102
First screenshot is from here.
Second screenshot is from me updating an Ubuntu 22.04 LTS system today.
Post title is from https://web.archive.org/web/20130223104643/https://help.ubuntu.com/10.04/about-ubuntu/C/about-ubuntu-name.html via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_philosophy
Even though this has been explained many times since the whole hullabaloo, I'll assume you're genuinely unaware and/or perhaps got rage-farmed by someone else's meme. The current meme implies that Ubuntu/Canonical have actively disabled safety/security features in the form of withholding security updates, unless you pay for Ubuntu Pro subscription. The Ubuntu package support hasn't changed with the introduction of Ubuntu Pro. The packages that were supported by Canonical prior to this are supported the same way today. The packages that were community supported prior to this are supported the same way today. Without Ununtu Pro. There is net new support by Canonical that covers community-supported packages too which is available with Ubuntu Pro subscription. Therefore Canonical hasn't removed any existing, previously free security support. In addition, this newly added security support is available for free for up to 5 machines and it lasts for 10 years.
More info here: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-pro-faq/34042
That said this is usually fixed by upgrading it into Mint, and Mint is pretty much a "normie" distro, so you don't need to go out of your way to install Gentoo or say "I use Arch BTW".
EDIT: in other words there's enough shit to throw at Ubuntu, we (people in general) don't need to make it up like OP is doing.
I agree with all three. I always removed (not too long ago) all those lenses with apt, install whatever display server I want with apt and use apt to remove all traces of snap. I still use it, though. For dudes using gnu/linux at home Ubuntu is just Debian without the drama.
That's what I did, too - it isn't like there is no choice within Ubuntu. We could still use it to manufacture some outrage towards Ubuntu, and feel like a genius for using another distro; it would be silly but not completely irrational... unlike using Ubuntu Pro for that, the later is just witch hunting.
As a sysadmin that dealt with IBM "helping" CentOS into an early grave, I refuse to give canonical or any for-profit corporation the benefit of the doubt here. After seeing how many products start out free and move towards paid or ad supported models once they think they can get away with it, I doubt this is done out of goodwill, either.
Don't need to. It's useful while free for people who wouldn't otherwise pay for it. If/when we get the rug pulled from under us, mothrrship Debian is right there.
I'm perfectly aware of what Ubuntu Pro is, and the difference between Ubuntu
mainanduniverse.If you think the meme implies that, then surely you must think that the message printed by Ubuntu's
apt upgradecommand in the screenshot implies that too, right?One of the packages listed in this screenshot is
libavcodec, which is required by things like VLC (which is in Ubuntuuniverse, which is enabled by default).If you think it is perfectly fine for Canonical to do the work to patch that library and then withhold the security update from the vast majority of Ubuntu users who won't sign up for Ubuntu Pro... we'll have to agree to disagree.