Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 6th May 2010 21:05 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu The recently released 10.04 version of Ubuntu is the third Long Term Support (LTS) version Canonical has released. I installed this new version on four of my laptops (2 netbooks, 1 normal laptop, 1 portable desktop replacement), and here's my impression of it.
Thread beginning with comment 423158
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: lethal upgrade
by nt_jerkface on Fri 7th May 2010 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: lethal upgrade"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

This is a long term release. So your good for the next three years.


Until you want to upgrade software that requires a newer release or a trip to the command line.

Linux is not ready for the typical user until it can handle upgrades properly. That means being able to update a browser in a two year old release without having to open a command prompt. Users should not be told to stick with their current browser version if they want stability. Browsers need to be updated for security reasons and users should not have to choose between security and stability.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: lethal upgrade
by lemur2 on Fri 7th May 2010 14:37 in reply to "RE[6]: lethal upgrade"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"This is a long term release. So your good for the next three years.


Until you want to upgrade software that requires a newer release or a trip to the command line.

Linux is not ready for the typical user until it can handle upgrades properly. That means being able to update a browser in a two year old release without having to open a command prompt. Users should not be told to stick with their current browser version if they want stability. Browsers need to be updated for security reasons and users should not have to choose between security and stability.
"

Who feeds you all this utter FUD? Let me guess ... Windows fansites?

https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-daily/+archive/ppa

What is this guff about a command-line?
You can update your system with unsupported packages from this untrusted PPA by adding ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily/ppa to your system's Software Sources.

(Hint - copy and paste the bolded text above directly into the "Add source" GUI dialog).

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Repositories/Ubuntu#Adding%20R...

Edited 2010-05-07 14:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[8]: lethal upgrade
by nt_jerkface on Fri 7th May 2010 15:21 in reply to "RE[7]: lethal upgrade"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Well here is some of that command line guff:
http://www.howtoforge.com/how-to-install-openoffice-3.0.0-on-ubuntu...

A comment from that tutorial:


Submitted by geoffrey (not registered) on Tue, 2009-09-15 03:07.
Thank you very much for the instructions on installing oo 3.0 (which I used successfully for 3.1). It's people like you who make Linux such a great thing. (More than an O.S.) I wanted to upgrade OO, but not the kernel and Ubuntu makes that hard. Fortunately I was able to locate this info and it made my day.

Geoffrey


Linux just plain sucks at upgrades compared to Windows and OSX. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

It doesn't have to be this way. The distros could build systems that keep the applications independent of the OS.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: lethal upgrade
by gfx1 on Fri 7th May 2010 19:45 in reply to "RE[6]: lethal upgrade"
gfx1 Member since:
2006-01-20

There is an update-manager icon in the menu which works.

Updates on Ubuntu are a lot quicker than on the windows platform. (windows xp takes forever to scan and download new updates).

The last couple of years Ubuntu is pretty usable desktop environment.
Only adobe flash support sucks a bit.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: lethal upgrade
by darknexus on Fri 7th May 2010 20:39 in reply to "RE[7]: lethal upgrade"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Updates on Ubuntu are a lot quicker than on the windows platform. (windows xp takes forever to scan and download new updates).

I think it's time to stop comparing recent Linux oses to XP. XP is nine years old, Ubuntu 10.04 is a week or so old. Compare it to Windows 7 instead of XP in the interest of being fair.
That being said, your point does remain valid if not more so. At least on *NIX systems, I know that once an update is installed it *is* installed. There's very little that I hate more than when I shut down Windows 7 and I'm waiting five minutes for it to install updates before the damn thing will power off. I wish I could tell the thing to hurry up cause I want to go home! ;) And then it sometimes wants to "finish" the installation of an update upon boot-up too, never mind that it just supposedly did that same update on shutdown. Arrrrgh! At least on *NIX once an update is successfully installed, it is installed for sure. Even if I have to reboot, for say a kernel update, the new kernel is already there and I don't have to wait a millennium at the shutdown and boot-up stages. Oh and in the meantime I can use my system happily on the current kernel or GNOME or whatever core update asked me to restart, unlike in w7 where it gives you this annoying nag screen every hour.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: lethal upgrade
by jtfolden on Sat 8th May 2010 06:14 in reply to "RE[6]: lethal upgrade"
jtfolden Member since:
2005-08-12

Totally agree. This is a complete deal breaker for me, as well. I refuse to use an OS that requires me to upgrade it every 6 months just to install a newer browser release, new version of OO.org, updated music player, etc...

Edited 2010-05-08 06:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: lethal upgrade
by lemur2 on Sat 8th May 2010 09:33 in reply to "RE[7]: lethal upgrade"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Totally agree. This is a complete deal breaker for me, as well. I refuse to use an OS that requires me to upgrade it every 6 months just to install a newer browser release, new version of OO.org, updated music player, etc...


That's OK, so you won't mind using Ubuntu Lucid LTS then, because it DOESN'T require that of you.

Reply Parent Score: 1