Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Unity 8 And Snaps Are Conquering The Ubuntu Desktop After Ubuntu 16.10 (softpedia.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the divide-and-conquer dept.

prisoninmate writes: Today is the last day of the Ubuntu Online Summit 2016, and the Ubuntu developers discussed the future of the Ubuntu Desktop for Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety Yak) and beyond. It looks like Snaps (Snappy) and Unity 8 with Mir are slowly conquering the Ubuntu Desktop, at least according to Canonical's Will Cooke, Ubuntu Desktop Manager. Work has already begun on pushing these new and modern technologies to the Ubuntu Desktop, as Ubuntu 16.04 LTS has just received support for installing Snaps from the Ubuntu Snappy Store. Canonical's Will Cooke has mentioned the fact that the Unity 7 desktop enters its twilight years, which means that it gets fewer features and it's being reduced to only critical and OEM work. This is because Unity 8 desktop is getting all the attention now, and it will become the default desktop session somewhere after Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety Yak).

78 comments

  1. If Unity 8 is the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    why did this rush this LTS release? What a mess.

    1. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why did this rush this LTS release? What a mess.

      What rush? LTS was always set for April 2016. The next LTS will be 18.04 (April 2018).

    2. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The release was DOA if you had skylake w/nVidia, for example. It was a known bug and went out the door. For the first time in years Ubuntu didn't "just work" on my computer. Worse, even if you asked it to take updates while installing, one of which would have fixed the issue, it failed to do so.

      Perhaps the problem is that it was set for April 2016 and shipped in April 2016 when maybe it needed to be in May.

    3. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before logging in, go to terminal and do a dist-upgrade. Then install the latest driver from Nvidia PPA.

    4. Re: If Unity 8 is the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get why people choose to continue struggle with Ubuntu. Just use Debian if you want something that works.

    5. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      If Unity 8 is the future... why did this rush this LTS release? What a mess.

      If it's the future (it might not be) what's best? Rushing into an LTS or testing for two years then putting it in an LTS?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      The issue was bad code from an llvm toolchain generating bad instructions, I don't think the nvidia proprietary problem alone would have fixed it. What I had to do instead was boot with "nomodeset", get to a terminal, then do dist-upgrade. Then it will boot (and I can install proprietary drivers or whatever too).

      I have been using linux for years so this sort of thing is a throwback to 2002 (before that just getting X to run at all was an experience). I would not want someone who is a novice to computers to have to endure this. Particularly for a pretty bog standard set of hardware.

    7. Re:If Unity 8 is the future... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I watched this one carefully - from the outside, of course. I belong to all the mailing lists and have the team's mailings all filtered and, other than the flavor that I prefer, it did actually seem like this was more rushed than others. I think it's that the *.10 release is done just prior to the holiday season so you've got the *.04 release right after. The point release being LTS and right after that means that people have some time constraints.

      I wonder if it might be better to move the LTS builds to the *.10 portion of the cycle as that really does seem like it would have more personal time devoted to it. Then again, that might not be valid. I'm not sure why but 15.10 seemed particularly rushed - even in the Lubuntu sector, which was abnormal seeming to me.

      I don't usually stick to the LTS builds but flit to the newest when it is out - sometimes even hopping onto the train while it is still beta. They're not production machines so I don't worry about it. Sure, my personal servers and NAS and things like that are all configured to use LTS but I still swap those out long before the OS has reached EOL.

      At any rate, it really did appear to be rushed. There were calls to action hours before the release was final and then it got the "ship it" label thrown on it with known bugs still in it. It really did seem like a crunch time. I wonder, also, if they're just getting to be so big that they're needing to change their release schedule. Things move fast in the OS world - it might be worth it for them to revisit their process. And yes, I say this as a Ubuntu fan though my preference is for the Lubuntu flavor - for now. I'm not sure if I'll like LXQt as much.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. Fuck Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot makes it so you can't reply to a post on a poll because the poll is too old but it's still on the fucking front page? Talk about a half assed establishment.

    1. Re:Fuck Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does a half-assed establishment manage to be 100% ass? Science is still looking for the answer.

  3. We've stopped packaging anything else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our company will be ending support for all non-Snappy packaging for Linux based systems. From now on, if you want our stuff on Linux you either get it from the Ubuntu store or you checkout and build from git.

    1. Re:We've stopped packaging anything else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or wait until the distribution maintainers build it for me, you funny man.

  4. Who Cares? by paul_friedman · · Score: 0

    Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?

    1. Re:Who Cares? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      Does anybody actually still believe

      Torvalds.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    2. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm on Linux now for more than 15 years. Never looked back.

    3. Re:Who Cares? by StormReaver · · Score: 4, Informative

      Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?

      My customers and family love Kubuntu, so yes. Even Steve Ballmer admitted that Windows is so bad that it would have died a long time ago if Microsoft hadn't suckered the world's developers into programming directly to the Windows API.

    4. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd use Windows more but my shaver died

    5. Re:Who Cares? by wicka_wicka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "It's been 25 years. I can do this for another 25. I'll wear them down." He'll wear them down? That kind of attitude is why they've failed thus far. You don't need to wear anyone down, you simply need to make a better desktop. I'm sure I will now be inundated with replies saying various Linux distros/window managers are, in fact, better than Windows and OS X. Guess what? Millions (billions?) of users disagree. And the prevalence of the idea that Linux is somehow Good Enough, despite all evidence to the contrary, is precisely why I have little faith it will ever get there.

      --
      hi
    6. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?

      No, and that's a good thing. The illiterate masses will stay with Windows, bad guys will carry on focusing on Windows, because it is easier to break and the number of clueless people using it is large. The good part is that I will able to carry on using Linux on the desktop for everything I need.

    7. Re:Who Cares? by chipschap · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Millions (billions?) of users disagree.

      I think this is a misinterpretation. Yes, millions are using Windows. This is not an active vote for Windows over Linux. The fact is that millions of computers are shipped with Windows pre-installed, and most buyers go with the flow and use what's in front of them. They're not going to install a different OS and probably aren't any more capable of doing so than they would have been with installing Windows if it hadn't already been done for them.

      Whether Linux is "ready" or "as good as" Windows is an entirely different question. Quite a few people think it is. But I won't get into that argument here. But Windows' high market share doesn't prove very much.

    8. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux isn't ready, and likely never will be, for dozens of reasons.. you all know what most of them are, even if you won't admit they exist.

      But, simple fact: Until some flavor of Linux can be preloaded on OEM systems and sold at mass market retail and have no higher return or support incident rate than an HP or Dell, it will forever remain a niche product used by geeks and nerds with single digit desktop market share.

      So, what are you going to do to make that actually happen? Improve documentation? Make it readable and usable by "normal" people? Consolidate similar projects to make one better one instead of a dozen shitty ones? Give a desktop environment the same usability experience of a Windows 7? -- including simple, taken for granted features like automatically remembering Window positions whenever you launch a program, without any hoop jumping? Something else?

    9. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dozens of reasons

      Dozens, eh?

      List at least two dozen reasons, please. I am curious.

    10. Re:Who Cares? by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Does anybody actually still believe Linux is a viable desktop platform any more?

      Well I am writing this comment from Chrome which is running under Fedora 23 which in turn is running on the latest Skylake Core i7 chip-set which took me a time consuming 30 minutes to install without any issues. I also have Android, Mint and SteamOS virtual machines. Does that count?

      I have looked for MS Windows but my green parrot gets sick at the mere mention of it.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    11. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux isn't ready, and likely never will be, for dozens of reasons

      Linux is perfectly ready for the desktop. I've been using it on my desktop since 1994. It works fine for me, and I couldn't give a flying fuck whether it works for you or not.

    12. Re: Who Cares? by zaphirplane · · Score: 1

      Interesting, how about cause and effect
      Car makers with 90% market share are better than those with 2% market share, same with newspapers, builders, tyres or even sunglasses. Better involves a cost value assessment and when an option is free ...:

    13. Re: Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and when an option is free ...:

      Windows is also "free", in the sense that you have already paid for it (and cannot avoid it) if you buy a computer. Sure, you could build your own, but that's a minority of computer users.

    14. Re:Who Cares? by John+Allsup · · Score: 2

      I only use Windows for running Windows only software, like VSTs and DAWs; only use my mac for running music software. All else I use Linux. Having to use the mouse to launch my main apps, rather than a two-key combo is a real annoyance when going back to them. Likewise, not being able to write short scripts with ease is again an annoyance. Not being able to install to a USB stick, taking it from machine to machine without activation problems is another annoyance.

      --
      John_Chalisque
    15. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I do. I have been using Linux on the desktop since 1997. If it doesn't work for you then don't use it. I don't use a hammer to drive a screw. I use Linux because it gives me a safe and stable system that works the way I want it to.

    16. Re: Who Cares? by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Interesting, how about cause and effect
      Car makers with 90% market share are better than those with 2% market share, same with newspapers, builders, tyres or even sunglasses. Better involves a cost value assessment and when an option is free ...:

      The critical difference is that Windows is not being chosen; it comes pre-installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs. When you buy a car you make a choice. A car isn't delivered to you as part of a larger, more expensive bundle. So your analogy doesn't work.

      The AC above who said

      "Until some flavor of Linux can be preloaded on OEM systems and sold at mass market retail "

      was right but didn't take it far enough. Linux would have to be preloaded on an overwhelming majority of (non-Apple) systems sold. That's how Windows won the battle. Whether you think Windows is great or terrible, it didn't win through quality. It won through enforced marketing, by being delivered and ready-to-go on the computer you bought.

    17. Re: Who Cares? by zaphirplane · · Score: 1

      It is being chosen to be preloaded, by multiple companies, companies with a strong vested interest in selling a lot and profiting a lot.
      I'm not weighting into the which is better argument, in saying cause and affect are a data point of strong value

    18. Re:Who Cares? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I use it, quite happily and successfully, as my desktop OS. On the other hand, I'm not one of the crazy zealots that thinks everyone should use it. I don't care if there's a year of the Linux desktop. I don't care what OS you use. I never have. I use what works best for me and fills my needs the best. I have things I want to accomplish. My OS is a tool to let me do that. The tool that gives me the greatest ease, choice, and function is the desktop I will use.

      If that is Windows, then I'll use Windows. If that's OS X, I'll get a Mac. No, I get what I need to get done with Linux and I do so in a manner that suits my needs and tastes. I'm quite happy and my system operates without any bugs that I'm aware of. As in, none - there are no bugs that I know of in my system. Now, there are (surely) bugs. I am just not aware of them because they're in things that don't impact me.

      I've never been one to care what you use. I just hope that you made a choice that fits your needs and lets you get your work done. I think the OS should just do what I tell it to do and then get out of the way and let me do it. I don't want to see the OS. I don't want to have to tweak the OS - but I want to be able to if I decide to. I don't constantly fiddle with it. Hell, half the time the physical computer I'm using isn't even booted to an OS that I'm using. Yup, about half the time I'm just using a Live USB. I don't even use persistent storage. I click a couple of things and I'm good to go. I then just don't shut it down until I need to.

      Basically, I am in Florida. I use VNC (or SSH) into my home computers, my home network, and my home servers - and I'm good to go. The device in front of me is a bit more than a dumb terminal but everything I do on it, locally, gets replicated to the home - and further replication from there in the form of backups but that's a story for another day.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    19. Re:Who Cares? by wicka_wicka · · Score: 1

      This is the excuse Linux evangelists always give. But guess what? It doesn't hold water. Look at Apple. No, they don't have a massive desktop market share, but they have a significant and influential corner of that market precisely because they produced an OS that many people felt was superior to Windows. And they were able to convert users to their platform despite it only being available on their hardware, which required paying a hefty premium over Microsoft's OEMs. The simple fact of the matter is that more people would be using Linux if it were good enough. They aren't because it isn't.

      --
      hi
    20. Re:Who Cares? by tepples · · Score: 1

      By "short scripts" do you mean in sh or Python? Both are available on OS X, PowerShell is included on Windows, and Python can be installed on Windows.

  5. Conquering Shmonkering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's this guy and what he says, goes. He owns the place. That's not "conquering". But then again, the link is pure aggregated clickbait. Next!

  6. So by "conquering" by jofas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... They mean " being forced on users. Classic canonical.

    1. Re: So by "conquering" by amias · · Score: 1

      You don't have to use it but if you do you have to respect their decisions. You can allways fork it and fix it yourself if you could actually be bothered. I've used Ubuntu for years and it just works for me.

      --
      [site]
    2. Re: So by "conquering" by jofas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, here we go. "Fork it yourself!" Is that the answer for everything now? Canonical isn't just astronaut money, you know. Users put Ubuntu on the map and as such should be treated as stakeholders.
      Your comment "I've been using Ubuntu for years and it works for me." speaks volumes. How have you dealt with Gnome 3? Unity? Ever had non-PAE support yanked out from under you? How did you like when Canonical blindly followed Debian and ripped out ffmpeg?
      You may enjoy telling others to go build their own car when they're not satisfied with it, but many who put effort into filing Launchpad bugs *and* coming up with solutions may not appreciate your use-it-or-get-fucked attitude. Off with you!

    3. Re: So by "conquering" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fork it??? Why not just use of the many other flavours that use a different desktop? Ubuntu 16.04 with Cinnamon is pretty decent.

    4. Re: So by "conquering" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever had non-PAE support yanked out from under you?
      Not to mention hyperthreading support, resulting in an unbootable system.

  7. And that's the only desktop they will conquer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank goodness for that. And thank goodness to the fact that one can run Linux on the desktop without having to put up with that junk.

  8. A proud user... by ADRA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    of Xubuntu. Centos with XFCE is ok too. Really, the only thing that XFCE is missing for me (and probably others) is a set of pre-canned layouts to select from in order to prevent more of the esoteric configuration.

    I'm all for adding new types of applications in new and novel ways until the cows come home, but the way I launch applications hasn't changed since '95. Call me old fashioned, but it fcking works and I love it.

    --
    Bye!
    1. Re:A proud user... by adnonsense · · Score: 1

      Tell me about it... I've been using KDE on and off, the 4.x series had almost become as usable as 3.5 was, then my distro of choice (openSUSE) went to 5.x (if you can call it that, something about plasma seems to be involved?) - pile of buggy slow steaming dung trying to pretend my monitor is a mobile phone. Been back on XFCE for a week, some rough edges (getting session switching working took a bit of research) but so far it Just Works.

    2. Re:A proud user... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      pretty much the same here. fvwm 1.4 (iirc) user since I 'upgraded' from twm.

      that's not a desktop; it just lets me bring up a menu (that goes away after I unclick) and run an xterm or whatever. usually I will run a term and then use that to do things, including running gui apps. stdout is often useful! why hide it?

      do a 'ps aux' and you see very little cruft on my installs. do that ps on an ubuntu 'desktop' and there's 10x as many procs running. no one needs that kind of waste, I don't care if you are on a cray desktop system (btw, those are pretty sweet).

      running an app is the same way I've been doing it since I first ran DECwindows. in fact, the color scheme I used at DEC when twm first came out is what I'm still using now. it works. why break shit that doesn't need breaking?

      vnc session and managed by fvwm. connect to the persistent desktop from anywhere in the house and turn off the vnc client when done. the server keeps your state. and fvwm takes no resources to speak of. uptimes that only get reset when a reboot is forced by a kernel update.

      unity? what's that? oh right, its the shit I first de-install after someone forced me to use a desktop version of ubuntu.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:A proud user... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of Xubuntu. Centos with XFCE is ok too.

      Been using Linux desktops at my small software shop since late 1999. The early years had some rough patches, but since 2003 or so, things have been smooth as long as one avoided hardware not well supported in Linux (which in the last several years has been an ever shortening list). I'm running Xubuntu 14.04 using the DWM window manager. My regular "daily apps" include vim, git, Firefox, Thunderbird, mcabber, ranger, LibreOffice, evince, and eagle. I typically have several dozen applications and instances running at any one time across multiple virtual desktops (tags in DWM), and I rarely use more than 2 GB of RAM not counting the disk cache. With the exception of the hot mess that is LibreOffice 5, I rarely see any kind of application responsiveness problems. I have a valid Win7 64 Pro license, which I last spun up 6 days ago to run Altium Designer, which a customer uses and has no Linux port.

      My current uptime is 28 days, as I suspend to RAM when not using my computer.

      Linux hardware support is great! I'm running an X230 w/SSD. Suspend to ram, docking/undocking across two different physical dock setups, USB 3.0 high speed external drives, web cams for virtual design reviews, Yubikeys for two factor authentication for SSH and GPG, high resolution multiple monitors, gigabit Ethernet, 802.11 wifi. All of the hardware I use works with no unusual quirks or bad behaviors.

      I am quite grateful for the *nix ecosystem, including Linux, GNU and so many other sources of contribution, which provides a highly productive environment in which to engage in our software development work. I am even more grateful that at least for now I am able to mostly avoid the repercussions of the efforts by so many vendors (Microsoft, Google, Canonical, etc.) to turn technology that I purchase and own into tools for their revenue stream development and maintenance.

    4. Re:A proud user... by rybarczykbr · · Score: 1

      "A set of pre-canned layouts to select from".

      Xubuntu 16.04 now have this option. Its called Xfce Panel Switch.

    5. Re:A proud user... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really should be using BSD. Lunix isn't for people like you (and me), it's for people who like upgrading and spending the next 2 weeks figuring out why nothing works.

    6. Re:A proud user... by ADRA · · Score: 1

      God, this is literally be best thing I've heard on Slashdot in a long time, Kudos!

      --
      Bye!
    7. Re:A proud user... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      XFCE also has the best GUI task manager out there. At least it's the best one out of the ones that I've found.

      sudo apt-get install xfce4-taskmanager

      Then just set it as the default and whatnot (if you like it) and it is good to go. I'm going to be working on a way to set a switch so that you can automatically installed it and swap it out for the LXtask for the on-click function for LXpanel.

      I used LXpanel to build myself a nifty little dock that only appears when I mouse over the top of the screen (it disappears when I move the cursor away) and there's a resource monitor applet in it. It opens the LXtask, hard-coded, instead of loading the default. I can switch the default but it still loads LXtask so I'm going to fork it from GIT and see what I can come up with - then probably push it upstream (if they want it) instead of maintaining it myself.

      Still, I needed to add no dependencies, it just works. I use Lubuntu and really don't like the default task manager. Thus my decision to investigate this the other day. I spent a while going over all of the ones that I could find and I've settled on that and set it as the default. The resource monitor doesn't load the default but loads LXtask specifically. Why? I have no idea. Still, I'm pretty sure I can fix it to open the default (or even make it selectable) without much of a hassle. I guess I could just write it anew with the one from XFCE hard-coded but that's not really solving anything except for me and my needs/wants. If I'm going to 'fix" it then I might as well fix it right.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  9. linux desktop platform by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In response to anyone who questions whether Linux is a viable desktop, I have this to say:
    My father's first and only computer, at the age of 86, was Linux Ubuntu. He did just fine with it for 4 years.
    Windows was not even a consideration for my efforts to bring computers to him. Ubuntu simply worked for him with minimal support from me. If you prefer Windows or Mac that is fine. Just skip criticizing Linux for what it is.

  10. What is Snaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is Snaps?

    1. Re:What is Snaps? by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      An App Store. With all the drawbacks that come with it, such as giving up your privacy:

      Please note that to install and remove snaps, you'll need an Ubuntu One account.

      Exactly this attitude stopped me from buying a Jolla Phone as a successor to an old Maemo phone.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    2. Re:What is Snaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story gramps. Shake your fistp at any good clouds today?

    3. Re:What is Snaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck off pencildick. he's answering my question.

  11. ugh... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    the Unity desktop is so terrible they should just call it Overunity because that's a name that matches the level of ridicule it deserves.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:ugh... by Sesostris+III · · Score: 1

      I've just replaced LMDE and XFCE with Ubuntu and Unity on my main desktop. (I thought it time to judge it for myself, and my Mint install was getting stale).

      And it seems fine. OK, there are some things that need getting used to, but on the whole I find it usable.

      --
      You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
    2. Re:ugh... by Bathroom+Humor · · Score: 1

      Your opinion on desktop interfaces is not universal. I would not say I HATE simple desktops like Mate or XFCE or LXDE, but the straightforwardness of Unity and the fact that it's mostly set up in a pleasant way out of the box make it more ideal for me. The trade-off is they seem to have a fear of supporting large amounts of interface tweaking, but every desktop has strengths and weaknesses.

    3. Re:ugh... by tepples · · Score: 1

      I prefer "Un(usabil)ity".

  12. Looks like the app appers guy is out tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only snap snappers snap snaps. You Luddite snap snappers!

  13. Re:No by donaldm · · Score: 1

    I run MATE over UBUNTU. Auto-update & *synaptic package manager* do 95% of chandler chores; *apt-get* or PPA snatch odd-apps. That's sufficient for my three Linux boxes.

    What a minute you can't say that since we all know that modern computer users will get a brain aneurysm at the mere mention of the words "command line" ... Woops.

    You should have mentioned the GUI application that allows people to maintain the software on their computer. We have probably lost a few modern computer users here .... Oh well. :-)

    --
    There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  14. Wait! I can fix this. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... according to Canonical's Will Cooke, Ubuntu Desktop Manager.

    apt-get remove ubuntu-desktop-manager

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Wait! I can fix this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apt-get install mate-desktop
      # -or-
      apt-get install xfce4

      # then
      reboot

      # finally
      apt-get purge unity*

  15. Unity and 16.04 is great release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a shame there is so much negativity on this page. I love and prefer CLI, but imho Unity is great. Thank you team at Ubuntu for brining the community such a great FREE product - keeping the competition honest.

    1. Re:Unity and 16.04 is great release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't tell if shill or troll.

  16. Snappety Snap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could one of you kids explain (without a LMGTFY) what " installing Snaps from the Ubuntu Snappy Store" means. It wasn't there in Dapper Drake, so why would I need it?
    Quick googling (https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snaps) tells me this is the greatest idea since SystemD, but I'd like to hear your view.

  17. Xfce changed how I launch apps by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    With xfce, for common apps, the procedure:
    1. Think of what key combination is most obvious
    2. If it is not used, bind the app to that key combo
    3. If it is used, add a modifier key, else choose next most obvious
    Super-T for terminal, Super-B for browser, Super-E for file manager (inherited from Win95), Super-hash for virt-manager or x2goclient, and so on.

    --
    John_Chalisque
  18. Are they? by Qbertino · · Score: 2

    I don't know anyone who's used Unity longer than I have and I've just switched to Xubuntu/XFCE and Lubuntu/LXDE because I couldn't bear compiz slowing my system Quad-Core 2,5 Ghz + 18GB RAM + 256GB SSD System + NVidia Quadro GFX to a grinding halt.

    Fix compiz and Unity rendering and all will be fine.
    Until then, my patience with default Ubuntu Desktop finally is up.

    Clean design, bold new concept, convergence planed in - all fine and dandy - but Unity is broken and simply still not ready for primetime / real-world everyday usage. That's a simple fact. (I've been using Ubuntu since v.9 btw.)

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Are they? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an nvidia problem? (check the drivers?)

    2. Re:Are they? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I think Gnome 3, Unity and so on are meant to work on Intel graphics, such as on many laptops. Have anything else? Feel lucky if that works, or get lost if you don't have the "right" kind of hardware.

    3. Re:Are they? by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

      "Sounds like an nvidia problem? (check the drivers?)" ...and there you have in one comment the reason why Linux on the desktop is a fail, for ordinary non-techical computer users.

      Q: My computer is hosed. It keeps slowing to a crawl. What can I do?

      A: Just recompile the kernel with the whatchamacallit option disabled, after upgrading your gcc compiler and setting the flags just so, then try to find the exact right video driver on an obscure backwater page of some tech support website, upgrade your OS packages while holding back that one, oh don't forget to update the package list to include the alternate-universe list first, ...and Bob's your uncle!

      --

      Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  19. Three Cheers for Cinnamon! and Mint! by BrendaEM · · Score: 2

    Cinnamon and Mint are the future of the Linux Desktop.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
  20. Wait for 16.04.1 in third quarter by tepples · · Score: 1

    Canonical is aware that sometimes even the best informal* testing procedures miss things, and defects get included in the install image of an LTS version. So usually in July or August or thereabouts, they fix the defects and put out another install image numbered 16.04.1 or thereabouts. That's also when the LTS is offered to users of the previous LTS as an in-place upgrade.

    * Formal verification is generally considered cost-prohibitive for a consumer product that is not safety-critical.

    1. Re:Wait for 16.04.1 in third quarter by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Canonical is aware that sometimes even the best informal* testing procedures miss things

      It was not missed. It was known as early as February, and found several times again several weeks before they shipped it. And it was two bugs: one with llvm emitting bad code (this caused my issues), then the second bug is the installer was not pulling updated modules correctly.

  21. Republicans like it up the elephant. Democrats... by tepples · · Score: 1

    How does a half-assed establishment manage to be 100% ass?

    If it's U.S.-based, by running articles that support the Democratic Party.

  22. Remix OS, an Android distribution by tepples · · Score: 1

    Jide publishes Remix OS, a distribution of Android/Linux (as opposed to GNU/Linux) customized for use on desktop and traditional laptop computers.

  23. Used laptops with a no longer valid volume license by tepples · · Score: 1

    Windows is also "free", in the sense that you have already paid for it (and cannot avoid it) if you buy a computer.

    It's very possible to end up buying a PC without a properly licensed copy of Windows: buy a Mac.

    It's also possible even without Apple. A few months ago, I bought a used ThinkPad laptop on eBay for $101 shipped, and the copy of Windows 10 that shipped on it turned out not to be activated because it couldn't reach the LAN with the volume license server. I looked at the bottom and the COA had been peeled off. I guessed that it was part of a corporate fleet, and the Windows license was valid only within that corporation. I contacted the seller about it, and the seller recommended that I either buy an OS license or return it. It now runs Debian 8.