Comment 25 for bug 1292398
Revision history for this message
| gord-s (gord-sssnaps) wrote Re: multi-monitor : second screen position isn't saved from one session to another | #25 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
Sebastian said:
>The user numbers are only one metric, those numbers are low, the importance of the other bug is High due to the fact that..
Then in that case, may I suggest a change of policy somewhere? I've just been informed that this weekend our entire corporate entity will move to Mint (MATE) from Ubuntu Gnome, due to this bug. The kicker is that they now won't be going for Landmark next quarter, which is annoying. That's over 3,100 desktops lost to a competitor (it's business, so competitor is the appropriate word in this case), according to the feeling I'm hearing they may jump ship on servers soon too, which is more my department, so I'm extremely disappointed.
The bug simply doesn't happen on Mint and time is money, simple as that, it's not my decision, it was board-level no less.
Every decision on bug triage as well as release policies have consequences, I shouldn't have to mention how much the adoption and force-feeding of Unity has tainted the reputation of Ubuntu in many corporate eyes that were used to Gnome2 or legacy CDE-lookalikes. 58 affected - yeah right.
Moving forward: we use local mirrors to do all install and updates, we also have very strict firewalling and all traffic at every site goes though a application gateway to sanitise traffic - could that be a reason why "those numbers are low"? If so, what should be allowed (popcon?, not using local mirrors? something else?) to allow Canonical HQ to see the true user numbers of non-Unity DEs?