A Late X Server 1.7 Means No Update For Ubuntu 9.10

[deanjo]

Since when has popularity been a reliable metric for quality? Need I remind you which operating system BSODed its way into being the most popular OS ever? Popularity is the same brain-dead argument used by clueless Windows users. "Ugg lookie at da market share. They must be doing somethn' right."

Ya ubuntu's popularity hinged on good marketing, a solid community, a decent, usable live release that allowed people to "kick the tires" before making the leap. Many people did not even know about free OS's before someone handed out a live CD to them.

[Ant P.]

Ya ubuntu's popularity hinged on good marketing, a solid community, a decent, usable live release that allowed people to "kick the tires" before making the leap. Many people did not even know about free OS's before someone handed out a live CD to them.

For me, that was when I first used Knoppix in 2002.

[highlandsun]

re: ATI KMS - too bad there's no TV-Out support in the KMS code. I downgraded back to 2.6.29 for that reason...

[RagingDragon]

This means that Catalyst won't be supporting xorg 7.5 anytime soon after it's released. Hopefully by xmas...

More like spirng 2010 - for a late beta or early RC of Ubuntu 10.4. We might have usable open source 3D support for the Radeon 4000 series before we have Catalyst support for xorg 7.5.

[val-gaav]

Since when has popularity been a reliable metric for quality? Need I remind you which operating system BSODed its way into being the most popular OS ever? Popularity is the same brain-dead argument used by clueless Windows users. "Ugg lookie at da market share. They must be doing somethn' right."

Valid argument, but I always considered people using Linux to not be clueless... I mean a community full of geeks would not use a failure on daily basis just because of good marketing.

[BlackStar]

Valid argument, but I always considered people using Linux to not be clueless... I mean a community full of geeks would not use a failure on daily basis just because of good marketing.

Well, considering how many people are using Gentoo and Fedora, I wouldn't be so sure.

Ubuntu has three things going for it: it is very easy to get started with (pretty *and* usable installer, can be installed inside windows); it offers a good desktop experience out of the box; and it achieves a good balance between cutting edge and stable software.

None of the other major distros achieve all three: Fedora is way too cutting edge for its own good; openSUSE is (still) ugly, slow and awkward; Debian works, but Ubuntu overshadows it (simpler installer, better out-of-the-box experience); Arch is awesome but the entry bar is too high for non-geeks; Gentoo... well Gentoo is Gentoo and will never become mainstream.

Besides, Ubuntu is showing definite improvement between releases. Jaunty starts up as fast on ext3 as my tweaked Arch on ext4 (1-2'' difference, give or take) and fixes a large number of issues found in Intrepid. Karmic and its 100papercuts effort fix a large amount of small interface issues (which means I can install it and use it in 10' instead of installing it and tweaking defaults for 1 hour).

With enough tweaks you can make almost any distribution work as you'd like (besides openSUSE - that's hopeless). However, if you don't have the inclination or time to tweak, Ubuntu offers by far the best experience with the least amount of effort.

[deanjo]

With enough tweaks you can make almost any distribution work as you'd like (besides openSUSE - that's hopeless).

I see you haven't seen the benches of the last factory releases or any version in recent history.

[BlackStar]

I see you haven't seen the benches of the last factory releases or any version in recent history.

You are observant, congratulations.

The fact is, the latest stable release of openSUSE is slow as molasses. I'm not speaking from a theoretical standpoint either - it is slow enough that it's hindering my ability to test software on that distro (through VirtualBox).

[deanjo]

You are observant, congratulations.

The fact is, the latest stable release of openSUSE is slow as molasses. I'm not speaking from a theoretical standpoint either - it is slow enough that it's hindering my ability to test software on that distro (through VirtualBox).

Hmmm,can't say that I can replicate that here, quite speedy here (just about as fast native). With multiple systems (Ubuntu, Fed, openSUSE) serving as host's there is no noticable speed differential at all in the guest's. Benchmarks even are near identical on the guests. I really don't think opensuse is your issue. I also know of a data center that is running quite happily with multiple vm's running opensuse as server and guests on HP's DL series rack servers. In fact Xen VM's are also very snappy to the point that you can run web based VM's at a very satisfying performance level such as what SuseStudio uses and the build service.

[RagingDragon]

Hmmm,can't say that I can replicate that here, quite speedy here (just about as fast native). With multiple systems (Ubuntu, Fed, openSUSE) serving as host's there is no noticable speed differential at all in the guest's. Benchmarks even are near identical on the guests. I really don't think opensuse is your issue. I also know of a data center that is running quite happily with multiple vm's running opensuse as server and guests on HP's DL series rack servers. In fact Xen VM's are also very snappy to the point that you can run web based VM's at a very satisfying performance level such as what SuseStudio uses and the build service.

Different distros can have slightly different kernel patches and driver versions, maybe Blackstar is the victim on an unpleasant interaction between Virtualbox and some driver (graphics drivers are the first thing which comes to mind...)