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

Boot up speed?

[Cheapy]

"A positive point about the new version is the booting speed: Feisty boots in 40 seconds on my laptop, while Vista needs about 50 (with McAfee turned off)." How does the current version of Ubuntu compare to this? I have a new laptop and it seems to take over two minutes (while plugged in) to boot up. Oddly, it takes ~1 minute to boot up when it isn't plugged in. I don't understand how that works, but alright. For comparision, Windows XP boots in about 45 seconds.

Re:Boot up speed?

[killjoe]

My XP used to boot up fast too when I first installed it. These days it can take as long as five minutes to boot and display the desktop icons.

Come to think of it I guess I haven't re-installed it in about six months now so it's about time to do that.

Re:Boot up speed?

[LingNoi]

I don't choose an OS because it boots faster then another one and I think both boot almost as fast.

I'm using Ubuntu Edgy on a Laptop and a Desktop. I don't think it loads as fast as XP but again, I don't really care about how fast it boots when its only a couple of extra seconds.

For the record I would guess my boot speeds to be as so..

Desktop:
    Ubuntu Edgy - 35 Seconds - To the desktop and ready to launch.
    Windows XP - 25 Seconds - To show the desktop
                            - extra 5 seconds - To be ready to load apps

I should also note I use Ubuntu more so it could just be that its loading more stuff up to begin with compared to my windows xp partition. I tried to install Vista but it said I didn't have enough space (needs more then 10 gig). :(

Re:Boot up speed?

[kasperd]

I have a new laptop and it seems to take over two minutes (while plugged in) to boot up. Oddly, it takes ~1 minute to boot up when it isn't plugged in. I don't understand how that works

You mean it boots faster when running on battery than otherwise? How often do you boot that machine? Some distributions have startup scripts to ensure that background jobs, which would normally be run overnight, does also get run on machines that are always powered off overnight. The details probably differs between distributions. Some delay these jobs for a few minutes, which should ensure that they don't start to run before the system has finished booting. But if Ubuntu don't delay them, they could influence on the speed at which the system boots. I have seen a distribution, where the jobs would not be started on boot, if the system was running on battery. That could be part of the explanation why you see different boot times depending on whether you are running on battery or not.

How carefully did you meassure the boot times? If you just meassured each case once, the difference could be for a lot of other reasons. If you want to be sure, do the following. Flip a coin to decide whether you are going to plug the power or run from battery, then boot the machine. Repeat this ten (or more) times, meassuring the boot time each time.

Re:Boot up speed?

[cheater512]

On Linux it *should* be daemonizing and doing it in parallel.
dhcpcd I know for a fact does this but I havent tried the other clients.

Re:Boot up speed?

[iBod]

It is and it is a BAD idea to clear the prefetch folder.

http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000743.html

Re:Boot up speed?

[scum-e-bag]

Start>Run>msconfig ...and stop some of those background boot time processes.

Re:Boot up speed?

[an.echte.trilingue]

I found that Ubuntu booted initially in +/- 50 seconds, but then that as I installed software and services, it slowed to around 4 minutes. The reason for this is that Ubuntu uses readahead to read all of the required files into memory in one sweep as the machine boots, but as you install stuff, files move around and it doesn't know where files are physically located any more. So, the OS needs to ask the disk to read each individual file as the boot scripts ask for them. The solution to this is very easy:

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=25426 3&highlight=grub+profile+speed+boot

That alone took my boot speed back down to 80 seconds. Then you can install the package bootchart to see what is taking so long to load and tweak those services to load faster or not at all, depending on what you need. For example, I saw that fsck was taking around 25 seconds on boot, and I gained back about 15 seconds by modifying /etc/fstab so that fsck would not check the FAT32 partition that I use to share files with XP. Bootchart will help you figure out why your box takes so much longer to boot when plugged in, as well.

Now I have a laptop that boots into a usable kde desktop in 47 seconds. I am sure you can do this too. If you need more help, go to the Ubuntuforums, they are full of people who want to help.

Take care

-mat

Re:Boot up speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Great. Another article demonizing Linux!

Re:Boot up speed?

[Antique Geekmeister]

And Adobe pre-loader. And the MS Office pre-loader. And all the "download assistants". And all the adware and spyware. And the boot-time tools that try to pre-index your file system, which will definitely slow things as your system gets more files on it.

The list goes on, and some of it is very hard to get rid of. I love SpyBot for blocking it: they don't have the legal fears of calling spyware and adware by their right names, even if it's "selected" by ignorant users who don't know it's incorporated into other downloads. Some commercial anti-virus packages have taken on this business of blocking adware, but it's a legally nasty business for them.

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 :)

Re:Boot up speed?

[morgan_greywolf]

It is and it is a BAD idea to clear the prefetch folder.

From a performance standpoint, yes it does seem like that based on your accurate technical description of how the prefetch folder works.

However, it would seem that there might be some kernel of truth to the misconception that cleaning out this folder will improve performance. Here's what you said in your article:

When you run a program, Windows creates a .pf file for it in the Prefetch folder. When you run the program again, Windows looks for this .pf file and uses it to determine how to load the program. The hash doesn't contain any portion of the original program code. If you never run the program again, that .pf file never gets used, and in fact it gets deleted eventually. If you're one of those people that tries a lot of programs in a 1-off fashion, much like writers for tech news sites might do, you will probably degrade your performance somewhat. Since Windows only ever keeps 128 files in the prefetch folder, as you describe it, the more 1-off programs you try, the more Windows will delete some of those files in the prefetch folder -- including ones for programs that you use regularly. Clearing out the prefetch folder will not actually help this situation much, if at all, but clearing it out if that's your scenario may actually cause some appearance of improved performance since Windows won't have to scan the files in that folder, nor will it have to delete any files out of the folder. In reality, you're probably hurting yourself more than helping, but it would explain why the myth exists.

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.

Re:Boot up speed?

[yesteraeon]

But why would I want to wait for DHCP and NTP do do their thing during bootup on my desktop/laptop. DHCP can run in the background, and time can synchronize any time, no need for it to be at bootup. Sure that makes perfect sense on a server which you won't be rebooting very often (hopefully!). But bootup time is a much bigger consideration on the desktop.

Linux Mint

[Terminus32]

Linux Mint is an Ubuntu-based distro with all the codecs & drivers you should need for desktop use, it's worth checking out!

Re:Linux Mint

[johnw]

GPL doesn't allow you to distribute closed source software with the GPL lisenced software Nonsense. Users of the GPL have no authority to make such a restriction and there is none in the GPL. Remember, the GPL is a licence not a contract, so it can't restrict what people can do with other stuff, only what they can do with the stuff covered by the licence.

(The reason why other distributions don't have codecs and drivers with them.). The reason is slightly more subtle than that. The GPL does not allow GPL-licensed code to be incorporated into a larger work where other parts of the work are under a more restrictive licence. There is much debate about whether a device driver with a closed source licence is a derivative work of the kernel, but most distributions err on the side of caution and don't distribute them.

Re:Linux Mint

[PastaLover]

The reason is slightly more subtle than that. The GPL does not allow GPL-licensed code to be incorporated into a larger work where other parts of the work are under a more restrictive licence. There is much debate about whether a device driver with a closed source licence is a derivative work of the kernel, but most distributions err on the side of caution and don't distribute them.

You are right but I'd just like to add that the reason codecs aren't distributed can differ wildly. Most of the time it has to do with patent law (it might not be legal to distribute implementations of an algorithm), or the licenses of said codecs (not an issue for mp3 in linux, but maybe others) that don't allow redistribution. It has little or nothing to do with the GPL.

Re:Linux Mint

[johnw]

The chunk which you're quoting you've taken out of context. It refers specifically to modified versions of the original work and describes the circumstances under which chunks of that modified version might be distributed under a different licence. It's thus not relevant to the issue under discussion.

HTH

no NO NO!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not yet, 2008 is the year of Linux.

Re:no NO NO!

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Perhaps the thing you are missing is that some of us thinks that OS X is a) horrible to use b) costly c) closed? Until those three issues are resolved, I don't see OS X on any of my desktops. Ask, and I shall explain any of those 3 grievances, and why e.g. KDE+linux (and who knows, maybe Beryl some day) does not have that flaw.

/me waits for the hordes of the OS X lovers to mod me down to oblivion :)

Re:no NO NO!

[unoengborg]

The year of Linux arrives the year Adobe ports their software to Linux.

Linux is already more usable and easy to use and install than windows. The
problem is that windows is good enough for most people, and it have the advantage
of having a lot of applications the people already know how to use.

To make any dent in the Windows dominance it doesn't only need to be better than
Vista, it need to be significantly better.

Re:no NO NO!

[LingNoi]

Theres already a few things that I like, although everyone is different of course these problems really bug me on Windows XP and wish/hope they fixed them in Vista or Vista+1..

- No need to defrag your system.
- Can have lots and lots of files in the same folder without limit (not so important for everyone I guess)
- When you cut and paste DVD movie files from one folder to another on the same Hard Drive its almost instant (as in doesn't copy anything just reallocates it).
- When you copy files from one location to another and theres no space left it doesn't delete all the files that you just copied.
- When you copy files to a new location it checks that there is enough space for it to copy all the files.
- When your doing something CPU intensive it doesn't slow down the GUI. You can watch a movie even though the CPU is at 100% doing something else.

I hope this is the "Firefox wakeup" moment for Microsoft to improve their Desktop with these features too. Also there are many bad points about Ubuntu too but this would be my wish list for Windows.

Also the file copying feature that doesn't delete the files you copied is something windows needs a lot. Yesterday I was doing some data recovery with Knoppix to a USB pen and my boss kept saying "Check how big it is before you copy it". I didn't understand why until I asked him and he explained that its because it would delete the files if its too big for the USB pen.

I had to explain to him that doesn't happen on Linux systems only Windows. Does that happen on the Mac? I don't think it does..

Re:no NO NO!

[gbulmash]

To make any dent in the Windows dominance it doesn't only need to be better than Vista, it need to be significantly better.

It's not just being better, it's making the move more painless. Face it, even if your application is better, if there's a learning curve to do simple things, people won't switch. If your life revolves around ACT!, you'll be using the OS that supports ACT! (or more pointedly, the OS that ACT! supports).

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Most people don't learn to operate computers and software from a conceptual and fluid point of view that allows them to adapt easily. Then learn it by rote, step-by-step in a sequence of operations. They may not understand why they perform those operations. They just know if they follow the steps they've been taught, they'll get the result they want/expect.

Some people see life as an adventure of learning, but they're a minority. Having to learn new programs (via learning new steps) scares people. It makes them unhappy. And if they've been doing a set of steps for a few years, those steps have become habitual. So you not only have to teach them the new steps, you have to break them of the old ones. Breaking habits is unhappy work.

Furthermore, if you read TFA, look at the various driver problems she had. If the hardware and software don't play nicely "out of the box", the deal is off for most people. And you can angrily tell them to buy different hardware, but Joe Shmoe is going to buy what looks neat to him. If Linux won't run on it, Windows probably will, and since he knows Windows already, it's just the path of least resistance.

Being "better" is immaterial. Either sticking with Windows has to get so painful that people exceed their tolerance level and will switch to anything that promises (and delivers) less pain, or Linux has to make it SO easy and painless to switch over, that people will do it just to save a few bucks.

- Greg

Re:no NO NO!

[cheater512]

I agree with you completely. GP's argument is that because Mac can run everything else inside it, it therefore is the ultimate OS.
Get VMware and Linux is the ultimate OS using the same argument.

The ultimate OS should be determined based on merits of the operating system itsself, not what other operating systems you can run to get required features.

Personally as a guy who has on average 6 - 10 consoles open at any one time, Mac OS X isnt flexible enough to be the ultimate OS.
You just cant get the necessary power from it when you need it.

Linux can on the other hand adapt to be n00b friendly or power user friendly.
The fact that you have distros like Ubuntu and Gentoo as two extremes is proof of that.

Re:no NO NO!

[Serious Callers Only]

Personally as a guy who has on average 6 - 10 consoles open at any one time, Mac OS X isnt flexible enough to be the ultimate OS.
You just cant get the necessary power from it when you need it.

Please define 'power' and how OS X falls short.

PS I wouldn't call OS X the 'ultimate' OS either, but you seem to be dismissing a hand-waving argument with another one about power-users.

Re:no NO NO!

[robinvanleeuwen]

"The year of Linux arrives the year Adobe ports their software to Linux."

We hear that all the time but i don't believe there's any truth in that
statement. I tried to switch MS office users to OO, and allthough it worked
they all demanded to have MS office back. Even though a newer version came
out and the company had to pay big dollars for the upgrades, the management
said. So what, even i tried OO , but everything is soooo much different
(meaning, language (dutch) was a bit inconsistent in comparison to MSoffice and
some functions where in a different location).

Now i even understand why one of the highest management guy's over there didn't
want to switch. He was kind of an Excel guru and used about every function in Excel,
and had 5 years of data in Excel documents. Not all of them converted the right way(tm).

But other users used Excel only as a calculator , or add adresses to a name, and MS Word
for birthday cards. And even they complained and bluntly refused to use OO. Management
agreed with them offcourse.

So it isn't just Adobe's products, it's the whole mindset of people. Not to mention
Desktop in the office where custom software has to run. Try bookkeeping on linux. The
company who makes that software (biggest in the netherlands, the only one that has all
the functionality we need) bluntly refuses to make a windows version. In the newest version
they even require a Microsoft SQL server, wheras previous versions would run happily of a
samba server.

Telebanking software. Banks refuse to make Linux clients.
Tax software, no linux clients.
Salary payment accounting software, No linux client, almost the same story as the
bookkeeping i mentioned.
Various government programs (automaticly transfer data about sick days, salaries, free time
, vacation, days off etc) to all the various government departments, all Windows only.

We don't use adobe products. Only PDF readers and they are a dime a dozen.

kind regards,

Re:no NO NO!

[MostAwesomeDude]

- No need to defrag your system.
- Can have lots and lots of files in the same folder without limit (not so important for everyone I guess)
- When you cut and paste DVD movie files from one folder to another on the same Hard Drive its almost instant (as in doesn't copy anything just reallocates it).
- When you copy files from one location to another and theres no space left it doesn't delete all the files that you just copied.
- When you copy files to a new location it checks that there is enough space for it to copy all the files.
- When your doing something CPU intensive it doesn't slow down the GUI. You can watch a movie even though the CPU is at 100% doing something else. The first two items are general attributes of ext3 and reiserfs. The next two are part of the kernel's generic FS layer (if I remember correctly.) That last one is just due to Linux's thread scheduler being very intelligent.

Microsoft is not likely to adopt ext3 or ext4 support, much less reiserfs support. File copying is fairly old and not likely to be updated. It's feasible, though, that Microsoft could improve their thread scheduler, but it's not going to be a high priority because they will be busy for a while writing security patches for Vista and I highly doubt they will release kernel optimizations for the newly obsoleted XP.

Re:no NO NO!

[dr.badass]

/me waits for the hordes of the OS X lovers to mod me down to oblivion :)

You must be new here. Bashing anything always gets modded up. It's positive comments that get buried.

Re:no NO NO!

[Matt Perry]

No need to defrag your system.

Unless you are using FAT you should not be defragging your filesystem at all. NTFS is pretty efficient about how it stores files on the hard drive. Modern filesystems do a pretty good job at storing files and preventing fragmenting. They spread the files out over the hard drive and leave space between so they can easily be expanded. Once you defrag and compact all your data to the beginning of your drive, the filesystem will have to write data elsewhere if you expand a file. You'll suddenly find yourself needing to defrag often just to maintain the efficiency that you would have had had you let the filesystem do its job in the first place.

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

My experience with 6.10

[Matt Edd]

I decided to try Ubuntu (my first unix experience) two days ago. I spent two days trying to get it to use a proper aspect ratio for my main monitor and to use my second monitor as anything but a clone of the first monitor. All I could do was the former. I may go back to it someday to play but I just spent the evening learning how to get grub to boot into windows automatically and to hide the grub menu. Granted there may be an easy solution to all unix problems but they are not intuitive. I love (and use) many open source programs but until I have 9-5 job, I don't have the time to learn even Ubuntu.

Re:My experience with 6.10

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

decided to try Ubuntu (my first unix experience) two days ago. I spent two days trying to get it to use a proper aspect ratio for my main monitor and to use my second monitor as anything but a clone of the first monitor.

I'm presuming you have an ATI or nvidia card. I've come across this bug on my laptop also. I'm not sure what the linux community can do about software they have absolutely no control over.

I know this advice is too late now, but next time you make a hardware purchasing decision, I suggest investing your money in video hardware from a company that supports linux instead of a company that provides buggy, incomplete closed source drivers.

Re:My experience with 6.10

[FauxPasIII]

> Having ruled out ATI and Nvidia, that would be who, exactly?

Intel.

http://intellinuxgraphics.org/

If I were MS, I would be running scared

[rolfwind]

It's amazing how, since Ubuntu hit the scene, that the Linux Desktop has just dramatically improved. Before Ubuntu, things were meandering along without much focus it seems, with the best out of the box experience being Knoppix, which unfortunately was too complicated for the average user to install (being focused as it was as a Live CD).

It seems now that every six months brings as more improvements as Vista has to XP. And for most users, I would consider the Linux desktop as "here", if not for some applications which have little to do with the distro itself but have me asking - when are developers going to step in and provide ports or at least make sure they run fine in Wine without much modification? Do we Linux users have to signal to them that we are more than willing to pay for some things? Will Click-n-Run, when ported to Ubuntu later this year, spur this on? Will CnR maybe bring up a new crop of Linux developers servicing the Linux community with specific pay-for apps in the vacuum of development houses staying loyal to MS? Not every App lends itself to having the developer do support contracts afterall.

It's frustrating to be ignored, I already "converted" 3 people to Ubuntu this year - but these are types who simply want to browse the web and one had their MS OS trashed by malware and wanted something secure but convenient (FYI I don't delete Windows, just shrink the partition if they ever need it). But these are side converts, it really doesn't matter what OS they use - they won't ever go out and buy software - so for all intents and purposes the development houses can ignore them.

Not a nice middle-ground

[Burz]

Ubuntu is still its own OS (as are the other distros): See Ian Murdoch essay.

As such, no platform exists for PC software vendors to target.

If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[Alex Zepeda]

Case in point, the 3dfx xorg driver. Worked fine in Dapper. Broken in Edgy. A two line patch to add the proper prototype for a function fixes the problem in Edgy. Bug report is closed because it's been fixed in Feisty.

Or how about the USB hot plug stuff missing a bunch of digital camera IDs? Pretty well documented, but nope. Not fixed in Edgy. As a result, using a digital camera with Ubuntu requires lots of digging.

Re:If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[LingNoi]

Broken in Edgy.

I know your angry. I have a problem also with my Edgy Ubuntu laptop where I have to have wireless on to boot otherwise the whole thing freezes on boot (The reason for this bug is because of a closed source Intel wireless driver, not open source). This has also been fixed in Feisty but not Edgy.

BUT

Edgy is a Beta product and it is said many, many times on the Ubuntu website that if you want a stable version of Ubuntu to use Dapper Drake LTS (version 6.10... LTS=Long Term Support). I know its not what you want to hear, sorry and I hope you have better luck in the future. :D

Re:If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[Alex Zepeda]

I've got a Fuji F30 (which does not have a mass storage mode). I had to manually add some lines to /etc/udev/rules.d/45-libgphoto2.rules to get the permissions set properly. Said camera worked just fine with Dapper. Of course the rules file is not empty in Edgy, but it's certainly missing some well known USB IDs.

See also the bug report: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gphoto2/+bug/ 6602

These are pretty stupid regressions to be making, if only because they're so trivial to fix to boot. I certainly don't hold out a lot of hope for Feisty.

Re:If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[LingNoi]

Really? What bugs are non-issues? Tell me and I will look into it for you and report them to the bug tracker.

I have had problems with Dapper Drake and Edgy because I am using a laptop and every bug I have reported has been taken seriously. Please tell me so I can look into it for you.

I hope you will give Ubuntu another go when the next Long Term Support release comes out. :D

Re:If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[N7DR]

He's got a point though - Dapper is supposed to be the big "supported for years" release.

This "Long Term Support" thing is almost universally misunderstood by users. I agree that any normal person interprets "LTS" to mean that the distro (dapper) will be kept up to date. But that's not what it means :-( As has been explained several times (and not doubt will be explained many more) on various ubuntu reflectors and fora, Canonical says that "LTS" means that they will continue to provide security patches for a long time, not that they will update any apps.

They should make this much clearer than they do, because the natural interpretation is the one you suggest, not theirs. Someone on one reflector defines "LTS" to mean "Long Term Stagnation", which does unfortunately seem to be a defensible expansion of the term. It's not that simply applying security patches is bad or evil or wrong -- it's just not what the typical user expects "Long Term Support" to mean.

FWIW, I have some hopes that cnr.com will fix this, IMO one of the biggest failings of Linux distros: the inability to keep current with applications without being forced quite quickly to update the entire distro to the most recent version.

Re:If only Ubuntu weren't abandonware

[linguizic]

I have had problems with Dapper Drake and Edgy because I am using a laptop and every bug I have reported has been taken seriously.

I have been reporting bugs whenever I run across them in every distro I've used, and only Ubuntu consistently follows up on the bugs. I used RHEL for many years and never got the kind of attention paid to the bug issues that I had the way Ubuntu does.

Re:What is it about Ubunto

[gutu]

It's the best packaged product for average user.

my experiences on a laptop

[squidinkcalligraphy]

I got an IBM r52 recently; I tried installing XP on it - initially with the supposed foolproof system restore image, then from scratch, and three or four hours later, still had no usable system. The drivers just wouldn't install or download and I couldn't find a way to transport them from my other machine. Then I put an ubuntu 6.10 disc in, and bout half an hour later, without little to no interaction, had a perfectly working system. Even wifi worked out of the box. (WPA authentication took a little bit more digging, but was surprisingly easy once I found the package to use).

Re:my experiences on a laptop

[IchBinEinPenguin]

The utter PITA that is an XP install on modern hardware is mostly attributable to Microsoft's refusal to re-issue the XP install CD with an updated driver database (*).
This, of course, it to ensure that there's at least one good reason to upgrade to Vista.

(*) Yes, I know drivers can be slipstreamed, but why should we have to do that?

OK... enough trolling for one day....

Re:I'm sure I'm not alone

[the_womble]

I find it hard to believe I'm the only one who is going to find it hard to take an OS with the name Feisty Fawn seriously!

Unlike an OS that has serious codenames like: Snowball, Dolly, Longhorn Blackcomb, etc.

In case you did not know, Feisty Fawn is will officially be Ubuntu 7.04 once launched.

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...

Re:REALLY!?

[drunkahol]

At least two people get the underlying issue here ;)

Can't understand a Eugenia article being linked and the majority of comments are NOT about the bias of the review or the opinionated reasoning.

To be honest - it's certainly a long way from Eugenia's worst piece on the web. Perhaps she's mellowing in her old age (says he at 35!).

Duncan

Re:problems with ubuntu

[houstonbofh]

Since the default install is one big root partition, your problem was one of your own making. Hard to blame that on Ubuntu. I have sold several Ubuntu systems that have been rock stable, with no problems. If you buy the right hardware, and don't get fancy with the configuration, it is rock solid. If you compile your graphics drivers, you just might have graphics problems. A long time ago, this used to be called common sense. I guess really-fucking-rare sense just doesn't roll off the tung.

Don't pat yourselves on the back yet.

[Inoshiro]

"By manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file it fixed the problem for my 1440x900 screen and I was able to load the LiveCD and finally install Feisty on the hard drive."

If Windows is too hard for people (and it is), what on Earth makes you think mortals will be able to do that? That's not a mature product designed for end users, despite how (otherwise) nice Ubuntu is.

Re:Don't pat yourselves on the back yet.

[houstonbofh]

Comparing a user install to a factory pre-install is not a easy win. Have you installed Windows lately? Without the manufactures driver cd?

Re:Don't pat yourselves on the back yet.

[Telvin_3d]

I agree with everything you just said but I have a comment on your last point. I think the vast majority of developers know exactly who their target end user is... themselves. There is almost no one working to 'dumb down' the amount of knowledge needed to run the OS because that is not how the developers themselves run the OS. They are designing an OS for their own use which sounds to me like a fine thing to do. The problem is that there is a group of developers and a few end users who are so out of touch with anyone outside the technology field that they are working under the assumption that everyone has the same basic skill that they do.

Re:Don't pat yourselves on the back yet.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

That's not a mature product designed for end users, despite how (othere wise) nice Ubuntu is.

Uh? One bug for one particular hardware type in a beta release and it's 'not designed for end users'?

Jeepers! I guess vista isn't a mature product designed for end users - it's beta had bugs. I guess osx isn't a mature product designed for end users either - it's beta had bugs.

Re:Don't pat yourselves on the back yet.

[LingNoi]

Uh? One bug for one particular hardware type in a beta release and it's 'not designed for end users'?

Correction Alpha Release, Betas haven't started yet. :D

I've been using it.

[Chas]

I've been running the Herd releases for Feisty. And I just can't say enough good things about it.

Wireless just works. Automatically. No dicking around with swapping config files if I switch between an open AP and a WEP/WPA-locked AP.

Beryl. With the underlying AIGLX support, Beryl installed and just worked right out of the box on my laptop. SWEET!

Ubuntu has drastically reduced the hassle of just getting a Linux system into a usable, functional configuration. If they keep going, they're going to be a credible replacement for Windows, even for mega-luddites.

Good for newbies coming from Windows...ummm

[svunt]

First paragraph of the review says this

..There was a problem though and X11 would crash on load -- and the graphical safe mode would not work either (confirmed bug). The 915resolution hack was not needed for my Intel graphics card, but I needed to have more information for my laptop's LCD. By manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file it fixed the problem for my 1440x900 screen and I was able to load the LiveCD and finally install Feisty on the hard drive.

Yeah, that sounds really easy for an average Windows user...I'm sure you wouldn't lose 99% of them right there. If you honestly think that an OS which needs a "hack" or "manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file" beofre it will install is ready to compete with one that installs with nothing more challenging than "what time zone are you in", you're fooling yourself.

Re:Good for newbies coming from Windows...ummm

[LingNoi]

This isn't a Windows vs. Linux article. Its a Linux vs. Linux Article.

The screen resolution problem he was having was because he was using alpha software. Its like comparing Windows Longhorn as the final product for the end user. This version of Ubuntu still has a lot more testing to do before its being released.

So far we've had the following of Ubuntu Feistry Fawn: Herd 1, 2, 3, 4 and are currently on 5. These are "Alpha"s?

Next there is going to be "Release Candidate"s. These are "Beta"s? I can assure you that there are going to be at least RC1 and RC2 of Feisty before its released.

So any specific problems with Feisty Fawn should be commented on after its released not while it is still in Alpha. :D

Re:More desktop - yay?

[VON-MAN]

"Why is it that everyone is so focused on linux desktops, and not the core internals of the OS?"

Core internals? Hah, I know where you're from. So, a question for a question: where are all the Windows fanboys raving about the fantastic core internals of Vista? That is right.

"I hear many linux geeks whining about how bloated the windows vista system is"

You do? Well, it must be true than, eh? I remember geeks complaining about how bloated XP, 2000, ME, 98SE, 98 or KDE, Gnome, 2.6, 2.5, Red Hat, SuSE etc. etc. etc. is. So, when I hear someone complain about bloat, i don't take them serious, it really was the only thing they could think of. And it sounds really professional, like you actually only care about serious server-like stuff.

"Why do we then go and focus so much on the same aspects of linux?" Sorry, what's your beef??? I can't parse the logic of your comment. First you complain that linux geeks are preoccupied with Vista bloat, then you state we do the same with linux (or don't do the same)?

"I read the malloc man page, and the big memory mapping issue still remains, and as a result I still need to continually reboot to keep my ram defragmented....." Yeah, I read the same, you know how much work it is to keep that ram defragmented? I do it by hand(!!), can you believe how much work that is!

Re:More desktop - yay?

[fabs64]

The difference between the Linux bloat, and the Vista bloat, is that I can (and do) still use fluxbox as my wm if that's what I prefer.

Just a minor correction, it is not beta yet

[vivaoporto]

From the Ubuntu forums:

Ubuntu 7.04 Alpha 5 CD image testing started
** FEISTY IS NOT SUITABLE FOR EVERYDAY USE RIGHT NOW IT IS ONLY IN ALPHA. **
If you are interested in helping to test CD images for the upcoming Ubuntu release you can find more information here:

Xorg

[feranick]

This is a very serious problem of Ubuntu that is overlooked by the developers. Problems with specific hardware like those in the TFA, can be common especially these days with so many different combinations of monitors and video cards. I'd like to see some sort of "safe mode" that kicks in when there are problems, and a GUI to allow proper reconfiguration. If you expect a windows user to manually edit Xorg.conf, you're wrong.

Re:Xorg

[kripkenstein]

This is a very serious problem of Ubuntu that is overlooked by the developers. Problems with specific hardware like those in the TFA, can be common especially these days with so many different combinations of monitors and video cards. I'd like to see some sort of "safe mode" that kicks in when there are problems, and a GUI to allow proper reconfiguration.

You are correct about this problem, however, the developers are not ignoring it. In fact they were considering implementing more or less what you suggested for Feisty. This has been deferred, however, and for good reason - X.Org, in a future release (7.3, IIRC) will offer related functionality. So Ubuntu developing it themselves would be a lot of effort, for just a few months.

Hopefully with the next X.Org and the next (after Feisty) Ubuntu we will see many of the typical X problems disappear.

No, at least not for Ubuntu Re:no NO NO!

[GreatBunzinni]

Ubuntu will not be ready for any decent work while it still has bugs like the infamous overheating bug. I mean, I love Kubuntu and I adopted it as my main OS but seriously, it still suffers from a showstopping overheating bug which is almost 2 years old. I mean, what good is an OS for if it simply can't cope with any mildly CPU-intensive application (i.e., compiling, encoding sound files, running any 3D application, etc...) before hanging, crashing and endangering the hardware itself?

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:Hardware problems

[drunkahol]

Good for you - stick with your PS/2 keyboard and mouse. Don't try wireless networking. Don't use a printer. For the REAL world, however, some of us like to use those things.

I've been around Linux for many years now so have seen it when you REALLY had to be picky about the hardware you bought. To offer your 3 points of advice these days is seriously wide of the mark.

1) I've not had a USB device unrecognised under Linux for a while now. And I don't EVER remember a USB keyboard or mouse failing.

2) Wireless is certainly more of a blind-spot for Linux, but maybe I'm fortunate in that 3 of the 4 different wireless devices I've used have worked straight out of the box. The 4th wasn't THAT difficult to install either - although I wouldn't be recommending a novice tried it.

3) Unbelieveable twaddle. Printer management is pretty damn good under Linux in my view. I've not yet come across a printer that Linux can't manage to talk to politely. And I'm talking about a full range of printers from deskjets, personal lasers, high volume colour lasers through to A0 plotters. Never once have I struggled to get them working.

Why I bother replying I don't know - it's only slashdot after all. And a discussion about a Eugenia article at that! At least I've got these monkeys off my back now and can sink as many Guinness as physically possible tonight.

Happy Guinness Day (sorry - did I fall for the marketing ploy there?)

Duncan

Option #3 - the government

[khasim]

Your comment about "Joe User" is accurate ... but premature.

The group that will initially drive Linux adoption (whether *buntu or other) will be governments and businesses.

The majority (99.9%+) of workers in those two categories will not be focused on the latest hardware and toys. They use wired connections, 2D graphics and save their data onto a central server. Their users do not maintain nor upgrade their boxes. They have experts who do that for them. And being Debian-based, *buntu is very easy to upgrade/maintain.

The only features missing for those categories are email / calendaring / scheduling (similar to Outlook/Exchange, GroupWise or Lotus Notes) and directory services (similar to Active Directory or eDirectory). The directory services may be here soon from Red Hat's Directory Server http://www.redhat.com/software/rha/directory. But the email segment is taking a bit longer. Eventually that will be here also.

At which point, non-US governments will be heavily pushing to get off the Microsoft upgrade treadmill. Particularly since they'll be able to invest in their LOCAL developers to polish Linux for their specific needs.

As the government / business workers gain familiarity with Linux at work, they'll be more comfortable using Linux at home. But the home market will be the LAST market that Linux will crack. And it will take YEARS (literally).

If you want to bring the home market around quicker, you need to focus on bringing WINE up to speed for their applications (and the home users have a LOT of different apps, each with slightly different requirements and almost NONE of them written in an easily portable fashion). Or you can work on near identical apps for them (which addresses your point about them "learning" by rote).

Re:What is it about Ubunto

[Archtech]

Perhaps not entirely technical reasons. Why did Java take off at such tremendous speed and become so preeminent, when there are so many good languages out there? It's partly a matter of timing, but largely a question of mass psychology. For some reason, certain memes go howling into overdrive and enjoy a positive feedback loop that boosts their growth into the stratosphere.

When you find out exactly why these things happen, you can become the world's richest individual more or less overnight.

two words:

[hummassa]

"mere aggregation".
Read the GPL. Things are not black and white as you are construing them to be.

ubuntu missing APT pdiff??

[mennucc1]

Only problem with the refreshing of the repositories is that each time you refresh them, you need to download 5 MBs of data (that's with the restricted and multiverse repositories enabled)

That is peculiar. APT introduced pdiff downloading long ago (in "experimental", in Debian); then in May 2006, in version 0.6.44, apt pdiff support from experimental was merged in the unstable version: so this feature will be available in Debian Etch. If Ubuntu Feisty is shipping a reasonably new APT, all they need to do is to start generating the appropriate pdiffs in their repository.... and no more 5MBs download.

When we stop hearing this about Linux...

[cenonce]

... the Average User ("AU") will start adopting it. This really should be the goal of Linux now that it is well into its teens. Time to stop being a geek-only, tinkerer OS and streamline the process. Now, admittedly, this is a beta... but I have dealt with these problems in all kinds of final Linux distros over the years. With that in mind, I am not so inspired by this review. Consider the following from the article:

By manually entering the vertical and horizontal sync in the xorg.conf file it fixed the problem for my 1440x900 screen and I was able to load the LiveCD and finally install Feisty on the hard drive.

Fortunately, I have not had to do this since about Slackware 8 or 9 (and that was on an old 486 Dell). Even then, it was NOT fun. You will not get a mom to edit xorg.conf. You will not get your typical manager/supervisor to edit xorg.conf. You will get them, however, to call the MCSE tech to fix a driver issue in Windows or a problem with Exchange.

...the bootloader should be installed it could use some friendlier "names" rather than just (hd0,0)...

The AU doesn't know hd0,0 from eth1 from lpt. Why even have these as default names if you want the AU to know what it is? It is intimidating for an AU to decipher tech names for hardware. They just want to see "Wireless" and know that is what they configure to hook up at the local coffee shop.

I would personally go with AIXGL and Beryl instead of the slower-evolving Compiz (after re-writing Beryl's pref panels of course to be more humane/sane)

What is a resistance to a consistent interface and making things look at least somewhat like Windows by default in the Linux community? It always seemed to me that consistency and a default Windows look and feel would encourage AU adoption. Looking at the desktop of a Linux distro for the first time is like getting into a car with the break/accelerator pedals reversed and the radio and other interior controls located on the door. Let's get some consistency and start it up looking like Windows so the AU can find everything. Then let them move everything around!

I manually installed libdvdcss Yeesh! Never happen with an AU... and an AU would never adopt an OS they couldn't just watch a DVD (or rip an MP3 or whatever) from first boot.

I had to blacklist the BCM43xx driver before I could successfully install ndiswrapper and finally get WiFi support. Again, see "manual installation" issue above.

There were very few the times that I had to pop to the terminal to carry out an important action.

This should be a "never" for AU adoption. Geeks want to run everything from the terminal, moms, wives and bosses do not.

I am 33 years old and I just don't have the same energy as I used to to deal with stupid issues that they should not be there, or with removal or non-development of conveniences for no good reason.

Isn't this what ALL computer users want!?!

I am 35 and I write this on a T23 with Ubuntu Edgy Eft installed. Five or six years ago I would have spent hours getting Linux installed on a machine b/c I liked the challenge. Now, I have enough to do without fighting over all the stuff mentioned in this article (and hey for Edgy Eft on the T23, wireless was the only real difficult thing)! AUs of all ages are the same way with maybe the younger ones have slightly more intestinal fortitude to configure Linux under the hood.

My hope is that they clean this up in beta and Feisty installs as (more or less) easily as Edgy did for me, but this is not an article that inspires me to believe the Feisty is a transformative release for purposes of Average User adoption.

Re:When we stop hearing this about Linux...

[Vexorian]

Do you notice that all those config things, are stuff the AU doesn't even know about? My mom still uses 800x600 as resolution, certainly doesn't know what resolution is (In fact, when I increased hers she complained because stuff was small and she couldn't read) . And she never heard of 'installing drivers' Fact is the AU needs a lot of help in windows even to play DVDs (specially to play DVDs now that everything is moving to that DRM crap). In fact, the AU still has a lot of issues in windows with stuff like 'Copying files' or Decompressing files, seriously. I know this because I used to distribute tools for game editing...

But yes, it is still a beta. I for one would like to thank God for letting the ubuntu people choose blue for active colors, the orange toned edgy blows, seriously. This is perhaps the most beatiful screenshot I've seen of a default gnome distro.

Re:When we stop hearing this about Linux...

[petrus4]

... the Average User ("AU") will start adopting it. This really should be the goal of Linux now that it is well into its teens. Time to stop being a geek-only, tinkerer OS and streamline the process.

Why? Vista still exists. If you want Windows, use Windows. Linux isn't Windows. It's an entirely different OS. Nobody's forcing you to use Linux, either. If you want Windows, it's still there for you. Use it and enjoy it, and allow Linux to be itself, rather than insist that it become something it isn't.

If a free (as in beer) copy of Windows is something you want, download a cracked copy of XP from the Pirate Bay. (and realise the legal consequences of doing so are entirely on your own head)

If the evil behaviour of Microsoft is something you're having a problem with, and you want Linux to become a Windows clone purely in order to be able to escape that, maybe what you need to realise is that given human nature, a company that make a product that does as much for you as Windows does are also entirely logically and naturally going to want to dominate other areas of your life as well...hence, the only way to really escape that is to voluntarily become more self-responsible...which would mean using Linux as is.

What is a resistance to a consistent interface and making things look at least somewhat like Windows by default in the Linux community?

See above. Do you want Windows? Use Windows. Stop wanting to turn Linux into Windows, because in wanting that, all you'll really accomplish is to destroy Linux.

Yeesh! Never happen with an AU... and an AU would never adopt an OS they couldn't just watch a DVD (or rip an MP3 or whatever) from first boot.

AUs don't need to use Linux. (Are you getting the message yet?) They can use Windows. Have fun with Vista.

Also...DVD and mp3 codecs are used as competitive weapons by Microsoft. (and to a lesser extent, Apple) If you've got a problem with them not having been installed with Ubuntu by default, take it up with them. That issue is not the fault of anybody associated with Linux.

This should be a "never" for AU adoption. Geeks want to run everything from the terminal, moms, wives and bosses do not.

You already know what I'm going to say in response to this by now surely, don't you?

Now, I have enough to do without fighting over all the stuff mentioned in this article (and hey for Edgy Eft on the T23, wireless was the only real difficult thing)!

Then I guess at 35...

"The Wow starts now." ;-)

It is being worked on.

[an.echte.trilingue]

They are working on it. I don't know if it will be in this release, but it is on the way. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/bull et-proof-x/

Re:AverTV Card

[VoltageX]

Since when was any Linux distro easy to use? I have to recompile my kernel to get my TV card to work, and even then it's sketchy. The year of Linux will be when all hardware manufacturers release SOURCE for their drivers - AverTV released binary drivers, but they're no use to me. The card is an AverTV Hybrid PCI DVB card if anyone knows how to get it working, by the way.

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:More desktop - yay?

[Anonymous Coward]

And I run blackbox on my windows machine. Though, I can do have other options, too, such as Xoblite (a blackbox fork), LiteStep, or Aston, which I find consumes even less memory (abouy 3-4 mb worth), while giving me fancy plugins, transparency, and all that fun stuff. Hell, even GNUstep/Etoile does windows. And I'm pretty sure I've seen WindowMaker ports, as well.

Oh, yes, and you can also strip down windows by either hacking up the registry, or using fancy third-party Frontends. I recall sliming 9x to a 45mb install, and XP to about 1-200mb, by stripping out unecessary components and services (e.g. Outlook, Mediaplayer, explorer, etc). I haven't tried Vista as of yet, nor do I intend to in the near future, but I know that many of the alternate WMs havebeen ported.

Really, I'm trying hard, but I can't quite seem to get your point. Windows has had the option to swap outthe default explorer shell in favour of another, since NT4, and the process is painless. So, with that in mind, if your criticism is a fair one, would it not be just as fair to argue that Ubuntu is bloated because it installs Gnome by default?

Of course it isn't, you can't, however, have it both ways.

FWI: I'm not fanboying, but I do use a Windows desktop alongside my Unix boxen boxen, and I realise that each has their strengths and weaknesses, each their uses, and not one is unilaterally "better" than the other in all respects.

Re:My experience with 6.10 (It's the preinstall!)

[quixote9]

Matt Edd's issues are real. Windows is PRE-INSTALLED. That's why it doesn't have them. That's also why Microsoft fights like Godzilla to keep any other OS from being pre-installed. If people had to do their own installs of Windows (any version), the whole world would already be using Ubuntu, even with the well-documented problems for new users (manual edits of some config files and the like).

There's no point carping that such and such is "not a *nix problem" or "is a closed-source driver problem." Only we care. Lots of people out there want it to just work. Where we should be directing our energies is getting anti-monopoly laws applied to OEMs who won't provide specs so that drivers can be written, and to companies who kill people when they pre-install anyone else's OS.

An easier way

[an.echte.trilingue]

An easier way would be to install bootchart, boot a couple or three times plugged in, boot a couple or three times from battery, and then compare the charts to see what is taking longer to load (assuming that there is still a difference).

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!

To paraphrase Mr MonkeyBoy.

[haeger]

Applications! Applications! Applications! Applications! Applications!

Most people I know don't care at all about what OS they're running. Not one bit. That's something that we here at slashdot do. Most people will choose the OS that has the applications that they need. 90% of the time that's windows.

Let me go through the usual "selling points" of Linux and their typical response from a normal user.

Linux evangelist: "Linux is free"
Normal user: "So?"

Linux evangelist: "Linux is more secure"
Normal user: "So?"

Linux evangelist: "Linux is faster"
Normal user: "So?"

Normal user: "Does it run application X that I use?"
Linux evangelist: "Well, sort of, and if you combine this app with that and do this random hack then....." by which time the normal user have stopped listening.

In my humble opinion KDE4 is a great step in the right direction for Linux. In KDE4 (from what I understand) there shouldn't be any problems recompiling things for windows. This means that we can first hook them on free, secure, fast applications, and by doing that we have lowered the threshold for them to come over to our free, secure, fast platform.

.haeger

3d desktops are a waste of ... everything

[fudgefactor7]

I would personally go with AIXGL and Beryl instead of the slower-evolving Compiz (after re-writing Beryl's pref panels of course to be more humane/sane).
 
Compiz/Beryl/AIXGL all really serve no purpose other than slow your system down to a crawl, introduce instability, and waste your time. I played around with them and see no benefit other than the "Whee, look at the cube!" which is boring as hell in about 5 seconds. So, can anyone actually tell me what's the point?

Solution: Share an ext3 partition like /home

[Jeff Carr]

I used to have that issue as well. Not to mention disk space issues on my laptop due to 5 partions (swap,/,/home,/mnt/shared/,windows,).

Now instead of sharing a fat32 partion, I share my /home partion using FS Driver an EXT2 file system driver for windows. (naturally compatible of course with ext3)

Solved many, many annoyances for me. I highly recommend it.

Usability Labs

[justthinkit]

The problem is that there is a group of developers and a few end users who are so out of touch with anyone outside the technology field that they are working under the assumption that everyone has the same basic skill that they do.

Microsoft formed their Usability Labs for exactly this reason. Perhaps these guys can work together on something like this?