Ubuntu 12.04

[innerspace]

Im planning on doing a fresh install of Ubuntu for my main work machine soon in combination with getting a new SSD.

Im currently using gnome2 so was planning on going back to 10.04 but considering giving the latest unity another go.

My previous trials of unity lasted less than an hour with each version, the simple regular things just had too many extra steps and click in the way.

But the recent reports on 12.04 say that they have done a lot to improve things for power users so it could be worth another shot.

The built in HUD certainly sounds like an interesting time saver.

Just wondering if anyone has given it a go yet and if so whats your feedback.

When I get round to running a live USB I will report my findings here.

10.04 only has another year left of support for the desktop so a switch will be needed sooner or later. 12.04 would give 5 years.

I use debian at home and although good, the usability and repository support is not on the same level as ubuntu.

Tried KDE/XCFE/Gnome3 etc but none have yet compared to the strengths of gnome2 with ubuntu packaging.

[JimShortz]

If you like the Gnome front-end you might also consider Linux Mint 12. I am also debating having a go with Ubuntu 12.04, but I wish they would take more care to make it look good (as Mint does). A couple of good Mint 12 reviews here:

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/245030/12_reasons_to_try_linux_mint_12.html

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/desktop-os/2012/02/19/linux-mint-12-why-its-the-best-desktop-os-40094992/

[innerspace]

but I wish they would take more care to make it look good (as Mint does).

Looks are a nice touch but is is usability thats most important to me and thats where unity fell down on the current versions.

I did sample mint before but think that was 11.

Those reviews look good and a gnome 2 style gnome 3 could be the perfect option.

I think debian is getting wiped soon for a home mint trial before deciding what to do with the main machine.

[terribleterri]

I suggest Mint 12 Gnome with the Cinnamon desk top. Update the kernal to 3.2. Add Cairo dock and Ubuntu tweak and enjoy.

[justsumhelp]

You can install a different windows manager, debian is just the base which is awesome (flame away) dpkg -i

but I wish they would take more care to make it look good (as Mint does).

Looks are a nice touch but is is usability thats most important to me and thats where unity fell down on the current versions.

I did sample mint before but think that was 11.

Those reviews look good and a gnome 2 style gnome 3 could be the perfect option.

I think debian is getting wiped soon for a home mint trial before deciding what to do with the main machine.

[dharmabm]

no reason you have to use what ubuntu (or mint, or any distro) shoves down your throat, you can always use the alternate installer (or the server version), install the minimal system, and add the DM or WM of your choice.

[innerspace]

no reason you have to use what ubuntu (or mint, or any distro) shoves down your throat, you can always use the alternate installer (or the server version), install the minimal system, and add the DM or WM of your choice.

No reason to, except saving time.

I manage multiple servers via SSH without a GUI. No problem whatsoever.

I can compile software from source or even write it myself.

But my time is better spent doing my work than spending 20 minutes compiling and debugging a software update or spending a month making my own version. Hence the established, tested ubuntu repositories are great.

I recently went to debian to sample the foundation of ubuntu. Very stable without a doubt, but several of the programs I use are stuck with flawed, outdated versions. Sure I could install any version from source but there goes the fantastic 1 click update feature.

I completely agree with your post for running a server, install a stable core and add what you need.

But for a general work machine, you want it to do what you want, when you want, how you want.

Ubuntu has proven to do that. I assume that mint as a derivative will do the same (USB stick ready, will find out soon).

Getting a fully optimised system and adding a few bits is generally quicker, easier and less frustrating that starting with the basics and adding the lot.

[innerspace]

Cheers for the mint sugestion, installed tonight and seeming good.

Debian base with the best of the latestest ubuntu usability improvements and then some more on top.

Hardly had to install any extra software so far and all been flawless.

[Crushdepth]

As an Ubuntu fanboy, I have tried to like Unity, really I have tried. But it's just crap. It is a giant step backwards in usability and in terms of customisation options its a joke. Whoever designed the new applications 'menu' should be taken out the back and shot.

Its too bad Gnome 2 is getting tossed out. I tried the new Mint desktop (Cinnamon?) and was not impressed. Tomorrow I'm going to take another look at KDE out of desperation.

Why we need to 'revolutionise' mature and functional desktops with what looks like a lame attempt to strap an iPad interface onto non-touchscreen computers is beyond me. What they have done is criminal. Its sad.

[matt111]

CrushDepth,

Long time ArchLinux user finally feed up with fixing issues that crop out in a rolling release OS, in the past week I've tried several distros:

Ubuntu 12.04b1, Unity is terrible, as is gnome-shell, I appreciate they are different so I stuck with them for days, until I nearly stabbed my eyes out. It also suffers from terrible performance although to be expect from a beta.

Debain6 nice install, lean, but like you say several core packages are out of date (e.g. ssh client no understanding certain directives), also terrible font rendering, both issues are fixed by bastardization that belong in the gentoo/archlinux 'i like to spend 3 weeks customizing/building my OS' land

OpenSuse, I was the most optimist about this even though the package manager was completely different than dpkg/apt-get. OMG, the default KDE looks like the Thai version of Windows 2007 (I know it doesnt exist.. one of those disgusting themes). It crashed repeatably. #Fail

XUbuntu 10.10, wow. Fast install. Decent font rendering out the box. Stable. XFCE based (default theme looks like Gnome-2). Full access to Ubuntu repo. Try it, cant tell you how impressed I am (its very polished, unlike a xfce install on Arch etc)

[pol123]

Look interesting but wait for the final release ;-)...

[Crushdepth]

Well I tried a few different things. I'm running themn in Virtual Box on a slightly outdated host computer (2.3 GHz dual core, 4 gigs of RAM and a mediocre 128 MB graphics card, Windows 7). I gave the VMs 1 gig of RAM.

First I tried Kubuntu 11.10: Looks fairly good ie. the UI is not too painful compared to Unity but but the Muon package manager is broken, so you can't install anything (honestly, of all the things you could break...). I lost patience trying to work around it and gave up.

Next was Open Suse 12.1. I really like the look of it, seems much more like a 'traditional' desktop with a nice clean UI. Unfortunately it is unacceptably sluggish on my VM, I had to wait a long time for menus to open and applications were dog slow to launch. If I had a better computer at work I would be tempted to stick with this. If anyone has some ideas about how to speed it up I would like to hear them.

Finally tried Xubuntu 11.10. It runs considerably faster than the other two and the way the UI works is fairly similar to Gnome. I'm not that keen on the look of it (not a fan of chunky low res icons) but then Ubuntu was never that attractive either. This is what I'll use as my Linux VM for now.

[matt111]

Not sure what you mean by "(not a fan of chunky low res icons)" presuming you are using VirtualBox have you installed the guest utils in guest os (not sure which one but have a look at "apt-cache search virtualbox | grep guest"), and enough video memory allocated to run native resolution? Probably also want to apt-get install ttf-mscorefonts-installer if certain web pages are rendering not to taste, other than that I've not tweak anything else visual and it all looks very crisp and clean.

[Crushdepth]

I gave Mint 12 another go. Pleasantly surprised to find that Gnome 3 *with* the Mint Gnome Shell Extensions is actually rather good, very similar to Gnome 2 (you have a traditional task bar and application menu) and faster than all the rest. If you lament the loss of Gnome 2 then I recommend giving Mint a go. But forget about Cinnamon.

[matt111]

Interesting.. How did it compare to XUbuntu? I see they share many similarities (i.e. deb/ubuntu repos, codecs etc out the box, polished UI)

[Crushdepth]

Mint is also based on Ubuntu, so it's more or less the same beast with a different skin. I think it has possibly the best UI at present. I like that they have gone out of their way not to break the existing desktop paradigm and have committed to developing a sane replacement for Gnome 2 (MATE), although it is still early days for that one.

The big surprise is its speed - a lot of the reviews say that Gnome 3 is slow and XFCE is supposed to be lightweight, but the modified Mint GSE runs significantly faster than anything I have tested abve (although the differences might not be so obvious on a decent computer).

[dharmabm]

i've been enjoying both crunchbang and archbang quite a bit lately, i am using archbang for my son's gaming machine at the moment and i have a crunchbang partition on my notebook for development (i don't like cluttering my main arch distro with android source and other development bloat). plus i have also started using crunchbang as a quick server setup for testing, as i got tired of building ubuntu server from base every time.

[dharmabm]

CrushDepth,

Long time ArchLinux user finally feed up with fixing issues that crop out in a rolling release OS, in the past week I've tried several distros:

i don't understand this - i have been running arch as my primary os for over 4 years, and i have NEVER had anything broken that couldn't be fixed rather easily (and is usually posted in the news section on the main arch webpage). i've tested just about every major distro out there (and a lot of minor ones), and i have never been happier than i am with arch. it does what i want it to do (and ONLY what i want it to do), and it doesn't automatically do stupid shit like install every single frikin video driver know to mankind when you install xorg, or insist on automatically installing EVERY locale just in case you might need it someday. i guess i'm just a control freak, but i'm really curious why you would abandon such a sweet distro (maybe a subject for a separate thread?).

k

[matt111]

dharmabm,

Arch is good OS but for me it was too much of time sink, and whilst instrumental in helping me learn fundamentals about Linux nowadays I just want something that works and gets out of my way. Indeed the fixes are often < 10min, sometimes as easy as booting into run level 3 and pulling out a package from /var/cache/pacman/pkgs etc.. but again it is still a time sink. Recent issues including compeletely freezes due to wireless changes in 3.1.x, amesomewm breaking because libpng upgrade (the perils of depending on something in AUR), couchdb being upgrade to some insanely buggy git head (due to someone else upgrading the spidermonkey stuff), touchpad breaking, etc..

Minor irratation include not having a TH mirror for pacman repos too, IRC folks that have a competition of who can ! refer people to outdated wiki the quickest, (e.g. ipv6 being built into kernel now and not able to disable via sysctl but instead a kern line parameter), having to pull cairo packages from AUR for smooth font rendering etc..

XUbuntu (wish it was called something else so it didnt have the ubuntu stigma, but dogma is something i need to forget) is lean enough for me, there might be excess packages installed but running footprint is light weight enough, Xubuntu = 2hrs to get going, 1hr to install, 10min to git clone dotfiles and configure xfce, 50mins misc, Archlinux i probably need 3 days to get everything sorted

[Crushdepth]

What about FreeBSD?