[HN Gopher] Canonical Launches Ubuntu Pro
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Canonical Launches Ubuntu Pro
        
       Author : ShowalkKama
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2022-10-08 20:37 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ubuntu.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ubuntu.com)
        
       | unpopularopp wrote:
       | wow just had a daily apt-get update/upgrade and got a Pro ad in
       | the terminal, pretty crazy https://files.catbox.moe/bzqkry.png
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | For all I disagree with canonical's desktop decisions their long
       | term support of their distro is currently unmatched. You can't
       | get 10 years anywhere else.
       | 
       | Canonical's (free!) Extended Service Maintainance (ESM) program
       | has been extremely valuable to me for the last decade. They still
       | support security updates on Ubuntu 14.04 (April 2014) till 2024.
       | Hopefully this rebranding of parts of ESM won't change that
       | support.
        
         | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
         | > You can't get 10 years anywhere else.
         | 
         | That's been Red Hat's thing since forever. And Rocky is free.
        
           | gw99 wrote:
           | They'll hire all Rocky contributors in under 3 years and turn
           | it into a rolling distribution.
           | 
           | That's how Redhat works.
        
         | stonogo wrote:
         | You can't get ten years from Canonical, either. I've been
         | burned by drivers being dropped from LTS support mid-cycle.
         | Sure, they were obscure drivers, probably with few users. I'm
         | not saying the decision didn't make business sense. But I'll
         | never rely on an Ubuntu LTS again.
        
       | Wronnay wrote:
       | Why should any company buy this? Does that mean, that these
       | security updates are exclusive to Ubuntu Pro and everybody else
       | won't get Vulnerabilities fixed?
       | 
       | Aren't security upgrades anyway getting deployed - I mean, if
       | Canonical would hold bug fixes for Vulnerabilities back, then
       | obviously the community would switch to a different Linux Distro?
       | 
       | Especially this sentence makes me wondering: "Many zero-day
       | vulnerabilities addressed under embargo, with critical CVEs
       | patched in less than 24h on average"
       | 
       | => This sounds like Canonical holds back zero-day vulnerabilities
       | for not-paying users!
        
         | fulafel wrote:
         | Souns like it's security updates for otherwise out of support
         | versions, 16.04, like MS sells (sold?) for Windows XP.
        
         | nicce wrote:
         | Hopefully it just means extended duration for getting patches.
         | If not... yikes.
        
         | akdor1154 wrote:
         | From TFA:
         | 
         | > Ubuntu Pro expands security coverage for critical, high and
         | medium Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) to thousands
         | of applications and toolchains, including Ansible, Apache
         | Tomcat, Apache Zookeeper, Docker, Drupal, Nagios, Node.js,
         | phpMyAdmin, Puppet, PowerDNS, Python 2, Redis, Rust, WordPress,
         | and more.
         | 
         | So sounds like coverage of a bunch of stuff in their Universe
         | repository that is not part of the base system.
         | 
         | Though I found my own thing to whinge about, on
         | https://ubuntu.com/security:
         | 
         | > Ubuntu [...] includes access to:
         | 
         | > - ...
         | 
         | > - Knowledge Base: a private archive of expert-written
         | articles and tutorials
         | 
         | Wait what?
        
           | emj wrote:
           | > > - Knowledge Base: a private archive
           | 
           | Common thing for enterprise customers, I can not speak for
           | Ubuntu but usually they are private because they are filled
           | with bad articles and tutorials that no one would pay for.
           | Sounds good though.
        
       | alpaca128 wrote:
       | Apparently they also launched pretty horrible cookie popup dark
       | patterns. Come on Canonical, even Google learned to do it
       | properly by now.
        
         | stjohnswarts wrote:
         | what cookie popup dark pattern are you referring to? I didn't
         | see any popups.
        
       | ginko wrote:
       | So Debian?
        
         | esbeeb wrote:
         | I'm using Linux Mint Debian Edition 5, and recommend it. It has
         | the deep sensibility of Linux Mint, but it's _not_ based off
         | Ubuntu. The Cinnamon desktop in LMDE5 has much more polish than
         | Debian 11's Cinnamon desktop, which I also tried and hated
         | within 2 hours (the user management - namely adding additional
         | users who don't inherit the group memberships they sensibly
         | should - is hot garbage).
        
       | gfaster wrote:
       | I'm personally still upset that they made all the ubuntu-
       | advantage software a) come preinstalled b) making it impossible
       | to uninstall because it's a dependency of ubuntu-minimal[1]
       | 
       | [1]: https://packages.ubuntu.com/bionic/ubuntu-minimal
        
       | osigurdson wrote:
       | I don't understand why they don't make the default Ubuntu theme a
       | bit nicer. It seems that they would merely have to hire a single
       | designer to improve this materially.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | I would pay for this.
         | 
         | If they could get rid of the slow LibreOffice garbage and make
         | the audio / video system more stable, I'd pay a monthly fee.
         | 
         | I would pay for Firefox too.
        
         | beermonster wrote:
         | What is it you think could be improved ?
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | what's not nice about it specifically
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-08 23:01 UTC)