Is it worth upgrading to Helena over Gloria? [poll]

[mikhou]

A question for you who have upgraded so far. Has it been worth it? Looking through the list of changes, I don't see a whole lot that will drastically affect what I do. If upgrading will cost me a headache in fixing bugs, I may not do it. Gloria works like a dream and is SO MUCH BETTER than Vista which I switched over from. So...is it worth it? Thoughts.

[vrkalak]

Just because a new version (Helena) of a distro is released; that doesn't mean that you must upgrade to the new one.

If the version (Gloria) works for you ... stay with it.

I know some people that use Debian, and Debian is now in version 5.0.3 and Debian 6 Squeeze will be released late next year.
Debian releases a stable version every 2-3 years. Anyway, I know people who are still using Debian 3. It works for them.

In MS Windows, version 7 is out. Before that was Vista. Many people still use XP . . . and XP was released, how long ago? 10 years? more or less.

I don't know what all the hype is, that everyone gives, to having the absolute latest Apps. in the Repros.
"Oh my god! FireFox 3.5.5-4 is out and I only have Firefox 3.5.5-1 in the Repositories. What am I gonna do?"
The sub-versions of an App or Distro ... don't usually change much or are security/bug fixes. Let the App or Distro grow to maturity, before you switch to it.
It only, makes sense to me.

Stick with the OS distro and version that works for your needs. If you see an update for an App. that you must have, download it and install it.
There is no problem, really. IMHO, when a new version of a Linux OS distro is released, give it a month or two, let them fix the bugs, before you download it.

I am one of the biggest supporters and advocates for LinuxMint, and while I have just downloaded Helena-8, I haven't installed it in my computer yet.
Maybe, next month? Actually, I think, I'll wait until a month or so after LinuxMint-8 Xfce CE is released ... them I'll install and use that.

[Kaye]

Just my two cents after upgrading.. For me Helena has been a huge improvement over Gloria. Although Gloria was awesome and I enjoyed using it, the newer bases used in Helena just give such a better feel than I ever got from Gloria (or any other operating system I've used so far for that matter).

If you're hesitant, pop in the Live CD and give it a try. Worst thing that happens is you don't install it and you end up wasting a 50 cent CD-R.

-Kaye

[XidCat]

I agree with vrkalak, you don't have to upgrade. I still use 7 on my main box. I have 8 on a test box. I haven't found any major bugs. I have managed to destroy the install a few times tweaking GDM and GRUB2 . I still don't intend to use it on my main box until January, giving the Ubuntu and Mint teams time to throw some more fixes out. It's all about what works for you and your pain threshold. Nothing more frustrating than someone downloading a new release on day 1 than whining in the forums 5 minutes later about what a piece of junk it is.... patience, patience.... please

[dequire]

[/i]I don't know what all the hype is, that everyone gives, to having the absolute latest Apps. in the Repros.
"Oh my god! FireFox 3.5.5-4 is out and I only have Firefox 3.5.5-1 in the Repositories. What am I gonna do?"
The sub-versions of an App or Distro ... don't usually change much or are security/bug fixes. Let the App or Distro grow to maturity, before you switch to it.
It only, makes sense to me.

Some good points made in your post, vrkalak. And I agree, for a business / work environment upgrading is not a necessity - and if working to your satisfaction, there's no reason to upgrade.

However, on a home system, I might mildly disagree. As new versions of applications come out, many new features are added that are often needed / wanted. These may be for:

• comapatabilty (like the improvements made in KOffice for compatability with MS Office apps)
• new features deemed important (webcam functionality, Skype, etc.)
• security (Firefox security updates are important, as are the steady improvements to web rendering abilities and speeds)
• New technologies that were not around a few years ago (Like Twitter and Identi.ca clients [microblogging], for example)

Also, I think it's safe to say the Firefox is a mature app
I just thnk it depends on the situation, basically. For me, I like the bleeding edge.

[Egorama]

Just because a new version (Helena) of a distro is released; that doesn't mean that you must upgrade to the new one.

If the version (Gloria) works for you ... stay with it.

I know some people that use Debian, and Debian is now in version 5.0.3 and Debian 6 Squeeze will be released late next year.
Debian releases a stable version every 2-3 years. Anyway, I know people who are still using Debian 3. It works for them.

In MS Windows, version 7 is out. Before that was Vista. Many people still use XP . . . and XP was released, how long ago? 10 years? more or less.

I don't know what all the hype is, that everyone gives, to having the absolute latest Apps. in the Repros.
"Oh my god! FireFox 3.5.5-4 is out and I only have Firefox 3.5.5-1 in the Repositories. What am I gonna do?"
The sub-versions of an App or Distro ... don't usually change much or are security/bug fixes. Let the App or Distro grow to maturity, before you switch to it.
It only, makes sense to me.

Stick with the OS distro and version that works for your needs. If you see an update for an App. that you must have, download it and install it.
There is no problem, really. IMHO, when a new version of a Linux OS distro is released, give it a month or two, let them fix the bugs, before you download it.

I am one of the biggest supporters and advocates for LinuxMint, and while I have just downloaded Helena-8, I haven't installed it in my computer yet.
Maybe, next month? Actually, I think, I'll wait until a month or so after LinuxMint-8 Xfce CE is released ... them I'll install and use that.

Somebody promote this person to "Enlightened User" Sound advice indeed.

[viking777]

No doubt in my mind that Mint 7 is the better of the two at the moment. That may change in the future and I will definitely be using both to see how things develop. Helena is still good, better than its Ubuntu sibling in my opinion, but Gloria is just so hard to beat it is almost inevitable that you don't succeed straight away.

[Oscar799]

I installed Helena on 29/11 as a dual-boot with Gloria,I'll be keeping both for a while yet.
Currently spending more time with Helena -just getting to know her

[mzsade]

Dual booting is a sign of mistrust, unless there are applications that are specific to Windows that you just cannot do without. C'mon guys, Clem and team have worked really hard on this, have some forbearance and respect! If your system worked well enough with Gloria, stick to it, don't make a song and dance about your difficulties with Helena, unless it is contributes to reporting of specific bugs.

[rich_roast]

Just another two cents - my personal experience has been very positive with Helena since nothing has broken since Gloria and many things have improved. A hidden advantage for me (again this is idiosyncratic) is that I tend to install a lot of software to try it out, and eventually those packages begin to get in the way with me being too lazy to remove and optimise. A frequent upgrade cycle serves the second purpose of clearing the air on this box and Helena runs very quickly and smoothly with a lot less overhead than Gloria was on its last days. The release cycle also dictates part of my back-up cycle, too, permanent CD archives of all my data get made on upgrade day to reinforce the usual net and memory stick backups of stuff I work on. I guess I've worked the distro's release cycle into my own schedule of computer maintenance.

That said I think we are all aware that many have been disappointed about Helena, either because some functionality has broken since Gloria and/or because of gdm / Ubiquity (OEM install not working, no backward compatibility with gdm).

I think it's human nature and right to want the latest release of the software, especially when you get to decide how much you (don't) want to pay for it, and it must be generally helpful to the development process that users upgrade and report bugs on the latest version. Users who aren't looking to report bugs and aren't prepared to admit them have recourse to the LTS edition, which is still Elyssa, I think; alternatively if Gloria works for users they should keep that, of course, up until support for it expires, if Helena doesn't work out (as per Kaye's suggestion). Others won't mind a certain amount of brokenness and will happily report any to developers (Mint or upstream) in return for keeping up with the latest "stable" version of the software - it's worth reiterating that for at least one computer in the world, no bugs to report yet and a more fluid and swift edition of Mint. It's also worth thinking about what "stable" might actually mean - I've learnt to read it as "this (probably) won't crash, and it (shouldn't) won't cause your computer to shut down and catch fire", rather than "this will do what you want it to quickly and well". When a package leaves testing it should be relatively safe to install, but a lot of the software packaged in Mint is still under active development and should never be considered a final release, meaning that bugs will get introduced and features will sometimes break or be deliberately removed (become deprecated); users of working machines which are critical for producing something should bear that in mind and upgrade less frequently (follow the LTS cycle!) to avoid the rocky path of improvement.