Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu 16.10 To Be Powered By Linux Kernel 4.8 (softpedia.com)
Reader prisoninmate shares a Softpedia report: We've been monitoring the Ubuntu 16.10 development cycle for quite some time now to see what Linux kernel version the upcoming GNU/Linux operating system will be based on, and for now, it remains powered by the same kernel packages as Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Xenial Xerus). Also, it looks like Ubuntu 16.10 has been switched to a universal local DNS resolver service. However, the Ubuntu Kernel Team published the other day a new installation of their weekly newsletter, informing the community that Ubuntu 16.10 (Yakkety Yak) would soon be rebased on the latest stable Linux 4.6 kernels. Then, it will move to the Release Candidate builds of Linux kernel 4.7, and after that, the operating system will finally be switched to Linux kernel 4.8.
Just told my Grandmother the great news. She can't wait to try this out!
Version 16.1 (Xenial Xerus) kernel 4.8. Non-linux people look at the wide quagmire of distros and are baffled, many interested people who would like a desktop alternative get turned off by the impenetrable complexity
No they don't. They get told Ubuntu or Mint are good and go download it. Then they maybe do or maybe don't. No one sees Linux complexity except for the mythical super ASD who insists that his first foray into Linux should be to google for a list of all distributions.
and holy wars of the community (systemd, whatever the hell that is, I don't give a crap, vi, emacs, etc).
No one outside of Slashdot and the admin forums of a few distros gives a shit about this. You don't see mention of this in the community you got to for help because LibreOffice isn't doing something right.
Then you get to Ubuntu as the one targeting non-linux folks to join up, and are confronted with this BS. Xenial Xerus? Really? You picked a revision number, why add a really stupid moniker to it?
Keep it simple stupid.
I'm going to go with no again. Go to Ubuntu homepage, there's no mention of the version name. Not on their home page, not on the desktop sub page, not on the download page, not during installation, and not when booting.
Linux a pool of contradiction. "We have a GUI as good as Windows/OSX!" But then GUI users are mocked, and frankly the GUI is only half heartedly implemented, sort of a facade. Real work is done at the command line, and important settings are only available by knowing where esoteric files in a variety of scripting languages live that then must be modified using an editor the proudly user surly.
There's nothing contradictory about Linux. No one praises it's GUI. They praise its customisability but that's as far as it goes. As for the "real work". Who's real work? Let me see you use a WYSIWYG word processor on the command line. ... Wait you don't think grandma is trying to setup a LAMP stack on her system do you?