I'm neutral on whether this is good or bad news, however while it's evidence some life may have an extraterrestrial origin it is not evidence life may not have started right here on earth. I have no problem with both being true, terrestrial and extraterrestrial origins of life. The odds may be astronomically high but without proof ruling out one or the other I won't ignore it.
but debian testing has freezes. Will Ubuntu-Rolling have Freezes half a year before a new LTS?
I don't think Ubuntu will be using alpha releases for normal downloads. It makes sense that alpha releases would be for testers and those who know what they're doing just as with Debian alphas.
Here's my recent comparison, it's almost a year old and therefore is not valid anymore. And in that post I even state buyers shouldn't upgrade the RAM because Apple charges more for them than third parties do, just as I said in the post you replied to does. Currently comparing Mac Pros doesn't work as the Pros use 2 year old Xeon CPUs, but it will soon hopefully. Tim Cook better keep his word that Mac Pros will be upgraded to the most recent Xeons and include Thunderbolt. However comparisons are possible with laptops, I won't try the all-in-one iMac nor the Mac Mini.
3rd Gen Intel® Core i7-3840QM Processor (2.8GHz, 8M cache, Upgradable to Intel® vPro technology)
15.6" UltraSharp FHD (1920x1080)
16.0GB, DDR3-1600MHz
512GB 2.5" (SATA3) Mobility Solid State Drive
Resource DVD - Contains Drivers
Recovery Media for Windows® 7 Professional,64bit,Multiple Language
$4,187.59 with instant savings of $1,340.03 making it $2,847.56
I tried to configure both of these to be closer to the MacBook Pro, but only the second offered hardware configuration that I saw.
And you're right, it isn't that restricted, aside from not being able to even change your own battery.
I've posted elsewhere that I hated it that the battery is soldered in and is not user swappable. When I bought my MacBook Pro, I got a second battery with it so when the first one drained down during use when I wasn't near an outlet I could swap them, though it's too big for most people I did want a big display and be able to go hours and hours without needing to be plugged in, ie I wanted to take it hiking. Weight? I used to hike carrying 50+ lbs and have hiked carrying 120 lbs. If I can't carry just 10 lbs then I'm in real bad shape.
The bigger problems are their complete disregarded for backwards and forward compatibility and the small selection of software, and no, linux software doesn't count.
Backwards and forwards compatibility? What does that mean? What does small selection of software mean too? And why doesn't Linux software count? Because if it is counted Macs run more software than both Linux and MS Windows? That is an arbitrary limit for no good reason.
However native OS X apps the iTunes app store alone has thousands of downloadable programs. Now I've haven't used iTunes yet, I may use it to download classes from iTunes U which has lectures from a number of universities including MIT. However I prefer to buy my software on media I can keep, CDs or DVDs. Of course a person can download then burn programs on disks, such as from , Source Forge, and
but it will only be as stable as a normal release now.
The LTS release? Yes I think so. Actually with the rolling releases, software should be tested more making the LTS releases just as stable. And with the rolling releases Ubuntu will be going back to how Debian is released. It has 3 versions, a stable, a test, and an alpha release. Or something like that.
What a silly suggestion. It's only certain kinds of people who think it is a good idea to pay *more* for a restricted platform.
1996 want's it's mime back. Macs cost no more than Windows OEM PCs do. The thing is is you have to start with a Mac then configure the Windows PC to the Mac's specs. And don't have more memory installed than what it comes with, as you will be paying more. One employee in an Apple store specifically told me to buy a Mac with the standard amount of RAM then buy more myself and install it. He said that will save me half of what the RAM cost. Before I bought my Mac I made a list of the requirements I would need to do what I wanted. I then picked a MacBook Pro that met them. Afterwards I went to various OEMs to configure their laptops to meet the Mac's and compared prices. the cheapest price was $50 less than the Mac. The Alienware, Dell, and HP laptops were more than $200 more.
And as far as a restricted platform is concerned, Apple uses the same parts as Windows OEMs. Apple does not restrict what is installed on Macs, unlike iPads, iPhones, and iPods. As I said I dual-boot my Mac with Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04. And Apple does not restrict developers/programmers from [programming for Macs. Though I no longer am I used to be a member of Apple Developer Connection.
Of course if you want a Linux PC you may be able to build one for less than a prebuilt PC.
*shrugs* they have a right to expect to be paid for their work, just as you have a right to decide that the price is too high. The problem is, if you decide the price is too high, most people don't take the ethical course of action and install something like Linux, they take the unethical course of action and pirate Windows.
MS can lower it's prices, and did in places like China and India. At one tyme MS was selling Windows for $5 at then current foreign exchange rates. But that's beside the point, most people don't buy Windows, they buy a PC with Windows preinstalled. And as I said above buyers of PCs with Windows preinstalled still have to activate it. While I disagree with those who illegally install and use Windows and other commercial software, by lowering prices more people who pay for it. Sell 10 million licenses for $100 a pop, or sell 100 million for $20 and make twice as much money. And that's what MS does for OEMs, an OEM will pay much less per PC to install MS Window/Office than an individual will because the OEM buys in volume.
Windows 8 *is* a steaming pile of donkey poop, however, and even *free* would be too expensive for me. My gaming machine will continue to run Win7 until my favourite games run on Steam/Linux (or when I'm bored enough of them that running on Wine won't be too much of a hassle), at which point it'll be reinstalled with the same version of Linux that's on my main laptop.
There is Steam for Linux being worked on. I know games is a sticking point for many people but I don't play computer, or other, games myself. At least not now, I last played computer games three or four years ago in vocational therapy.
That's like saying if someone shits in your bed you can always wash your bedding. The fact is that they shit in your bed.
No it isn't, it's nothing like that. People intentionally install Ubuntu on a PC, they are not forced to. Most people don't expect, nor give permission, for someone to shit on their bed though. You'd better get your comparisons right. What would be a more appropriate comparison is if you change bed sheets and put sheets with shit on them on the bed. That is your choice, you're not forced to accept it.
I was fine with Unity and Gnome 3, liked them both. But I'm in the same boat as you -- compiz would crash and disrupt my workflow. Switched to KDE and I now have a different set of gripes and crashes, but not at the WM level. Better, but...sigh...when will it all work and have a nice integrated desktop?
Get a Mac if you want it to work. And if you want, some of the same software that runs in Linux can run in OS X too. It does come with X11. Fink installs.deb, Macports,.rpm, and Homebrew installs other packages. Apple also supports open source developers.
When i saw the big Amazon icon at the Unity taskbar after install 12.10, I know it's time for me to leave Ubuntu...
If you don't like it you can uninstall it. For more than a month I've been installing Xubuntu 12.04 on PCs I'm building. And as part of that I uninstall, remove, Abiword and Gnumeric then install LibreOffice.
I'm running a Redmond distribution, Windows 7 I think it's called. It's not bad, reasonably stable, the installer works just fine, has a nice polished look to it, and seems to have built-in Wine support because Office runs fine on it.
You must like being treated like a criminal then. By requiring Activation MS is treating its customers like criminals. The only proprietary software I use, and like, is OS X Snow Leopard. I also use Linux and Open Office so I'm not locked into proprietary software, not even for office work.
At first I misunderstood that you were violently forced into using SL.
Only partially. After using MS Windows for years I was getting fed up with constant crashes, BSODs, and new installs when it came tyme to get a new PC. Then I found out MS was treating its customers like criminals. If I buy software I should not have to let that software contact the mother ship to see if it can run. And that's what Activation does. Even on a brand new PC with MS Windows installed, if Windows is not allowed to contact MS servers or an MS phone number is not called, after 30 days Windows will not allow full use of the OS. So when I got a new PC it came with Linux preinstalled, and when I got a laptop I bought my MacBook Pro. Now unless MS stops this if I have a choice I will not buy another MS product.
I wanted to buy Photoshop but because Adobe is also requiring activation I won't be buying it if I don't need to. For now I plan to install Arch Linux, which comes with CinePaint, in a Virtualbox virtual machine.
I'm not saying OS X or Windows are perfect either, but inability to access files over a network share from one of the default installed apps is a bit.... poor to say the least.
The only problems I've had accessing files in Snow Leopard or Ubuntu was due to permissions, when saving files to USB flash drives in Ubuntu but not changing permissions I can't access the files in OS X. Of course that's not over a net share. I haven't done that yet, I don't have a network at home now but I want to set up one as I have two tower PCs and my laptop. I may get rid of one of the towers as it's an old PC with a DEC Alpha running NT 4 Workstation and Redhat Linux. But I want to set up network storage as well as a VPN.
As a basic example of what I mean, just last week. Mint-Cinnamon edition (downloaded a few weeks ago). Browse a network share, try and drag a file into the pre-shipped VLC media player. Doesn't work. I can navigate to the share, i can browser the share and pick the file up. But can't drag it to VLC or VLC's playlist window. Works on Windows, Works on Mac.
Ok, so i'll try and open the file from the network share within VLC's file browser dialog. Nope, can't browse to the network share I have open in the file manager application.
So you mean to play this media file i need to change to a different app, or manually copy it from the network share to my machine before i can play it? Give me a break.
If VLC can't do stuff like that (and yes, the problem is probably partially VLC, and partially Linux having no standard API for doing this that works cross-distribution), then don't ship it by default as part of the OS? I shouldn't be running into these issues with default-installed apps.
Sure, Cinnamon looks pretty, but the workflow that works on every other mainstream OS, is broken.
Is that Ubuntu's fault? I've had trouble running VLC in Snow Leopard, is that Snow Leopard's fault? Or VLC's? Even though it is set to open certain files by default I've had Miro launch when clicking on these files.Other files had their default app set to Miro but it won't open them, instead it may launch Quicktime. Most things run fine on my Mac but not everything does. Now I haven't used 12.04 enough to decide whether it or OS X is better, but I can say they are both better than the last MS Windows version I used was, XP or 2003, I don't recall which. Of course that could be because they're a lot newer and MS has improved it's quality.
I'm a big fan of long-term releases, only because I may be one of those individuals who might be responsible for systems that do not have access to the internet in order to support the "rolling release" model.
It's nice to be able to have a stable, known-good server installation on several isolated networks that just need an occasional update of dpkgs and completely expect it to work fine after it's been restarted. I don't think the same is expected in a rolling release model.
The idea that a rolling release maintains binary compatibility is, so far, been proven false. In our world, long-term releases make sense.
Well you wouldn't have to give up LTS then, TFA says they will still be available.
I've tried using LTS on some machines, but it hasn't worked out well. The trouble with it is that Ubuntu's quality is crap, and that applies to LTS releases just as much as non-LTS. For instance, they started gratuitously breaking sound with Jaunty, and as of Precise it's still broken on some machines I use. When important stuff is randomly broken in an LTS release, you end up upgrading to a non-LTS to see if they've fixed the bug.
For almost 2 years I'll been volunteering for a branch of Freegeek and in that tyme I've installed Ubuntu 10.04 on hundreds of PCs and most of the installs have been fine. So I don't know where you get LTS hasn't worked out well or that Ubuntu's quality is crap. You may not like the DE, Canonical, or how Ubuntu is run but that's different than saying the distro is crap.
Rolling releases are one thing I would applaud Ubuntu if they did it. It's always been my pet peeve to have to upgrade to a newer version of the same distro every 6 months.
You don't have to upgrade to newer versions if you don't want to. Personally I prefer to have the version I'm going to use day in and day out to be tested in a production environment. I also want long term support, just in case I need it. I'm dual-booting Ubuntu 12.04 on my MacBook Pro, however when I find out out to I plan on installing Arch, Fedora 18, and or Linux Mint in a VM on a USB Flash drive. That way I can install VirtualBox on my laptop, I have it installed in Ubuntu but not Snow Leopard yet, and on my desktop PC also running Ubuntu 12.04.
the amount of bitching i hear about unity versus the amount of time it takes to install something else (TM) is ridiculous.
I volunteer for an organization that collects old and used PCs then builds new ones with the good parts from the old ones. We then install Ubuntu. Until the start of 2013 we used Ubuntu 10.04, however with the new year we switched to Xubuntu 12.04. Some of the people in the organization don't like the new DE Canonical is using, Unity. As ease of use is one of the criteria we use, I suggested that we use Linux Mint as studies and surveys rate it as the easiest. However no one replied. Not right now, as I'm booted into Snow Leopard, but I have Ubuntu 12.04 installed on my Mac to dual-boot.
I just got a new PC with Windows 7 and (non-secure) EFI booting. It seems like only Ubuntu-derived distros know how to set up to be booted on such a system. And it's kind of hit-and-miss with a lot of manual intervention required even at that. Apparently there are more hurdles involved with EFI than just 'turn off secure boot' - a lot more. And there is no consistency between firmware implementations, so no place to go to get a straightforward explanation of what to do. If you're struggling with this too, let me recommend rEFInd - not magic, but its author at least tries his darndest to explain why it's all so hard and what you can do about it. And it works (that helps).
I'm typing this on my MacBook which dual-boots, Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04. I use rEFIt as the boot selector. With Snow Leopard already installed I only had one problem installing 64 bit 12.04. For some reason it would not install when I tried. So I tried installing 11.10 and it wouldn't install, then 11.04 didn't work either. Finally I got 10.10 to install. From there I upgraded to first 11.04, then 11.10, and finally to 12.04. But when I got it installed it was 32 bit not 64 bit. Just for the heck of it I inserted the 64 bit 12.04 DVD and tried again. This tyme it installed. So unless I used a different disk the second tyme than I used the first tyme and the first was bad, I don't know why it didn't work at first.
Anyway, I ended up with Mint
I may try Mint, with Cinnamon, MATE, KDE but I'm not sure. I plan on trying Arch Linux though, it includes software Debian based distros don't, CinePaint. As a photographer I want CinePaint, and GIMP does not cut it as a professional print photo editor.
Well, those are certainly some reasons to use Linux from Scratch or Gentoo. However, you haven't given us any reasons not to use Linux Mint except the nebulous comment about "true traditional systems."
One thing that many non Gentoo users realize is that a Gentoo installation is completely customized from the beginning
You haven't explained why some should not use Mint though.
For those of us fed up where with where distros are going these days, it's looking to me like Linux Mint is probably the place I'm going to end up.
For those who want an easy to install distro If ease of use is a concern there's Ubuntu and Linux Mint. And if minimal hardware requirements are concerned there's Arch Linux. However for those who want a robust server Fedora may be the distro to try.
Given that the installer is so dangerous, I cannot recommend F18 to any non-expert.
Step one always backup data. Step two test the backup. Step three check to make sure you have a backup.
Who knows what it will do to your existing windows or linux installs. Maybe F18 should be considered VM only?
Step 4, always test a new system in a VM before deploying it. I was going to try Fedora 18, until I read this review. But now I may just try Arch Linux by itself. Of course when I do it will be in a VM. In Ubuntu 12.04 and in Snow Leopard. I need to find out how to install it in a VM on a USB Flash drive first. Of course I didn't take step four myself, after making my backups and making sure I had them, I have 3 backups, I went ahead and installed Ubuntu on my Mac. I just wanted to get it over with. But when I try Arch, and Mint, it will be in a VM.
Linux devs! Stop breaking Linux to make it UI-simple. Make the back end stuff work properly.
Yea, don't make it so end users will use it. Make it so only geeks can use it. According to studies and surveys Ubuntu used to be the most popular Linux distro but now Linux Mint is. Why" Because Ubuntu was easiest to use and now Mint is.
If i want to use something that looks like a Mac, it better WORK like a Mac underneath. Something that looks like a mac but doesn't work is not going to cut it. The UI is very much a secondary reason as to why I am a Mac user today, and used to be a Linux user prior to 2006.
Though it's supposedly can be made to look like OS X, I have yet to see a Linux desktop that does look like one. On Ubuntu 10.04 I used to use Gnome and on 12.04 I use Unity. I plan to give Linux Mint with MATE, Cinnamon, and or KDE a try. I also plant to try Arch Linux and or Fedora 18, though at reading this review I may not try Fedora.
Ooh, and I'm typing this on a dual-boot Mac with Snow Leopard running, the other OS is Ubuntu 12.04. I use it because it runs like a Mac, in the more than 5 years I've had it I only took it in for a problem twice, the first tyme after I had it about 18 months.
Why is providing feedback whining to you? I find it to be more helpful than random patches or other contributions.
Thing is, I don't want everyone and their brother submitting patches to a project I work on. I prefer the coding to be done by a core group of people I've vetted and know they are willing to maintain what they submit. I'd much rather get feedback to see if my ideas are headed in the right way my userbase wants it to be headed. Sure, I don't always go in that direction, but it's helpful to see what they want. And it way beats a poorly written patch submitted by someone who doesn't want to maintain it.
Do you want experienced people? How do they get that experience if not by programming? As I've heard or read and repeated myself a good way to get experience is by writing patches for FOSS projects.
Clause 15 is a cop-out so GNU (and eventually other FOSS) could avoid having to work on proper usability.
That is nowhere near as burdensome as commercial proprietary licenses are. For example "We are not liable for lost data when our software crashes your system." I've installed MS Windows and have had the Windows license presented to me saying something to that effect a bunch of tymes. If the software is commercial it should have a warranty of usability, and I don't think having your system crash is very usable.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm neutral on whether this is good or bad news, however while it's evidence some life may have an extraterrestrial origin it is not evidence life may not have started right here on earth. I have no problem with both being true, terrestrial and extraterrestrial origins of life. The odds may be astronomically high but without proof ruling out one or the other I won't ignore it.
Falcon
but debian testing has freezes. Will Ubuntu-Rolling have Freezes half a year before a new LTS?
I don't think Ubuntu will be using alpha releases for normal downloads. It makes sense that alpha releases would be for testers and those who know what they're doing just as with Debian alphas.
Falcon
Err, no, or mind showing your work?
Here's my recent comparison, it's almost a year old and therefore is not valid anymore. And in that post I even state buyers shouldn't upgrade the RAM because Apple charges more for them than third parties do, just as I said in the post you replied to does. Currently comparing Mac Pros doesn't work as the Pros use 2 year old Xeon CPUs, but it will soon hopefully. Tim Cook better keep his word that Mac Pros will be upgraded to the most recent Xeons and include Thunderbolt. However comparisons are possible with laptops, I won't try the all-in-one iMac nor the Mac Mini.
The 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
$3,049.00
Dell Precision M4700 Mobile Workstation
$2,498.53, with $700 off making it $1,699.00.
Not quite comparable. A second Dell Precision M4700 Mobile Workstation
$4,187.59 with instant savings of $1,340.03 making it $2,847.56
I tried to configure both of these to be closer to the MacBook Pro, but only the second offered hardware configuration that I saw.
And you're right, it isn't that restricted, aside from not being able to even change your own battery.
I've posted elsewhere that I hated it that the battery is soldered in and is not user swappable. When I bought my MacBook Pro, I got a second battery with it so when the first one drained down during use when I wasn't near an outlet I could swap them, though it's too big for most people I did want a big display and be able to go hours and hours without needing to be plugged in, ie I wanted to take it hiking. Weight? I used to hike carrying 50+ lbs and have hiked carrying 120 lbs. If I can't carry just 10 lbs then I'm in real bad shape.
The bigger problems are their complete disregarded for backwards and forward compatibility and the small selection of software, and no, linux software doesn't count.
Backwards and forwards compatibility? What does that mean? What does small selection of software mean too? And why doesn't Linux software count? Because if it is counted Macs run more software than both Linux and MS Windows? That is an arbitrary limit for no good reason.
However native OS X apps the iTunes app store alone has thousands of downloadable programs. Now I've haven't used iTunes yet, I may use it to download classes from iTunes U which has lectures from a number of universities including MIT. However I prefer to buy my software on media I can keep, CDs or DVDs. Of course a person can download then burn programs on disks, such as from , Source Forge, and
but it will only be as stable as a normal release now.
The LTS release? Yes I think so. Actually with the rolling releases, software should be tested more making the LTS releases just as stable. And with the rolling releases Ubuntu will be going back to how Debian is released. It has 3 versions, a stable, a test, and an alpha release. Or something like that.
Falcon
What a silly suggestion. It's only certain kinds of people who think it is a good idea to pay *more* for a restricted platform.
1996 want's it's mime back. Macs cost no more than Windows OEM PCs do. The thing is is you have to start with a Mac then configure the Windows PC to the Mac's specs. And don't have more memory installed than what it comes with, as you will be paying more. One employee in an Apple store specifically told me to buy a Mac with the standard amount of RAM then buy more myself and install it. He said that will save me half of what the RAM cost. Before I bought my Mac I made a list of the requirements I would need to do what I wanted. I then picked a MacBook Pro that met them. Afterwards I went to various OEMs to configure their laptops to meet the Mac's and compared prices. the cheapest price was $50 less than the Mac. The Alienware, Dell, and HP laptops were more than $200 more.
And as far as a restricted platform is concerned, Apple uses the same parts as Windows OEMs. Apple does not restrict what is installed on Macs, unlike iPads, iPhones, and iPods. As I said I dual-boot my Mac with Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04. And Apple does not restrict developers/programmers from [programming for Macs. Though I no longer am I used to be a member of Apple Developer Connection.
Of course if you want a Linux PC you may be able to build one for less than a prebuilt PC.
Falcon
*shrugs* they have a right to expect to be paid for their work, just as you have a right to decide that the price is too high. The problem is, if you decide the price is too high, most people don't take the ethical course of action and install something like Linux, they take the unethical course of action and pirate Windows.
MS can lower it's prices, and did in places like China and India. At one tyme MS was selling Windows for $5 at then current foreign exchange rates. But that's beside the point, most people don't buy Windows, they buy a PC with Windows preinstalled. And as I said above buyers of PCs with Windows preinstalled still have to activate it. While I disagree with those who illegally install and use Windows and other commercial software, by lowering prices more people who pay for it. Sell 10 million licenses for $100 a pop, or sell 100 million for $20 and make twice as much money. And that's what MS does for OEMs, an OEM will pay much less per PC to install MS Window/Office than an individual will because the OEM buys in volume.
Windows 8 *is* a steaming pile of donkey poop, however, and even *free* would be too expensive for me. My gaming machine will continue to run Win7 until my favourite games run on Steam/Linux (or when I'm bored enough of them that running on Wine won't be too much of a hassle), at which point it'll be reinstalled with the same version of Linux that's on my main laptop.
There is Steam for Linux being worked on. I know games is a sticking point for many people but I don't play computer, or other, games myself. At least not now, I last played computer games three or four years ago in vocational therapy.
Falcon
>If you don't like it you can uninstall it.
That's like saying if someone shits in your bed you can always wash your bedding. The fact is that they shit in your bed.
No it isn't, it's nothing like that. People intentionally install Ubuntu on a PC, they are not forced to. Most people don't expect, nor give permission, for someone to shit on their bed though. You'd better get your comparisons right. What would be a more appropriate comparison is if you change bed sheets and put sheets with shit on them on the bed. That is your choice, you're not forced to accept it.
Falcon
I was fine with Unity and Gnome 3, liked them both. But I'm in the same boat as you -- compiz would crash and disrupt my workflow. Switched to KDE and I now have a different set of gripes and crashes, but not at the WM level. Better, but...sigh...when will it all work and have a nice integrated desktop?
Get a Mac if you want it to work. And if you want, some of the same software that runs in Linux can run in OS X too. It does come with X11. Fink installs .deb, Macports, .rpm, and Homebrew installs other packages. Apple also supports open source developers.
Falcon
IMHO, it seems to be a "simple but limited" vs "complex and powerful" argument.
Arch is a bare minimum distro, it eliminated a lot of stuff most people won't use. Of course those who want things can install them.
Falcon
If you want Ubuntu without all the bullshit just use Linux Mint.
Others may say the same about Linux Mint. I looked at Mint 13, Maya, and liked it but I use Unity now. And I'm getting ready to use Arch Linux.
Falcon
When i saw the big Amazon icon at the Unity taskbar after install 12.10, I know it's time for me to leave Ubuntu...
If you don't like it you can uninstall it. For more than a month I've been installing Xubuntu 12.04 on PCs I'm building. And as part of that I uninstall, remove, Abiword and Gnumeric then install LibreOffice.
Falcon
I'm running a Redmond distribution, Windows 7 I think it's called. It's not bad, reasonably stable, the installer works just fine, has a nice polished look to it, and seems to have built-in Wine support because Office runs fine on it.
You must like being treated like a criminal then. By requiring Activation MS is treating its customers like criminals. The only proprietary software I use, and like, is OS X Snow Leopard. I also use Linux and Open Office so I'm not locked into proprietary software, not even for office work.
Falcon
I'm booted into Snow Leopard
At first I misunderstood that you were violently forced into using SL.
Only partially. After using MS Windows for years I was getting fed up with constant crashes, BSODs, and new installs when it came tyme to get a new PC. Then I found out MS was treating its customers like criminals. If I buy software I should not have to let that software contact the mother ship to see if it can run. And that's what Activation does. Even on a brand new PC with MS Windows installed, if Windows is not allowed to contact MS servers or an MS phone number is not called, after 30 days Windows will not allow full use of the OS. So when I got a new PC it came with Linux preinstalled, and when I got a laptop I bought my MacBook Pro. Now unless MS stops this if I have a choice I will not buy another MS product.
I wanted to buy Photoshop but because Adobe is also requiring activation I won't be buying it if I don't need to. For now I plan to install Arch Linux, which comes with CinePaint, in a Virtualbox virtual machine.
Falcon
I'm not saying OS X or Windows are perfect either, but inability to access files over a network share from one of the default installed apps is a bit.... poor to say the least.
The only problems I've had accessing files in Snow Leopard or Ubuntu was due to permissions, when saving files to USB flash drives in Ubuntu but not changing permissions I can't access the files in OS X. Of course that's not over a net share. I haven't done that yet, I don't have a network at home now but I want to set up one as I have two tower PCs and my laptop. I may get rid of one of the towers as it's an old PC with a DEC Alpha running NT 4 Workstation and Redhat Linux. But I want to set up network storage as well as a VPN.
Falcon
As a basic example of what I mean, just last week. Mint-Cinnamon edition (downloaded a few weeks ago). Browse a network share, try and drag a file into the pre-shipped VLC media player. Doesn't work. I can navigate to the share, i can browser the share and pick the file up. But can't drag it to VLC or VLC's playlist window. Works on Windows, Works on Mac.
Ok, so i'll try and open the file from the network share within VLC's file browser dialog. Nope, can't browse to the network share I have open in the file manager application.
So you mean to play this media file i need to change to a different app, or manually copy it from the network share to my machine before i can play it? Give me a break.
If VLC can't do stuff like that (and yes, the problem is probably partially VLC, and partially Linux having no standard API for doing this that works cross-distribution), then don't ship it by default as part of the OS? I shouldn't be running into these issues with default-installed apps.
Sure, Cinnamon looks pretty, but the workflow that works on every other mainstream OS, is broken.
Is that Ubuntu's fault? I've had trouble running VLC in Snow Leopard, is that Snow Leopard's fault? Or VLC's? Even though it is set to open certain files by default I've had Miro launch when clicking on these files.Other files had their default app set to Miro but it won't open them, instead it may launch Quicktime. Most things run fine on my Mac but not everything does. Now I haven't used 12.04 enough to decide whether it or OS X is better, but I can say they are both better than the last MS Windows version I used was, XP or 2003, I don't recall which. Of course that could be because they're a lot newer and MS has improved it's quality.
Falcon
I'm a big fan of long-term releases, only because I may be one of those individuals who might be responsible for systems that do not have access to the internet in order to support the "rolling release" model.
It's nice to be able to have a stable, known-good server installation on several isolated networks that just need an occasional update of dpkgs and completely expect it to work fine after it's been restarted. I don't think the same is expected in a rolling release model.
The idea that a rolling release maintains binary compatibility is, so far, been proven false. In our world, long-term releases make sense.
Well you wouldn't have to give up LTS then, TFA says they will still be available.
Falcon
I've tried using LTS on some machines, but it hasn't worked out well. The trouble with it is that Ubuntu's quality is crap, and that applies to LTS releases just as much as non-LTS. For instance, they started gratuitously breaking sound with Jaunty, and as of Precise it's still broken on some machines I use. When important stuff is randomly broken in an LTS release, you end up upgrading to a non-LTS to see if they've fixed the bug.
For almost 2 years I'll been volunteering for a branch of Freegeek and in that tyme I've installed Ubuntu 10.04 on hundreds of PCs and most of the installs have been fine. So I don't know where you get LTS hasn't worked out well or that Ubuntu's quality is crap. You may not like the DE, Canonical, or how Ubuntu is run but that's different than saying the distro is crap.
Falcon
Rolling releases are one thing I would applaud Ubuntu if they did it. It's always been my pet peeve to have to upgrade to a newer version of the same distro every 6 months.
You don't have to upgrade to newer versions if you don't want to. Personally I prefer to have the version I'm going to use day in and day out to be tested in a production environment. I also want long term support, just in case I need it. I'm dual-booting Ubuntu 12.04 on my MacBook Pro, however when I find out out to I plan on installing Arch, Fedora 18, and or Linux Mint in a VM on a USB Flash drive. That way I can install VirtualBox on my laptop, I have it installed in Ubuntu but not Snow Leopard yet, and on my desktop PC also running Ubuntu 12.04.
Falcon
the amount of bitching i hear about unity versus the amount of time it takes to install something else (TM) is ridiculous.
I volunteer for an organization that collects old and used PCs then builds new ones with the good parts from the old ones. We then install Ubuntu. Until the start of 2013 we used Ubuntu 10.04, however with the new year we switched to Xubuntu 12.04. Some of the people in the organization don't like the new DE Canonical is using, Unity. As ease of use is one of the criteria we use, I suggested that we use Linux Mint as studies and surveys rate it as the easiest. However no one replied. Not right now, as I'm booted into Snow Leopard, but I have Ubuntu 12.04 installed on my Mac to dual-boot.
Falcon
I just got a new PC with Windows 7 and (non-secure) EFI booting. It seems like only Ubuntu-derived distros know how to set up to be booted on such a system. And it's kind of hit-and-miss with a lot of manual intervention required even at that. Apparently there are more hurdles involved with EFI than just 'turn off secure boot' - a lot more. And there is no consistency between firmware implementations, so no place to go to get a straightforward explanation of what to do. If you're struggling with this too, let me recommend rEFInd - not magic, but its author at least tries his darndest to explain why it's all so hard and what you can do about it. And it works (that helps).
I'm typing this on my MacBook which dual-boots, Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04. I use rEFIt as the boot selector. With Snow Leopard already installed I only had one problem installing 64 bit 12.04. For some reason it would not install when I tried. So I tried installing 11.10 and it wouldn't install, then 11.04 didn't work either. Finally I got 10.10 to install. From there I upgraded to first 11.04, then 11.10, and finally to 12.04. But when I got it installed it was 32 bit not 64 bit. Just for the heck of it I inserted the 64 bit 12.04 DVD and tried again. This tyme it installed. So unless I used a different disk the second tyme than I used the first tyme and the first was bad, I don't know why it didn't work at first.
Anyway, I ended up with Mint
I may try Mint, with Cinnamon, MATE, KDE but I'm not sure. I plan on trying Arch Linux though, it includes software Debian based distros don't, CinePaint. As a photographer I want CinePaint, and GIMP does not cut it as a professional print photo editor.
Falcon
Well, those are certainly some reasons to use Linux from Scratch or Gentoo. However, you haven't given us any reasons not to use Linux Mint except the nebulous comment about "true traditional systems."
One thing that many non Gentoo users realize is that a Gentoo installation is completely customized from the beginning
You haven't explained why some should not use Mint though.
Falcon
For those of us fed up where with where distros are going these days, it's looking to me like Linux Mint is probably the place I'm going to end up.
For those who want an easy to install distro If ease of use is a concern there's Ubuntu and Linux Mint. And if minimal hardware requirements are concerned there's Arch Linux. However for those who want a robust server Fedora may be the distro to try.
Given that the installer is so dangerous, I cannot recommend F18 to any non-expert.
Step one always backup data. Step two test the backup. Step three check to make sure you have a backup.
Who knows what it will do to your existing windows or linux installs. Maybe F18 should be considered VM only?
Step 4, always test a new system in a VM before deploying it. I was going to try Fedora 18, until I read this review. But now I may just try Arch Linux by itself. Of course when I do it will be in a VM. In Ubuntu 12.04 and in Snow Leopard. I need to find out how to install it in a VM on a USB Flash drive first. Of course I didn't take step four myself, after making my backups and making sure I had them, I have 3 backups, I went ahead and installed Ubuntu on my Mac. I just wanted to get it over with. But when I try Arch, and Mint, it will be in a VM.
Falcon
Linux devs! Stop breaking Linux to make it UI-simple. Make the back end stuff work properly.
Yea, don't make it so end users will use it. Make it so only geeks can use it. According to studies and surveys Ubuntu used to be the most popular Linux distro but now Linux Mint is. Why" Because Ubuntu was easiest to use and now Mint is.
If i want to use something that looks like a Mac, it better WORK like a Mac underneath. Something that looks like a mac but doesn't work is not going to cut it. The UI is very much a secondary reason as to why I am a Mac user today, and used to be a Linux user prior to 2006.
Though it's supposedly can be made to look like OS X, I have yet to see a Linux desktop that does look like one. On Ubuntu 10.04 I used to use Gnome and on 12.04 I use Unity. I plan to give Linux Mint with MATE, Cinnamon, and or KDE a try. I also plant to try Arch Linux and or Fedora 18, though at reading this review I may not try Fedora.
Ooh, and I'm typing this on a dual-boot Mac with Snow Leopard running, the other OS is Ubuntu 12.04. I use it because it runs like a Mac, in the more than 5 years I've had it I only took it in for a problem twice, the first tyme after I had it about 18 months.
Falcon
Why is providing feedback whining to you? I find it to be more helpful than random patches or other contributions.
Thing is, I don't want everyone and their brother submitting patches to a project I work on. I prefer the coding to be done by a core group of people I've vetted and know they are willing to maintain what they submit. I'd much rather get feedback to see if my ideas are headed in the right way my userbase wants it to be headed. Sure, I don't always go in that direction, but it's helpful to see what they want. And it way beats a poorly written patch submitted by someone who doesn't want to maintain it.
Do you want experienced people? How do they get that experience if not by programming? As I've heard or read and repeated myself a good way to get experience is by writing patches for FOSS projects.
Falcon
Clause 15 is a cop-out so GNU (and eventually other FOSS) could avoid having to work on proper usability.
That is nowhere near as burdensome as commercial proprietary licenses are. For example "We are not liable for lost data when our software crashes your system." I've installed MS Windows and have had the Windows license presented to me saying something to that effect a bunch of tymes. If the software is commercial it should have a warranty of usability, and I don't think having your system crash is very usable.
Falcon