Was 9 worth the trouble?

Questions and thoughts about present and future editions
Forum rules
Before you post please read this
Biker
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:58 am
Location: Where my hat is

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by Biker » Tue May 25, 2010 8:37 am

vrkalak wrote:
Biker wrote:Please show me an operating system that doesn't have any bugs upon release.
Debian 'stable' ... when it is finally released as 'stable' ... it is rock solid stable ... always.
Stable does not imply there are no bugs. There are many stable OS's, but they still have bugs.
Linux User #384279

User avatar
ibm450
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:56 am
Location: Kwinana, Western Australia

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by ibm450 » Tue May 25, 2010 8:51 am

ive only en-counted 2 operating systems that have been buggy as hell.
  • Windows Me - my god - as buggy as ubuntu
    Ubuntu in general
not 1 issue with 98SE, 2000, XP nor W7, not 1 that i can recall that i classed as or had a major bug in them that made me put either ISO into the RIP folder on external backups.

but in saying that, i cant recall how many linux distros i have BINNED. only 1 linux distro i actually keep close and guarded is an ISO of Mint7 (9.04/9.10) cant remember the release, mint7 was responsive and had a nice login screen and a good editable menu.lst that i actually understood in a sort time how to edit the boot menu...grub2...pffffittttt....
Asus UL50VT laptop ~ LM10 - Unity 12.04 - Win 7
Image

gogogadget
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by gogogadget » Tue May 25, 2010 10:47 am

DrHu wrote:
gogogadget wrote:What people want is a Ubuntu based CD which has all Multimedia Codecs included, most other things are obsolete.
I don't know that the people do want a Ubuntu base, it is simply that they have a fast development cycle and are the most well known, by the public..

If that is what people do want, this will be a problem for any Linux distribution trying to be different
I may be wrong with "all people want is Ubuntu+Codecs", and I think I could be happy with a clean "Debian Mint" as well :wink: Unfortunately I agree that Ubuntu is bloated. Yet it's the most user friendly distribution (as well as Mint). But it needs to change. Or Mint needs to change. It must not suffer the issues from Ubuntu.

@"Linux versions being different": To be honest, most Linux distributions fail in being "different". I checked out a lot of distributions in the past and most of them were the same except 1 different wallpaper and 1 different application. There are only about 3-6 Distros left which really provide either useful operating systems, server usage, rescue/backup utilities.

deleted

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by deleted » Tue May 25, 2010 10:54 am

HMMM Debian based Mint....
Just curious (I haven't tried it) but say when Mint 9 XFCE comes out... I might try installing on 64 bit Debian SID.
I've run the KDE Mint tools on SID, but I've kinda fallen out of love with KDE for the moment. It seemed that after about a week of no-reboots it (and it's compositing) began to trash.... (Of course it could have been the 2 vms I'm running simultaneously)
But to stay on topic and not to hijack the thread, yes it was worth it. (even doing a fresh install on a production machine)
I use it daily (24/7) for software development on a desktop. One thing that did notice (tho small but makes my life better) is I can run VMWare Player in Unity mode without my mouse pointer disappearing. (I couldn't do that using Gnome and Mint 8).
It makes my development (Windows based FlexBuilder and Linux Based midtier/server) easier since I don't have to limit myself to the real estate of the VMPlayer. Most distros (and I've tried a lot) have a great out of the box experience, but when you try to do something other than "Yea Linux, Boo Windows" (ie, be productive), they can come up short. Never had a problem I couldn't work around.... My general rule of thumb is that when something annoys me enough, I'll figure it out. Otherwise, I just use it.
-Hinto

FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by FedoraRefugee » Tue May 25, 2010 12:01 pm

So many unhappy people! Spending a lot of time complaining about everything!

It would seem time would be better spent just learning how to use Linux so you could be happy! :D

Like me! :lol:

deleted

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by deleted » Tue May 25, 2010 12:19 pm

Hope my "I am happy" didn't get lost;)
Since I switched to Mint, I've been happy.
Mint 9, same deal....
-Hinto

FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by FedoraRefugee » Tue May 25, 2010 12:26 pm

hinto wrote:Hope my "I am happy" didn't get lost;)
Since I switched to Mint, I've been happy.
Mint 9, same deal....
-Hinto
Oh, I was not referring to you Hinto. :wink:

User avatar
ibm450
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:56 am
Location: Kwinana, Western Australia

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by ibm450 » Tue May 25, 2010 6:37 pm

FedoraRefugee wrote:So many unhappy people! Spending a lot of time complaining about everything!

It would seem time would be better spent just learning how to use Linux so you could be happy! :D

Like me! :lol:
why spend time learning linux to be productive!

i didnt have to SPEND so much time fixing, rebooting, hacking, trolling on forums, reinstalling, editing boot menus, installing so many alternative apps that are semi similar to windows apps, waiting for web browser to render web pages, poor drivers, pointless 3d cubes and desktop effects as i have on linux as opposed to windows!

you have to realize that people just want to boot into a OS, spend virtually 0 time pondering why this or that has crashed or frozen or reinstall driver graphics out of the blue, spend time learning a not so user friendly app which slows down the individual to get on with their basic computing needs - the way ubuntu is heading, imho, i reckom it will definitely STAY as an hobbyist play time OS and never reach the status as an serious windows replacement.
Asus UL50VT laptop ~ LM10 - Unity 12.04 - Win 7
Image

Biker
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:58 am
Location: Where my hat is

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by Biker » Tue May 25, 2010 6:55 pm

ibm450 wrote:why spend time learning linux to be productive!
Because Linux is not WIndows.
ibm450 wrote: i didnt have to SPEND so much time fixing, rebooting, hacking, trolling on forums, reinstalling, editing boot menus, installing so many alternative apps that are semi similar to windows apps, waiting for web browser to render web pages, poor drivers, pointless 3d cubes and desktop effects as i have on linux as opposed to windows!
The basic, bare bones Mint installation allows one to hit the ground running and be "productive". One doesn't need to load up the pretty screen effects in order to use it.
ibm450 wrote:you have to realize that people just want to boot into a OS, spend virtually 0 time pondering why this or that has crashed or frozen or reinstall driver graphics out of the blue, spend time learning a not so user friendly app which slows down the individual to get on with their basic computing needs - the way ubuntu is heading, imho, i reckom it will definitely STAY as an hobbyist play time OS and never reach the status as an serious windows replacement.
There are many who use Linux as their primary OS (myself included). For the majority, there are many distributions that work well for them without having to tweak a thing. However, when you start tinkering with things, expect things to break. This is true of any OS, including Windows.

If you don't want to learn Linux, that's your prerogative. However, don't blame the OS on someone's unwillingness to apply themself and learn how the OS works.
Linux User #384279

deleted

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by deleted » Tue May 25, 2010 7:03 pm

ibm450 wrote: why spend time learning linux to be productive!

i didnt have to SPEND so much time fixing, rebooting, hacking, trolling on forums, reinstalling, editing boot menus, installing so many alternative apps that are semi similar to windows apps, waiting for web browser to render web pages, poor drivers, pointless 3d cubes and desktop effects as i have on linux as opposed to windows!

you have to realize that people just want to boot into a OS, spend virtually 0 time pondering why this or that has crashed or frozen or reinstall driver graphics out of the blue, spend time learning a not so user friendly app which slows down the individual to get on with their basic computing needs - the way ubuntu is heading, imho, i reckom it will definitely STAY as an hobbyist play time OS and never reach the status as an serious windows replacement.
The light went on for me (at home, I was already using Linux at work) when malware got on to my Windows PC at home... I was running Norton Endpoint Protection, so I was pretty well protected...
Well when it got on, I cannot tell you the number I times I had to reboot the computer, troll the Symatec forms, reboot in admin mode, modify the registry, (did I say reboot the pc?) in order to get the darn thing off.

Now I run Windows in a VM on Linux. If it gets infected, then poof. I delete it and replace the vmdk (the virtual disk drive). That takes about 15-20 minutes for a 80 gig file copy (unattended)...
Then I've got Windows back.... As for Linux, I cannot remember the last crash/malware on it. As an added bonus, since Mint is Debian, packages are installed and updated in place. No need to reboot (unless you replace the kernel). No need to restart X (unless you replace the video driver).
-Hinto

FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by FedoraRefugee » Tue May 25, 2010 7:36 pm

ibm450 wrote:why spend time learning linux to be productive!
So you don't have to waste days waiting for someone on a forum somewhere to spoonfeed you! So you can take pride and satisfaction in what you are capable of. And best of all so you don't start bitterly complaining when you can't fix your problem and no one is bothering to help you. :D
i didnt have to SPEND so much time fixing, rebooting, hacking, trolling on forums, reinstalling, editing boot menus, installing so many alternative apps that are semi similar to windows apps, waiting for web browser to render web pages, poor drivers, pointless 3d cubes and desktop effects as i have on linux as opposed to windows!
I do not quite follow your train of thought here. Are you saying you spent less time fixing things on Windows? I would agree that this is probably true. It all relates to what Linux is, and despite how many chuckleheads in here want to argue the point and try to make Linux something it is not, the fact remains that it is what it is. That is why you have to learn how to use it at least on a superficial level; ie being able to hack, reboot, troll, reinstall, partition, edit config files, learn apps that have no written manual, be able to adapt to frequent change... It is what you make it. You can complain and wait forever for Linux to become what you want...OR...You can simply learn to use it.
you have to realize that people just want to boot into a OS, spend virtually 0 time pondering why this or that has crashed or frozen or reinstall driver graphics out of the blue, spend time learning a not so user friendly app which slows down the individual to get on with their basic computing needs - the way ubuntu is heading, imho, i reckom it will definitely STAY as an hobbyist play time OS and never reach the status as an serious windows replacement.
You have to realize that I want to drive a Ferrari. Oh well... :roll:

gogogadget
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by gogogadget » Wed May 26, 2010 8:31 am

@FedoraRefugee:

Learning Linux is one thing, needing to fix bugs each new version is another. I had no problem in learning Linux, but it gets tiresome realizing that new versions contain obvious bugs which did'nt occur in previous versions.

So, what is this? A hunt for the next bug or what? - obviously: therefore get this mess fixed first, then speak up again.

Biker
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:58 am
Location: Where my hat is

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by Biker » Wed May 26, 2010 8:38 am

Again.. Show me a new release of ANY operating system that doesn't have bugs. Thinking a new release is going to be totally bug free is both unrealistic and naive.
Linux User #384279

gogogadget
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by gogogadget » Wed May 26, 2010 9:40 am

It's not about "ANY" bugs, please read: for example in Windows in any new version, I did not experience anything not-working, which worked in a previous version. If something worked on Win95 it worked on WinME. If something worked on WinME it worked on WinXP. If something worked on WinXP it worked on Win7. Get it?

In contrary to that, Ubuntu seems to produce non-working things randomly each new version e.g.:

Ubuntu 9.04: this version was fine for almost anything
Ubuntu 9.10: UMTS modem did not work anymore; critical
Ubuntu 10.04: adjusting display brightness not working anymore: critical

Both last mentioned worked in previous versions and both were widely spread tools. So what comes next? Networkmanager deactivated by default? Bootloader fails to install? CPU scaling bug causing CPU on 100% all the time? Choose yourself... but I hope you get, what I mean. That said, I don't care about a 6 month cycle if they are not able to get their fixes together. It's better they take their time and fix it until it's "done". But since they are announcing proudly in a 6 month cycle, one has to think the new version must be better and improved compared to the previous one. But it ain't that way. Maybe they should stop announcing bug-releases, and Linux Mint should stop to build on these bug releases.

deleted

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by deleted » Wed May 26, 2010 9:51 am

@gogogadget
Sounds like to me you want a rolling release. There are a few to choose from (Gentoo, Arch, sidux, etc). The upside is that if there is a bug, then it can be fixed rather quickly. The downside is that you may hit a few more bugs. The upside is that with a rolling release, you won't have to install a new image to get the bug fix.
It's always a trade off.
-Hinto

User avatar
ibm450
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 603
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:56 am
Location: Kwinana, Western Australia

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by ibm450 » Wed May 26, 2010 9:58 am


You have to realize that I want to drive a Ferrari. Oh well... :roll:
lol

i suppose theres no harm in dreaming like one day linux will dominate the desktop also...

oh well, but back to topic, lol, i had no issues with installing m9, nvidia drivers worked straight away on my 6600GT AGP, but the performance became very sluggish after doing a full system update. i reinstalled and only updated the nvidia driver and have ignored the 72 outstanding updates as system seems to be ALOT more responsive without the updates.....another bug present i suppose ;)
Asus UL50VT laptop ~ LM10 - Unity 12.04 - Win 7
Image

FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by FedoraRefugee » Wed May 26, 2010 10:27 am

gogogadget wrote:@FedoraRefugee:

Learning Linux is one thing, needing to fix bugs each new version is another. I had no problem in learning Linux, but it gets tiresome realizing that new versions contain obvious bugs which did'nt occur in previous versions.

So, what is this? A hunt for the next bug or what? - obviously: therefore get this mess fixed first, then speak up again.
I can agree that it gets tiresome, especially on a production computer that you rely on.

So just choose a more stable distro for that application! Why not use debian Lenny? Sure, it is about as exciting as oatmeal, but it is mostly bug free and is dead on reliable.

Hey, I agree that Ubuntu is getting way too buggy for what it is supposed to be. Fedora is actually getting more stable. Anymore there is little difference between the two...

But, no matter how you slice this, it is the nature of FOSS. WE are the QA team. It is the user who has to insure the distro is bug free. Developers have limited time and limited hardware to test these things, and Linux moves at a fast pace. It is only when a distro or an app is released into the wild that it can be run on thousands of computers in different situations. That is when most of the bugs show. Another factor, it is true that many bugs go unfixed. Why? Because the developer is moving ahead and knows that in a short period of time the bug will be irrelevant. Why waste precious time backtracking to fix something that will soon be obsolete. Then the worst bugs are the regressions! My wireless worked in the last 5 previous versions but does not now! :twisted: Yeah, who does NOT hate that one! You just have to deal with it. That is why you HAVE to learn how to fix these issues. You do not need any special skills, usually someone in the forum will provide the workaround. Just be comfortable enough to open a terminal and copy/paste some commands in. Or use gedit to edit a file somewhere. It is not that big of an issue. There are reasons why Linux is like it is. And yeah, it probably does hinder Linux from a more mainstream adoption. But Linux was not designed with that in mind anyway.

dkazaz
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 10:58 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by dkazaz » Wed May 26, 2010 2:13 pm

Well, I think what people forget is that Linux/Ubuntu/Mint are Free, not just in the Freedom sense but also in the beer sense :lol:

It is understandable that the amount of testing done in each release is much less than what MS or apple can afford to do. M$ can pay an army of testers, and millions of people joined the Win7 beta testing, while apple can't pay that much but has a fixed hardware ecosystem to test on.

Linux doesn't have this luxury, and depends on us to do this - few as we still are. We are actually getting spoiled these days, getting used to OS's that pretty well just work and do 90% of our daily task out of the box.

It's true that at some point in the distant past, Linux "just worked" out of the box too, but getting it out of the box (installing) was a pain and then it did very little.
I can remember installing an early edition of Red Hat and being greeted with a... command line from which I had to install X. On early versions of ubuntu (actually xubuntu) I had to manually add disks I wanted mounted (!) Of course why would I want all disks in the system mounted? :roll: I can remember arguing with a Linux fanatic on a forum on how illogical it was of me to expect it to mount all the drives in the system and this gave me more choice blah blah - sure it gave me the choice to waste my time :P

Now Linux does a lot and distros like Ubuntu and Mint which aim for the mainstream power user do a hell of a lot! Let's show some understanding on the bugs and see if we can help the team fix them for the next update.
Desktop: Intel Quad 3GHz, 4GB RAM, Asus P45, nVidia GT220, Mint, Ubuntu, Win7, x64
HTPC: AMD AthlonX2 5600+, 4GB RAM, Gigabyte AMD770, ATI HD5450, Vista x86

User avatar
monkeyboy
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 791
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:30 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by monkeyboy » Wed May 26, 2010 3:31 pm

ibm450 has it right folks should not have to spend time trolling around forums, however some folks can't resist.
If you don't like it, make something better
If you can't make something better, adapt
If you can't do either ball your panties up and cry.

Complaining is like masticating most anyone can do it.
However doing it in public is really hardcore.

User avatar
bunstonious
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:10 am

Re: Was 9 worth the trouble?

Post by bunstonious » Sat May 29, 2010 5:45 am

It's not about "ANY" bugs, please read: for example in Windows in any new version, I did not experience anything not-working, which worked in a previous version. If something worked on Win95 it worked on WinME. If something worked on WinME it worked on WinXP. If something worked on WinXP it worked on Win7. Get it?
I "lol"ed when I read that...

Windows 98 (horrible, BSOD's all over the place) -> Windows ME (it's ME, nuff said...) -> Windows XP (gold edition would crash every time I opened explorer, was not untill SP1 that it was ok) -> Windows Vista (hahahahahahahaha, it is ME v2) -> Windows 7 (they FINALLY did something worth doing, but there are still lots of bugs I have uncovered).

While I agree that the bugs you are experiencing are frustrating, and up until Mint 8 and Mint 9 the sound on my laptop was VERY difficult to get working (ACER ASPIRE 6920G) but I still muddled through because I enjoy it.

TBH I think that most of the people on here who are complaining about the "Mass Bugs" should just install Windoze and be done with it. Go away and pay the huge price that M$ asks! Go and pay stacks of money for stuff like Vista which uses so much memory that the HDD takes a battering from all of the swap usage. Whatever you guys do just stop the QQing, you are only embarrassing yourself!

kthxbai

Bunstonious
Eternal Geek, Linux Freak.

http://www.dark-spire.com
kthxbai,

Bunstonious
Eternal Geek, Linux Freak...
Australian Linux Mint User
W: http://www.dark-spire.com
Random Facebook Group wrote:You cannot fathom the immensity of the f**k I do not give

Post Reply

Return to “About Mint Editions”