Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 9.10 Release Candidate Has Arrived

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    What's that "Ubuntu problem"? The amount who download testing releases?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Apopas View Post
      What's that "Ubuntu problem"? The amount who download testing releases?
      Hmm, not sure

      Btw. I didn't mean upgrading from previous Ubuntu to newer one, but only updates related to single Ubuntu release.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Apopas View Post
        What's that "Ubuntu problem"? The amount who download testing releases?
        It's a generic search pattern, the interpretation is open. However, if you look at the graph, you'll notice that "ubuntu problem" peaks always lag behind the "ubuntu release" ones, so you can rule out your interpretation. It's clear that the traffic generated by people looking for help is much increased inmediately after every release. There you have to include people who installed the OS for the first time, who are bound to have problems no matter what. But it surely also includes many people who find problems because _there are_ problems with the new version. The average values are meaningless, what matters is how the baseline for "ubuntu problem" peaks with each new release, indicating that they don't go down all that well.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by yotambien View Post
          It's a generic search pattern, the interpretation is open. However, if you look at the graph, you'll notice that "ubuntu problem" peaks always lag behind the "ubuntu release" ones, so you can rule out your interpretation. It's clear that the traffic generated by people looking for help is much increased inmediately after every release. There you have to include people who installed the OS for the first time, who are bound to have problems no matter what. But it surely also includes many people who find problems because _there are_ problems with the new version. The average values are meaningless, what matters is how the baseline for "ubuntu problem" peaks with each new release, indicating that they don't go down all that well.
          There are for sure such problems you described - it's something natural IMHO. However, upgrading non rolling release distro (Ubuntu) is probably much safer then upgrading rolling one (Archlinux).

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
            There are for sure such problems you described - it's something natural IMHO. However, upgrading non rolling release distro (Ubuntu) is probably much safer then upgrading rolling one (Archlinux).
            I don't know how life is with Archlinux, I can't comment on that. What I know is that the 6 months release cicle of Ubuntu, coupled with their policy of including new things without much testing (early libata transition, pulse audio, desktop effects, kde4, whatever), gives rise to many problems--I'm talking about upgrades since that's what you mentioned. The usual response to this criticism is the long term support releases; the problem is that they are almost identical to the regular releases with an increased life span for security updates and a bit more conservative in general (pulling from Debian testing rather than unstable). It only makes sense that the Ubuntu guys can't do in six months what takes the Debian team 2 years.

            I can tell you that Debian Sid or testing are pretty easily manageable, giving you the choice of installing the latest software knowing that you can always revert back. I can't figure why anybody would prefer the Ubuntu way.

            In good faith, I wouldn't recommend Ubuntu to newbies (I did it and later regreted). Sure some things are very nice (like prompting you to download codecs the first time you click on an mp3 file) but I don't think it pays at the end. Not for stability, that's for sure.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by yotambien View Post
              I can tell you that Debian Sid or testing are pretty easily manageable, giving you the choice of installing the latest software knowing that you can always revert back. I can't figure why anybody would prefer the Ubuntu way.
              I never used original Debian, but only distros based on it and this is a shame I'll check it :>

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by yotambien View Post
                I can't figure why anybody would prefer the Ubuntu way.
                I switched from debian testing around december 2008 because of the lenny freeze and the fact I wanted new Xorg/ new radeon /new mesa to have a working open source driver instead of fglrx I used in debian. That included using very fresh stuff that ubuntu had packages for and debian didn't have at that time. I also wanted to try out KDE 4.1 and it wasn't possible in debian or problematic (I don't remember)

                Switching seemed to be the fastest solution instead of compiling X and all the needed packages...

                Nevertheless debian had a second chance as I got new HD around February 2009, which I wanted to format as ext4 even though 2.6.28 kernel had some problems with it... Still though it made no sense to me to format it as ext3. I waited a couple of weeks and checked packages and there was no ext4 support in debian, when it finally was in it still needed a separate ext3 boot partition for a while ... Ubuntu had ext4 support months before debian and with grub patch for booting ext4 from the start (yes I used an alpha jaunty release)...

                Comment


                • #18
                  Well, that's what I was talking about. See, what you mentioned as a problem in Debian is what I mentioned as a problem in Ubuntu, this is , the availability of the very latest developments (KDE4, ext4, pulse audio, what have you). When it comes to applications, Debian sid has usually slighty more recent packages than Ubuntu, and Debian testing slightly older ones depending on how well the packages are doing in the unstable repository. For instance, take a look at Firefox:

                  Sid: 3.5.3-2
                  Squeeze: 3.0.14-1

                  Karmic: 3.5.3+build1
                  Jaunty: 3.0.14+build2

                  and claws-mail (randomly picked a program I've got right now open)

                  Sid: 3.7.3-1
                  Squeeze: 3.7.3-1

                  Karmic: 3.7.2-1
                  Jaunty: 3.6.1-1

                  On the other hand, when it comes to stuff that can potentially break your system, Debian is in less of a hurry, as is the case with the kernel:

                  Sid: 2.6.30-21
                  Squeeze: 2.6.30-21

                  Karmic: 2.6.31-14
                  Jaunty: 2.6.28-26

                  But application version is not all that matters. The Debian folks don't jump to the next great thing on the spot, as Ubuntu does, and that's why you had problems trying to install some very new stuff. In the end, it all depends on what you want. Probably most people in this forum know what to use depending on their preferences. My point is that Ubuntu is strangely sold as simple, beginner friendly and ready for the masses since it 'just works'. Well, that may seem so on the surface, but it doesn't hold when you start digging on their development cycle and on the decisions that are pushed down user's throats. You simply can't have best of both worlds.

                  To recap, you're right, some people have reasons to use Ubuntu--like yourself--but those reasons are not the reasons that are usually publicised when selling it, and I don't think they are the reasons that should matter when suggesting a distribution to beginners.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I agree, I have had problems with Ubuntu when upgrading to a new release, but more often than not it goes fine. I suppose my biggest issue with any of the features shoved down the users throat is probably Pulseaudio. I still have issues with that thing in some of my apps that I would like to use. I'm not too sure whats to blame, Pulseaudio or the application not supporting Pulseaudio.. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

                    As far as rolling release vs non-rolling releases, it varies. I've used Arch and Gentoo, and what I've seen is that most of the time things go fine.. Occasionally a bug will sneak in, but I would say the same is true for non-rolling release distros. Personally, I think the only distros that doesn't use a rolling release that seems to get it right with stability is Debian (stable) and Slackware.

                    As far as Ubuntu is concerned, I like it, I use it. But its far from perfect.. I would say the same for every other distro is true, I've never found perfect, Linux is Linux to me.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      @yotambien:

                      Sure though the things I wanted where not in sid or even experimental. The kernel at that was 2-3 releases away and no new one even in epxerimental. On the other hand I can get and use even an rc kernel a day after release thanx to ppa system, it also applies to other software, Rekonq, Arora always quick to have new versions from ppa... In debian I'm not to sure that would be the case. I'm an advanced user or so I think... I mixed testing/sid even though it's not recommended, I used alphas of buntu and I could manage the breakage ... What it boils down to I guess is buntu is less likely to demand compiling stuff out of me, all the fresh things I can get are there and I can play with them and revert if I do not like ... As an advanced user that's a big advantage for me right now, on debian I would have to compile things just to try something I may end up reverting not using.


                      I applaud the stability of debian (even the testing branch is great rolling release but stable ), but in sid or experimental I would expect to have the fresh stuff, and it's not always the case.

                      People have new hardware and sometimes they need new fresh stuff to even get it working ... What's the use of stable debian on my laptop if I couldn't watch a movie on it without the crappy fglrx? That's even more silly as debian is the free distro and I switched to ubuntu to not have to use fglrx ...

                      Debian is great distro but one thing ubuntu does better is supporting new hardware... That's why ubuntu is sold as simple and just working because it gets your hardware to work out of the box... I'm not a big fan of strict 6 month release cycle, and my preference is rolling releases. To be exact debian testing was great compromise between 'get new stuff' and 'stay stable', even though it really sucks in time of the freeze ...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X