Ubuntu 16.04 LTS is out.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been out of the Linux world for a few years. How does this release compare to Mint?
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I've been out of the Linux world for a few years. How does this release compare to Mint?


As javacontour indicated, best to try versions out with VB.

Not sure whether your question refers to usability, interface etc.

People rave about Mint here; I don't care for it primarily because of the menu system; I don't like searching for apps when I can just put them in a dock like with Ubuntu. It is all about choice, which is a good thing for us
 
Faster and easier to just make a live cd or live usb. That also lets you verify compatibility with your hardware.
 
I'm a Debian user. But often use Ubuntu when I need newer packages or when I'm just feeling lazy.

On the Desktop I just don't care for Mint's aesthetic. I know I could customize it to my heart's content, but why spend the time when I could just install Xubuntu and like it out of the box.

Moral of the story, do as said above. DL a bunch of Linux flavors and run them in Virtualbox to find the DE you like. You can always install different DEs on Mint, too.

Great thing about Linux -- freedom. In more than one way.
 
Just upgraded one machine. Took a while. I do not like what they did to LibreOffice Writer. Looks too much like Windows 10 now. Before it had better visual appeal for me.

My go to ditro is Mint Xfce. Ubuntu seems more like a Lexus and Mint a Toyota. Ubuntu has more bells and whistles. Looks more polished. Mint, especially Xfce seems more like a striped down Camry with a manual. It is not as pretty but has some get up and go.
 
Originally Posted By: MONKEYMAN
Just upgraded one machine. Took a while. I do not like what they did to LibreOffice Writer. Looks too much like Windows 10 now. Before it had better visual appeal for me.

My go to ditro is Mint Xfce. Ubuntu seems more like a Lexus and Mint a Toyota. Ubuntu has more bells and whistles. Looks more polished. Mint, especially Xfce seems more like a striped down Camry with a manual. It is not as pretty but has some get up and go.


Xubuntu is ubuntu with XFCE.

http://xubuntu.org/

You can change DEs at any time no matter what distro you use.
 
Installed Xubuntu which removed Ubuntu. Much more to my needs. LibreOffice Writer has some color now. Computer is much faster like with Mint Xfce. Using it now. Thanks!
 
I'm sticking with 14.04 for a while, it's super stable and there aren't really any improvements in 16.04 for my 4 year old laptop.
 
Mint xfce = xubuntu with hobbled package maintenance (mint devs aren't super sharp on this, fiddling unnecessarily). For xfce the clear option is xubuntu imo
 
Originally Posted By: KingCake
I'm a Debian user. But often use Ubuntu when I need newer packages or when I'm just feeling lazy.


Doesn't Debian Testing track packages at least as current as Ubuntu? With Ubuntu's new Snap packaging I suppose it'll be almost trivial for Ubuntu to have up-to-the-minute package versions (Why, on an LTS, one would want that is beyond me) but apart form that I have always know Testing to be right with the times (more accurately: about 10 days behind Debian Unstable).
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I've been out of the Linux world for a few years. How does this release compare to Mint?


Mint is old versions of Ubuntu. Mint focuses on ultra stability so all they do is they maintain older versions of Ubuntu. I think typically Mint is about 2 releases behind latest non LTS version of Ubuntu. I used to be a bit Mint user but got tired of needing features only available in latest kernels. At this point Mint seems to be only worthwhile for Cinnamon or MATE environments but I think you can install those on Ubuntu just fine. Ubuntu forums are also a better source of support than Mint as there is much more activity.

For the other folks, there are several flavors of Ubuntu depending on which desktop environment you like. There is Ubuntu (unity), Xubuntu (XFCE), Lubuntu (LXDE but moving to LXQT), Kubuntu (KDE) and finally Ubuntu Gnome (self explanatory).
 
I like Ubuntu and had been running 14.04 for some time. A few days ago my updater said there was a new version 15.10 and asked if I wanted to install it. Okay, so I tried, and it hung up about 2/3 through. Could do nothing at that point, except shut the computer down. Lost 14.04 at that point, could not reboot the computer. To make a longer story shorter, I reinstalled 14.04, then downloaded 16.04 and burned to disc. Installed it over 14.04 and everything just fine with all my files just where they were. One word, if you want to install Chrome browser in 16.04, it won't unless you install the Gdebi package handler.
 
Quote:
One word, if you want to install Chrome browser in 16.04, it won't unless you install the Gdebi package handler.


What makes you say that? I have installed Chrome several times on 16.04 from the early alpha stages up until now. They're still using SHA-1 and apt will complain a bit about that; but I am pretty sure that both apt in the command line and the Software Center GUI will install it and its few dependencies without issue.

What was the hassle you ran into, if you don't mind me asking. My normal practice is do download the .deb, open a terminal and use sudo dpkg -i *.deb, which I can usually do before Software Center would have even opened. dpkg will gripe about a dependency so I follow up with sudo apt install -f and I am off to the races. Software Center though, ought to handle that in one fell swoop.

One could also take the step(s) of manually adding the repository to /etc/apt/sources.list.d, updating apt and then sudo apt install google-chrome. I have a bash script that does all of that. All have worked fine for me.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I've been out of the Linux world for a few years. How does this release compare to Mint?


Mint is old versions of Ubuntu. Mint focuses on ultra stability so all they do is they maintain older versions of Ubuntu.


Mint chose to change - as of Ubuntu 14.04 - from tracking Ubuntu's 6-month release cycle to only building their OS atop Ubuntu's LTS releases every 2 years. They still backport applications to work on the kernels and libraries within the LTS releases so their efforts might be more to ease development work for their small team than to maintain stability (while achieving both).

They also release "point" versions every 6 months still; but unlike Ubuntu they are not updating kernels and libraries and they continue to use Ubuntu's LTS software repositories.

It still boggles my mind how and why either the Ubuntu or Mint developers think of "Long Term Support" and "stable" but still update kernel and software versions; which almost seems like a textbook definition of "unstable"! (Besides having to wait for drivers and kernel modules to re-friggin'-compile every kernel update, I have had a situation where a LTS kernel update borked a video driver entirely.) I've always thought Debian had the best release model: You can live footloose and fancy free using the rolling "Unstable" branch or use the most stable, robust, reliable, (ahem, boring) thing possible in "Stable" or balance keeping up to date with package versions and enjoy more-than-reasonable stability by using "Testing".
 
Originally Posted By: TTK
I like Ubuntu and had been running 14.04 for some time. A few days ago my updater said there was a new version 15.10 and asked if I wanted to install it. Okay, so I tried, and it hung up about 2/3 through.


I thought LTS releases defaulted to only alerting you to new LTS releases. If not, you can set your "Software & Updates" to only notify you when new LTS's are out. I cannot recommend that enough. Part of the "Support" in "Long Term Support" is a more reliable upgrade path from LTS to LTS release.
 
So, will there eventually be a simple upgrade path from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 LTS? Or is the recommended approach to start with a clean 16.04 LTS install?
 
Nevermind. I see it is mentioning the availability of 16.04 LTS now and asking me if I want to upgrade.

I am in no rush though. For my purposes, I could stay on 14.04 LTS until support expires. I'll wait at least 6 months, just to give them the opportunity to work out any remaining bugs.
smile.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

OVERKILL
Building a home firewall - guide
2 3
Replies
50
Views
1K
BornSlippy
OVERKILL
Google's new Privacy Sandbox
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
Owen Lucas
Hermann
The new 17.3" HP laptop review.
Replies
19
Views
2K
Hermann
92saturnsl2
Ubiquiti access points on different subnet / separate from 192.168.1.x
Replies
7
Views
861
OVERKILL
OVERKILL
DNS and Secure DNS
Replies
15
Views
2K
hammerniski
Back
Top