Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released • Hacker News Board

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#31

Post by dimarco » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:03 PM UTC

windsurfer wrote: post #15

daleharvey wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it really a big jump from 9.04? the last few releases havent changed a whole lot in terms of ui polish, which I always thought was really nice until I used osx. and to be fair to the original poster, the link is available now, the site was in the middle of updating

I think it is. Pulseaudio, for example, has become sane and actually better than any other sound system I've used. It even streams to apple airports and other computers.

Finally! I'm sick of my roommate hogging the airport sound system!

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#32

Post by zacharydanger » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:04 PM UTC

paulsmith wrote: post #5

Smoothest dist upgrade yet ... didn't break any laptop functionality (ThinkPad T500) AFAICT. Use a mirror! ;)

Agreed, same experience on my ThinkPad R500.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#33

Post by windsurfer » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:05 PM UTC

mwexler wrote: post #20

Just whiny, but why does Ubuntu (or most distros) not give any idea of minimum/average disk required for install in their system requirements area? I know, I can customize the install so as to reduce or increase space requirements, but even a suggestion that "a straight default install requires around 2gb of space for programs, and 1gb for swap" would be helpful.

From http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/desktop/features :

System requirements

Ubuntu is available for PC, 64-Bit and Mac architectures. The Alternate installation CDs require at least 256 MB of RAM (the standard installation CD requires 384MB of RAM). Install requires at least 3 GB of disk space.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#34

Post by Tuna-Fish » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:09 PM UTC

natrius wrote: post #29

mseebach wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, well, good point. My point was that a userfriendly distribution shouldn't present technical information that isn't absolutely vital. And it's really easy to find, by the way: http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements

Disk space requirements aren't obscure technical information. Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone, especially not anyone adept enough to install an operating system. It should be provided.

> Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone

You fail at UI. Any and all information always adds some cognitive load and confuses the user. Every time you think you should show the user something, you must figure out a very convincing reason why you should not just leave it out. There clearly isn't one for majority of users who are going to install ubuntu, and for the rest, googling for two easy words isn't going to be too much of trouble.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#35

Post by robotron » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:09 PM UTC

natrius wrote: post #29

mseebach wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, well, good point. My point was that a userfriendly distribution shouldn't present technical information that isn't absolutely vital. And it's really easy to find, by the way: http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+requirements

Disk space requirements aren't obscure technical information. Providing it wouldn't confuse anyone, especially not anyone adept enough to install an operating system. It should be provided.

It's right there on the features page. That takes fewer clicks than finding the requirements for Windows 7.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#36

Post by mcav » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:14 PM UTC

ghotli wrote: post #30

Some googling shows that the VMWare Tools are not yet compatible with 9.10. Does anyone know how quickly VMWare usually gets around to updating tools after an Ubuntu update?

Works fine for me under Fusion 3.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#37

Post by kingkawn » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:18 PM UTC

i done been on beta, it actually works pretty well and the graphic card compatibility is improved greatly.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#38

Post by trevorbramble » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:24 PM UTC

Looking forward to upgrading from 9.04 to 9.10 ...in 3 to 6 months when all the bugs are shaken out and everything is compatible with the new version. =^)

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#39

Post by tortilla » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:34 PM UTC

daleharvey wrote: post #9

megaman821 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, with Windows 7 and Snow Leopard out Ubuntu feels even further away from becoming mainstream. I want to like Linux on the desktop but looking at it objectively Win 7 and Snow Leopard are better.

I genuinely believe (ignoring vendor support) that ubuntu is by far the easiest to use operating system, ahead of windows and osx for the basic operations of installing and using new applications, I would rather use gnome over leapords window manager any day. but the polish has always been lacking

Since I installed Ubuntu on my mom's computer, she hasn't called me for really any support. The computer boots up faster and isn't slowed down by virus software.

Re: Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala released

#40

Post by mikeyur » Thu, Oct 29, 2009, 4:35 PM UTC

bretthoerner wrote: post #27

rsheridan6 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spend almost all of my time in firefox, emacs and a few other programs, which are the same on every platform. It really doesn't make much of a difference to me what desktop OS I use as long as it's cheap and it works with my hardware. I use Ubuntu on an HTPC because it's free and it (usually) works. I can't imagine what MS or Apple could do to improve on free + works. To me Linux is a lot closer now than it was in…

> I spend almost all of my time in firefox, emacs and a few other programs Me too, and I have a Dell laptop in the mail that I'll be installing Ubuntu on and trying to use as my main machine. But you know what isn't the same in all of these programs between OS X and Linux? Font rendering. I can get Linux to "OK" but OS X is always refreshing in comparison.

Font rendering is a big one for me. For some reason Ubuntu always looks.. ugly.

The color scheme, font rendering, icons, etc, etc. Are there no designers in the open source community willing to help out? Or do the project leads not give a crap about design?