The application usability responsibility is the central problem for linux adoption: for the moment, each distro has its own version of every software. This is wrong: the application responsability should stay with the coders, not be moved to the distro.

So if Ubuntu supports a joint linux effort for a joint software store, with only one download per application, not one for each distro, we will be out of the woods. The rest is just propaganda.

Click'n run of linspire did not get support from the other distro's, and so did not take of.

How is this wrong?

Slackware uses tarballs, if you like Slack use Slack. Same goes for any disto out there. RPM was the other way until apt-get. All this is for Ubuntu is a wrapper for apt-get, nothing more. Gentoo does not use a package manager - it gets the pure source plus any needed patches and creates the package as needed.

How and why is it the responsibility of the coders to maintain the package across platforms? If someone codes an app for x86 and not for _64 - on purpose - then why is it that coder's responsibility to make a 64 bit port? (Throwing this out there because I *know* some 32-bit stuff does not play well on 64 -- learned that with Gentoo) How about ppc or alpha? It has been the responsibility of the *distro's maintainers* to get updates and new packages out to the users. Why is it so easy to create a new Linux distro? Have you actually seen distrowatch.org? Some die from lack of community support, some get a cult following and flamewars ensue.

I can't get over the feeling that somehow, you're a MS shill - only in that camp do I *ever* hear the phrase "application usability". In Linux we're too busy getting things done to come up with colorful management-speak phrases like this.

This is really exciting.
I do tend to agree with Mr. Gardner. It would be nice if the various distros would all support a same single package format such that coders can write one program for Linux rather than one for each distro. However, I understand and appreciate that the different distros have and intend to pursue very different ways of doing things.

I think the "buy software" option is a VERY good move. This may help to entice commercial software vendors (Adobe, Intuit, etc.) to port their applications to Linux, if they know they have a way to generate revenue from software sales. Plus, it would provide a channel for just about anyone to make some cash, if they create a good & popular application.

I agree with sam gardner's comments above. Some distos use debian packages, some use yum, etc. It would be nice if the package update application was configured with all relevant distro specific stuff, and then the packages are distro agnostic. It may be hard to be universal, but at least support Ubuntu/Debian, Fedora, Suse, and other major linux distros.

Can anyone tell what s that called that beautiful Ubuntu Interface and How to get it? tahnkx!

It's the Dust theme from Ubuntu 9.04