Linux Mint 18 Will Ship Without Multimedia Support (linuxmint.com)

An anonymous reader quotes this report from Distrowatch: Linux Mint 18 will no longer provide separate, codec-free installation media for OEM and magazine distribution. Instead, the distribution will ship without multimedia support while making it easy for users to acquire media codecs during the initial installation of the operating system. "OEM installation disks and NoCodec images will no longer be released. Instead, similar to other distributions, images will ship without codecs and will support both traditional and OEM installations. This will reduce our release cycle to 4 separate events and the production and testing of 12 ISO images. Multimedia codecs can be installed easily: From the welcome screen, by clicking on "Multimedia Codecs", or from the main menu, by clicking on "Menu"->"Sound and Video"->"Install Multimedia Codecs", or during the installation process, by clicking a checkbox option." Additional information on the upcoming release of Linux Mint 18 can be found in the project's monthly newsletter.
Softpedia points out that they're using Ubuntu 16.04 LTS as the package base, meaning "more hardware devices and components are now supported."

Comments

So why use Linux Mint now?

[Tenebrousedge]

LMDE has had inconsistent releases. I'm not sure if they figured out whether they were pulling from testing or rolling their own packages. The Linux Mint website was hacked to distribute malware. Linux Mint devs managed to create some package name conflicts with upstream. I read they are holding off on systemd for now, but plan to switch at some point, a position calculated to annoy everyone. There are equally simple ways to get a distro with Cinnamon, and now they're not packaging multimedia libraries any more.

I'm out of reasons to consider installing Linux Mint, I think. Are there more positives/negatives I'm missing? Or can we just write them off at this point?

Re:So why use Linux Mint now?

[DoofusOfDeath]

I too am curious. When I reflect on why I've chosen Mint over Ubuntu in recent years, it came down to:

* Seriously disliking Unity. (But now I can install Cinnamon packages on Ubuntu easily.)

* Easy ability to play DVD's. (But it just got a tiny bit harder; not significantly.)

* Wanting to give Shuttleworth the middle finger regarding forcing Unity down people's throats. (But I think my finger has now been extended long enough.)

So now, I'm not really clear as to why I'd prefer Mint over Ubuntu.

Don't omit the protocol in an href

[Anonymous Coward]

in the project's monthly newsletter.

in the project's monthly newsletter. FTFY

um a hey what time is it?

[Pseudonymous Powers]

Well, I read their blog post, and I'm having a hard time parsing it:

...although the absence of codecs is important for magazine and distributors and OEM installation images are required for manufacturers to pre-install Linux Mint on computers they’re selling to their customers, this is an area where a lot of work is done for a very small portion of our audience. With this in mind, OEM installation disks and NoCodec images will no longer be released. Instead, similar to other distributions, images will ship without codecs and will support both traditional and OEM installations.

So, to me, this sounds like: "Only a few of our users wanted us to leave the codecs out. So we decided it wasn't worth going to all that extra work all the time for just a few people. So we just took the codecs out of every build."

Am I just confused, or is this Bizarro logic? I mean, I'm definitely confused, but does this reasoning make sense to everyone else?

Did they just get sued by some the rightsholders of some patented codec, and just say, fuck it, if it's gonna be that kind of party, no codecs for anyone, ever? But if so, why wouldn't they just say that? What's with the doublethink? Is it doublethink?

I think I need a nap.