Please don't confuse "Ubuntu" with "Linux". What you are saying is something like "Fire is bad because it burns people".

Ubuntu might be the most popular linux distro, but there's so many other options out there. Take a look at https://distrowatch.com/ there's basically a distribution for any type of usecase you might imagine. Hell if you can't find a distribution to suit your needs nothings stopping you from starting your own.

People can't invoke the name "Linux" and exclude Ubuntu when it suits their narrative. So what I said is perfectly reasonable.

All poodles are dogs, not all dogs are poodles.

Using 'dogs' and 'poodles' interchangeably subconsciously implies that all/most dogs are poodles.

I think the big difference here is the relative mindshare of Windows in the Windows ecosystem (100%) vs the share of Ubuntu in the Linux ecosystem (popular and dominiant, but not 100%).

A very small portion of the Linux community made the decision to put the launcher ads in, a large chunk of the community made a very loud fuss, and the feature was removed.

> People can't invoke the name "Linux" and exclude Ubuntu when it suits their narrative.

Why not? Ubuntu (along with Red Hat & others) is a commercial distribution of Linux, but it's not the only Linux. Users who care about their freedom & privacy don't use Ubuntu, because it includes proprietary drivers & does things like phone home.

Users of distros such as Debian, OTOH, do care about those things, and I think it's very fair for us to note that we find the behaviour of Microsoft recently to be quite remarkably sad.

Of course you can. Why do you think they can't? Just because a company is shipping a Linux distribution which has some less than pleasant defaults that suddenly taints all of Linux?

If I start selling beer with piss in it, does suddenly all beer taste like piss or just the one I'm selling?

You (and malikNF) are acting like Waterluvian was saying all Linux is bad, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Waterluvian is saying that simply choosing to switch to Linux doesn't automatically mean you'll get away from bullshit.

Given how other distros stepped up their UX game (with regards to things that are outside the DM/WM combo such as OS install, package management etc), there's no real good excuse for the continued mainstream momentum of Debian/Ubuntu =) Korora (Fedora for newcomers) and Manjaro (Arch for newcomers) seem to install without a hitch these days and largely work fully as expected on most machines "out-of-box". Seem to have come a long way from just a few years ago.

> there's no real good excuse for the continued mainstream momentum of Debian/Ubuntu

Debian's momentum is due to the fact that it's a really stable, really well-thought-out, sysadmin-friendly, production-quality, freedom-respecting, privacy-respecting Linux distro; I don't think that has changed, and I don't think that anything beats them by those metrics.

Ubuntu's momentum is due to the fact that it supports proprietary hardware, is easy to use, and is pretty. You may be right that other distros are better than it there.

Debian & Ubuntu are very different.