Ubuntu Feisty Fawn - Desktop Linux Matured

Provataki writes "It seems that Linux on the desktop is getting there, with Ubuntu. Eugenia of OSNews fame wrote a glorifying preview about Ubuntu's next version, dubbed Feisty Fawn. The review talks up the new features, like the restricted drivers/codecs management, easier package management, and good laptop support. The review also lists some of the distro's flaws in the current beta. A good read for those who are curious about what's next for Linux on the desktop. The piece concludes: ' Ubuntu is a distro that obviously has paid attention to detail ... and has found a good middle ground between hard core Linux users and new users from the Windows/OSX land.'"

Comments

no NO NO!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not yet, 2008 is the year of Linux.

Re:no NO NO!

[LingNoi]

Actually, in my experience Windows XP does not delete the files it already copied. However, since it copies files in disk order (rather than alphabetically) it's near impossible to figure out which files were already copied and which were not. One solution if I recall correctly is to use xcopy from the command prompt, which does result in an alphabetical copying process, thereby making it a lot easier to pick up where you left off.

No, no, no..

A user shouldn't have to touch the command prompt. This is why Windows will never be "ready for desktop".

Just joking but I couldn't miss such an opportunity. :D

REALLY!?

[sunami88]

It seems that Linux on the desktop is getting there, with Ubuntu. Eugenia of OSNews fame wrote a glorifying preview about Ubuntu's next version

Well if Eugenia said it, it must be true!

Re:REALLY!?

[VON-MAN]

Eugenia's claim to fame is that she's been writing about Linux desktops and distros for a long time. Not that she's very balanced or objective. To me, her reviews are allways very opinionated without really being to the point.

A real woman in other words...


Ducks...

Hardware problems

[petrus4]

For people experiencing hardware problems preventing them from having the usual effortless Ubuntu experience, I offer the following advice. Linux still *does* have a few blind spots where hardware support is concerned, but if you can maneuver around these, you'll be fine.

1) If you can get non-USB replacements for your USB hardware, you might want to consider doing so. Obviously with things like cameras and memory cards, that's not an option...but for such devices as keyboards, it is. You might even have less problems under Windows if you do that as well.

2) Use non-wireless network hardware where possible. I myself have a RealTek Ethernet card, which has very solid support under both Linux and the BSDs...it is also one of the core hardware drivers included with the Menuet OS.

3) If you can avoid a need for printing entirely, you'll be a lot happier. I don't own a printer, and I am deeply gratified to be able to make that claim. I consider printers genuinely evil things. I've been using different types of computers on and off since the early 80s, and in all of that time, the one type of hardware that I've seen people having more consistent difficulty with is printers. That is still true under Linux.

Re:Boot up speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

On Linux it *should* be daemonizing and doing it in parallel.

Great. Another article demonizing Linux!

Are you serious about "this Linux" thing?

[WED Fan]

Gem from a comments list attached to this article:

You are kidding arent you ?

Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.

So, apparently, like man-caused-global-warming, the discussion about Linux is closed.

Re:Boot up speed?

[eraserewind]

... he writes in response to an article saying that there is finally a distribution you don't have to tweak :)

Too mature?

[stim]

I recently installed feisty fawn to take a look, what I found disturbed me greatly. From install to finish I never had to touch a terminal. I got my 3d drivers, aixgl and video codecs working all in the comfort of a gui. This is unacceptable to me! If i don't have to edit my fstab, apt, or xorg config files, how will i look super smart to someone sitting over my shoulder? I switched from windows so that I would look smart dammit!

Re:Boot up speed?

[nih]

I found that Ubuntu booted initially in +/- 50 seconds

so Ubuntu can reboot in -50 seconds? beat that ms!

Re:Boot up speed?

[an.echte.trilingue]

I found that Ubuntu booted initially in +/- 50 seconds

so Ubuntu can reboot in -50 seconds? beat that ms!

To be fair to Microsoft, I have Ubuntu running on a quantum computer (a Beowulf cluster of quantum processors, more precisely), so it regularly performs tasks before I ask it to. The problem is that whenever I look at the screen the quantum state collapses, which is making it really hard to surf pr0n.