Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 18th Oct 2012 18:15 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Ubuntu 12.10 has been released, sporting the rather... Interesting tagline 'Avoid the pain of Windows 8'. Two main features are that websites can now be treated as actual applications, integrating them into Unity. The divide between local and online content when searching has also been softened, which, they claim, makes it easier to find what you're looking for. On the server side, it includes the Folsom release of OpenStack, "Cinder, for block storage and Quantum, a virtual networking API. Ubuntu's Metal-as-a-Service bare-metal provisioning tool has been updated and now supports Calxeda hyperscale hardware based on ARM".
Thread beginning with comment 539368
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[12]: ...
by Dave_K on Sun 21st Oct 2012 17:07 UTC in reply to "RE[11]: ..."
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

The machine ran Linux from the get-go, and the new version of the OS has already been tested on my hardware before I committed to installing it on the machine's hard disk.


In those circumstances I'm not surprised that Linux installed without any problems. Obviously I was talking about my own experiences with Linux, where I've merely bought hardware that was listed as Linux compatible, rather than buying something with it pre-installed.

Use a popular distribution meant for use on the desktop, it will have a huge set of packages available in repositories. Faux "problem" solved.


I tried half a dozen different desktop distributions on my Thinkpad before settling on Scientific Linux. It was the one where the most functionality worked after installation. For example, it was the only one where the laptop successfully entered sleep mode when its lid was closed, while the others required a lot of tweaking just to get that working. I've actually had a lot less problems with that distribution than I did with Mint or Ubuntu.

None of them had working graphical tools for things like power management, trackpoint configuration, or fan control. Even with the desktop distributions I'd have to try to compile utilities and edit config files to do things that are easy in Windows.

In my experience with Linux there's always something that goes wrong or isn't straightforward. Even when I've run mainstream distributions on my desktop there have been problems more time consuming than anything I've experienced in Windows.

Please desist with outright lies and FUD.


You may have had good experiences with Linux, but your experiences aren't universal.

I'm not claiming that everyone will have the problems with Linux that I've had. Unlike you I'm not trying to generalise my experiences and make sweeping claims based on them. All I'm saying is that my experience of Linux doesn't come close to matching the easy to use and trouble free operating system that you're promoting.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[13]: ...
by lemur2 on Sun 21st Oct 2012 22:54 in reply to "RE[12]: ..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Please desist with outright lies and FUD.


You may have had good experiences with Linux, but your experiences aren't universal.

I'm not claiming that everyone will have the problems with Linux that I've had. Unlike you I'm not trying to generalise my experiences and make sweeping claims based on them. All I'm saying is that my experience of Linux doesn't come close to matching the easy to use and trouble free operating system that you're promoting.
"

Sigh! Read what is being said.

If you want Linux and an easy to use and trouble free desktop operating system, you are going about it the wrong way. What you need to do is to duplicate the way you get a Windows system. You need to get hold of a system that will run Linux flawlessly. You can do this in either of two ways ...

1. you can get a Linux LiveUSB of the operating system you intend to use, and try it on the hardware you intend to use. This is not optimal, but it might work.

2. you can get a system for which the supplier is prepared to sell you Linux pre-installed. This is what you do for Windows, is it not? This is the only fair comparison, like for like, between the ease of maintenance and upkeep of desktop Linux compared with desktop Windows, BTW.

Now, once again, the distribution you choose is important. Scientific Linux is not a general purpose, ease-of-use-focussed distribution, it is made by CERN to control the LHC I believe. Hardly what a typical desktop user wants.

So, once again, to compare apples with apples, we need to compare the Linux OS which suppliers are prepared to pre-install. This is just about always Ubuntu.

Finally, the point about the number of packages available in repositories is crucial. For my Kubuntu 12.10 system, there are over 60,000 packages available in repositories. More importantly, every single package that I use on the system is available in repositories. Every single one.

This means that the single auto-updater, called muon updater, can automatically monitor all repositories, detect updated versions, notify, and update every single package on my desktop system, including muon itself.

You can't do that for Windows. Windows is a pig to maintain compared to a proper desktop Linux system.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[14]: ...
by Dave_K on Sun 21st Oct 2012 23:25 in reply to "RE[13]: ..."
Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

you can get a system for which the supplier is prepared to sell you Linux pre-installed. This is what you do for Windows, is it not? This is the only fair comparison, like for like, between the ease of maintenance and upkeep of desktop Linux compared with desktop Windows, BTW.


Actually, I prefer to build my own PCs. I like low noise systems, and the only way of guaranteeing both high performance and quietness is to choose the components myself. I haven't bought a ready built computer with the OS pre-installed for about 15 years.

The nice thing about Windows is that I don't have to worry about the components I'm buying, let alone get someone else to build and test the system for me. I can select the components that best fit my needs and budget and know that they'll all work with my OS.

Now, once again, the distribution you choose is important. Scientific Linux is not a general purpose, ease-of-use-focussed distribution, it is made by CERN to control the LHC I believe. Hardly what a typical desktop user wants.


In reality it's just a tweaked version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, like CentOS. I don't find its ease of use significantly different from desktop distributions like Mint.

Before someone recommended Scientific Linux I tried Linux Mint, Mint Debian Edition, Ubuntu, Fedora, and a couple of others. Scientific Linux was by far the easiest one to get running on my Thinkpad. Like I mentioned, it was the only one where basic features like sleep mode worked properly after installation.

Even in Ubuntu, things like power management, fan control and the trackpoint still needed to be configured using config files. In Windows there are graphical utilities to tweak all those things quickly and easily.

On my main desktop I have Linux Mint installed, but that hasn't been trouble free either. Sound doesn't work reliably and I've had updates cause all kinds of glitches.

Reply Parent Score: 2