This is an often repeated argument against Wubi, but there are some problems with it.
1. Wubi isn't supposed to compete head-to-head with a normal install. I've seen cases of people that aren't even aware they are using Wubi or what the differences are, and this is definitely an issue. So I raised this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/wubi/+bug/1078959 2. If point #1 is not understood then, yes, I can understand why people would get upset about Wubi. But imagine if every time someone burned a live CD and it failed and then we decided it was a problem and we should get rid of live CDs because it was making Ubuntu look bad. No, I don't believe that argument holds. 3. Wubi does in fact work well. I could forgive a newcomer to Ubuntu thinking "why do a normal install when Wubi works so well". I can hear you laughing, but this is actually stated often[*]. Yes there are bugs. Yes people have problems. But these need to be looked at without emotion and used to make a rational decision. Saying "I have a friend who..." or "I couldn't even get it working so..." or "Windows is unstable therefore..." just doesn't add anything of value. So to answer your main point... the journalist did make a mistake recommending Wubi. I haven't seen anyone in mainstream put forward Wubi as a viable long-term alternative or a production system. There should indeed be warnings. But we should IMO go further to understand what real positives and real negatives they are, and arrive at a reasoned decision. And I'm fine with that decision either way. Regards, bcbc [*] References 1. Comments in the same article you referenced 2. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2131454 (Wubi is no more) 3. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2093840 (Is WUBI worth it) 4. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1982669 (Wubi opinion/usage survey) On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Robert Bruce Park < robert.p...@canonical.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 04:09:35PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > > On 8 April 2013 18:01, bcbc bcbc <openb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It's hard to make an informed decision without knowing the usage stats > of > > > Wubi. If it's quite low then I expect there'd be little impact, but if > it's > > > popular then it's taking a low-risk installation method away from > users who > > > might otherwise not have tried Ubuntu. Does Canonical have any > statistics on > > > this? > > > > > > > The point that it's not low-risk any more. It can cause data-loss on > > windows 8 side when it's hibernated. > > I can't find the original article right now, but I recently read a > gaming blog where some random journalist had attempted to install > Steam inside of a Wubi Ubuntu installation. His readers mercilessly > flamed him as being essentially a total idiot (because everybody "just > knows" that Wubi is *incredibly* terrible), and so he was forced to > try it again without Wubi. Had he not been a journalist, he would have > simply given up on Wubi and written Ubuntu off as an unstable product. > > The unfortunate reality is that if Wubi is your first experience with > Ubuntu, you're likely to come to the conclusion that Ubuntu is an > unstable mess, when really it's the fact that Windows is an unstable > base underneath your Ubuntu that is causing the problems (but you > don't know that). Wubi is basically a disaster and is generating a lot > of negative associations with Ubuntu in novice's minds. > > Here's an alternate page where "Don't use Wubi" is given as the number > one piece of advice for getting Steam to run on Ubuntu: > > http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3079968 > > In short, Wubi needs to die a quick and painless death so we can get > on with providing positive experiences to new users of Ubuntu. >
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
