Guest post by Linux Mint 17.3 is the final Mint 17 release and should put to rest any worries about Mint’s plan to stick with Ubuntu LTS releases for its base. Mint has done what it set up to do, namely improve the Cinnamon desktop to the point that it not only matches, but in many places far exceeds the user experience found in other options like GNOME, and especially, Unity.
Indeed, it’s hard to look at Mint 17.3 without comparing it to its upstream base. While Mint has been continually working hard on the desktop and cranking out release after release, Ubuntu has stagnated. If Ubuntu wants to leapfrog past some of its pain points, its developers would do well to look downstream. Mint’s package management tools are simpler, more comprehensive, and easier to use than anything Ubuntu offers. Mint also manages to do all this without anything even remotely close to the resources Ubuntu enjoys.
This is great news.
Being a long-time Ubuntu user, to me Ubuntu has been the “Debian that just works”. However it is great other distributions are able to build upon that and show there is still room for competition and innovation in making a user friendly Linux desktop.
All my best wishes to the Mint team.
We must also aknowledge the tremendous amount of work that the Mint developers have put behind MATE desktop environment. They’re doing it in an extremely intelligent and sustainable way (using upstream as much as possible), while providing us with what some people consider to be the most usable desktop interface ever. Many many kudos to everyone involved. I can’t wait for the next version, when the GTK+ 3 port is completed.
It’s the only linux distro i’ve ever used that hasn’t broken on me. i’ve not used GNU/linux for a while, but even 4 years ago, it was, and still would be, my distro of choice.
“It just works”
It was my first release upgrade (from 17.2) and I did it wrong remotely by trying to do it using: apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
Things were totally screwed up even tho I followed it with a release upgrade using Mint’s own updater before reboot.
An in-place reinstall using 17.3 ISO solved it for me.
I admit I should have read up how the upgrade is to be performed. :[
As a long-time Fedora user unhappy with GNOME and such (I use the Fedora MATE spin, which is not very polished) I feel some temptation to jump to Mint, but the very idea of LTS makes me feel uncomfortable.
I am used for many years to be on the bleeding edge, with the newest released software and for such things like the kernel you do want it, if only for hardware support and performance.
ArchLinux is the distro you are seeking then.
Sure a bit more work to initially setup (but not much), but then rock solid and on the bleeding edge.
I have moved from *buntu and their spin-offs to Arch because I wanted working bleeding-edge and never looked back.
Guys, you need to know why these spins are not polished, very buggy and the experience is horrible. Fedora and a lot of Linux distributions are releasing linux desktop with all DEs available. The result is horrible experience with each desktop environment. This is one of the reasons Linux desktop is just a geeky desktop and nothing else.
Edited 2015-12-26 00:41 UTC
Actually not. Fedora is a Red Hat project and these days Red Hat is the main development force behind GNOME. There is a lot of developers paid by Red Hat to work full time on GNOME (despite this, it is horribly bad) and only a very few community members working in their spare time working on alternative spins.
Linux Mint has been an absolute pleasure to use.
I have four Linux desktops and three of them are running Mint, the other still uses kde.
I moved to it because I was tired of having to fsmount smbshares so that Libreoffice could open files directly without having to copy them locally.
This just works with Linux Mint, but it is not just this. The whole desktop is clean, light and ergonomic.
Many of my Ubuntu friends who never found Unity appealing also moved to Mint and have been using it without issues for a long time.
You get the feeling that Mint developers have had the good sense of not trying to reinvent the wheel.Rather they have focused on performance and fixing bugs and it shows.
I am also happy that they are focusing on LTS releases. Most users and companies prefer fixes to user-facing software to having the whole distribution changed every six months. And for those who want or need newer kernels, they are available.
Merry Christmas, everyone.
My experience of Mint was good on the whole but not so as to stop me from looking elsewhere.
After Mint, I tried Xubuntu and for the time being I am enjoying PinguyOs.
Pinguyos looks utterly georgous though gradually some of the repositories no longer deliver. This affects other distros as well but degrades the strategic value of an LTS distro.
Mint is the new Ubuntu then?
Looking at it from outside (don’t use either) I get the impression that Canonical has dropped the ball and Mint has taken it and are running away with it.
I was a long term fedora user but now being on the bleeding edge is not for me so I’m sticking with CentOS + Cinnamon but a lot of Kudos goes to the people behind mint.
Mint still doesn’t have the funding Ubuntu has and they don’t offer anything to businesses. Ubuntu has Landscape, Ubuntu Server, support services, Ubuntu Touch..
So no, Canonical hasn’t dropped the ball. Mint is still practically non-existent:
https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSys…
After years of Unity rage Mint is at 0.00% and Ubuntu is at 0.48% based on server logs.
Edited 2015-12-26 20:33 UTC
Debian has gone a long way these days as well. Sure it may not have the latest bells and whistles but it’s rock solid.
It’s fast to boot and I can’t remember the last time I had an issue with updates.
You just change the name of the release in the source list and run the upgrade tool.
Arch is also fine but there are times when bugs end up in AUR system due to various reasons.
I’m still hoping these developers will just get together and unite their efforts to make something that can be actually used as a standard Linux platform. Don’t we have enough variants already?
I’m still sad to see how all these clones of Debian are so called successful, when all their efforts are actually based on what Debian team has offered since their initial releases.
I’m not talking about personal projects (funded or cofunded by companies with deep pockets), but also commercial ones that try now to become console killers.
It’s still a mess because everybody wants to make a bit of money from something that was supposed to be free.
I agree that the Debian team doesn’t get near enough credit while popular Debian-based seemingly get all of it. It’s like slapping paint on someone elses car, and you getting all the glory for how awesome the car is.
As far as free, Linux is free (to end users). I also agree that Linux would be better served if developers joined their efforts instead of being scattered throughout many (and mostly) unneeded distros. That’s never going to happen though. The Linux community is fragmented to hell because people can’t be sensible and agree on a path forward. Everyone has their own idea about what Linux should be and look like. The ability to take it and do whatever you want is both its greatest strength and its achilles heel.
Another thing to consider is working for free makes it hard to keep your lights on, food in the refrigerator, and your house note paid. Linux is only sustainable as a hobby or with financial investment and one of those two expects some kind of return.
We are talking about the Linux desktop, I think. So under the hood, glory goes to the Debian people, but for polishing the desktop, that glory must belong to those who was able to polish the desktop.
I’ve never heard an Ubuntu user give Debian credit for polishing the desktop, but I’ve heard countless Ubuntu users give Ubuntu credit for everything while ignoring Debian having any part of it.
The Ubuntu devs get plenty of credit for the polish job, and plenty of credit for things they shouldn’t as well.