Author: Daniel Llewellyn Date: To: Hampshire LUG Discussion List CC: Hampshire LUG Discussion List Subject: Re: [Hampshire] What would you do,
faced with the following advice re Ubuntu
Hello all, first post to this list, and a bit of a lighthearted one at that :-)
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 17:42, Lisi <hantslug@???> wrote: > Note: this is not for my production desktop, which is still running Lenny.
> <quote>
> Canonical who are the creators of Ubuntu are supporting 8.04 until April 2011
> as well as releasing 10.04. Both versions will work, the differences in 10.04
> LTS compared to the labs in week 2 are subtle. You MUST install Virtual Box
> version 3.1.6 or later for 10.04 to work with the additions installation.
Isn't it nice that they think you're only ever going to run Ubuntu
inside a virtual machine?! It strikes me as ironic that they are
teaching a course on our favourite OS, yet assume we're not going to
be running it ourselves and therefore require a virtual machine to
install it in. (at least they seem to infer that VirtualBox is the
preferred environment; but there are many different ways of
virtualising these days and virtualbox isn't completely OSS for the
die-hard freedom guys. Also, who knows how long before Oracle get
their claws into VBox and milk it like a cash cow like they're doing
with OpenSolaris?)
> Yhe Open University course team are strongly reccomending that you use 8.04.
> You are welcome to use 10.04 but with the advisory that it comes with some
> risks.
>
> We have created an addendum pack which can be found in the course resources
> page, if you wish to have a go.
>
> (LTS stands for Long Term Support and is described in the course material)
> </quote>
>
> Hardy is really a bit long in the tooth now...
>
> But the general impression I get is that Maverick, albeit still in Beta, is
> generally considered more successful than Lucid.
>
> I have personally had several "failures" with Lucid. (I got on better with
> Jaunty.)
>
> Should I try to triple boot Hardy, Lucid and Maverick?
>
> Should I go for one and stick to it? If so which? (Bearing in mind that if I
> have a problem with Maverick, which I fancy trying, I shall have to ask for
> help since the OU course team are warning me that they can't really support
> it!)
I've been running maverick since late alpha and have had _many_
software crashes flagged by the apport system. (I've not reported them
though because I'm bad bad bad! *slaps wrist*)
> Incidentally, so far, the course is a little disappointing. The first week's
> work is actually wrong in some of its facts. E.g., Ubuntu shadows Debian
> Stable's six monthly release, and is released about a month after it. I kid
Debian releases every 6 months?? (my debian knowledge must surely be
lacking here, but aren't they on 1) a rolling release cycle for
software within each major release and 2) a major release "when it's
ready"?)
> you not. They really said that. :-( And one page is clearly quoting some
> of Microsoft's more inaccurate FUD. :-(
It really wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft were on the advisory
committee for the drafting of the course content. Maybe I'm just a
cynic :-p
ho hum, for a first posting this sure turned out political! hello btw,
I'm Daniel from Basingstoke :-D
