KDE 3.5.6 released w Kubuntu packages

[Angus Prune]

To be fair we're not talking about 5+ years, we're talking about a
release less than a year ago.  I'm not arguing that things should be
run differently, and I don't know enough about the technical issues to
have any opinion other than the official one on whether kde 3.5.6
should be backported

BUT this user isn't talking about trying to run World of Warcraft on
windows 3.1  He's talking about, to hijack your mac analogy running a
piece of software on OSX(Big Cat -1).  Something the whole non-linux
world is able to do - I needn't update windows every 6 months, I
needn't update OSX every 6 months to use the latest software(as far as
I've heard).

This is a new user, who hasn't made friends with his approach to this
list, but he was confused by what the Long Term Support version of our
operating system offered in terms of long term support.  Perhaps we
should take that away with us and work out whether this guy is just
dim or whether these issues aren't made clear to new users.

There is allot of /basic/ information about Linux which isn't handed
to the new user on a plate when, in my opinion it should be.  Perhaps
this is yet another example of this.


James



On 1/29/07, Art Alexion <art.alexion at verizon.net> wrote:
> This is tiresome nonsense.  Try running iTunes on Win9x -- can't do it.  Or
> the latest Turbo Tax for that matter.  Try running any win32 software on
> win3.1.  For that matter try running OS X apps on MacOS 9.x -- can't do it.
>
> This is just how operating systems with shared libraries work.
>
> If you want to run the same OS version for 5+ years without a choice of
> upgrading to something truly different, stick with Windows.  If you want THE
> CHOICE of frequent upgrades, Ubuntu is one of many Linux choices.
>
>
>
> On Monday 29 January 2007 04:26, Donn wrote:
> > > Donn <donn.ingle at gmail.com> writes:
> > > > I reckon this upgrade treadmill should not be hidden from new users. I
> > > > don't find any clear public explanation about this unusual fact of
> > > > life on the Ubuntu site, nor anywhere else really.
> > >
> > > In the About Ubuntu section of http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu, on the
> > > first line:
> > > "Ubuntu is a free, open source Linux-based operating system that starts
> > > with the breadth of Debian and adds regular releases (every six months)"
> > > How much clearer can they make it?
> >
> > John,
> > I have learnt a lot more about Gnu/Linux in the last 4 days than I have in
> > the last 4 years, and I am clear on why the latest apps won't run on "old"
> > distros -- not crystal clear, but I have the big picture.
> >
> > Still, I must comment on your reply above. If you spoke that quote aloud to
> > a Windows user they would look at you as if you had just spoke Klingon.
> > Linux? Debian? Breadth of Debian? The regular releases part would not
> > clarify an already wildly confused start.
> >
> > What I am saying is that users use apps not Windows, not Gnu/Linux, not Mac
> > O/S etc. They use the apps they need and they like to keep using the latest
> > version of those apps. The "upgrade treadmill" I refer to is not made clear
> > by that quote at all. I am sorry, but normal people don't come to some
> > mystical understanding about the realities of Gnu\Linux by reading
> > something like that -- it is not clear at all.
> >
> > Something like this should be said, to maintain integrity:
> > "Ubuntu is a free, open source operating system. It makes many applications
> > available at no cost during each of its 6 monthly releases. New versions of
> > applications like Firefox, Thunderbird and Open Office to name but a few
> > will be available at each upgrade. You should be aware that should you wish
> > to upgrade to a new version of a particular application, you may have to
> > upgrade to the latest release of Ubuntu; for technical reasons many new
> > applications cannot be run from older releases of Ubuntu."
> >
> > Now I ain't no copywriter and that can be made shorter, but the elemental
> > confession about the "lifetime" of applications on Ubuntu ought to be
> > spelled-out because it's vital information.
> >
> > If Ubuntu is going to aim at the Windows user then they can't gloss-over
> > the one thing that a Windows user is going to expect; applications of any
> > version can run on any Windows of any version.
> >
> >
> > /d
>