Ubuntu Versions

[Carlos Ribeiro]

Michael,

I think you are missing the point. If you want something stable and
polished, with the highest stability possible, you should use only the long
term support releases, which are not released every six months, but have a
much longer life. The intermediate versions are great but aren't promised to
work for everyone "at the highest level"; they are suited for people that
don't mind to experiment a little bit with stuff, and are very important to
check if the project is going as planned. Projects that have long release
cicles increase the chance that something may go really wrong (see the
Longhorn/Vista history) leaving little time for correction. By having a very
useful and "nearly stable" release every six monthts, that works for 99.5%
of all users, Ubuntu keeps the ball running and still have time to react and
adapt to new situations that may arise - a change in tech direction, a
change in priority, etc.

Carlos Ribeiro

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 13:08, Michael Bruttel <m.bruttel at gmail.com> wrote:

> I recently tried to updgrade from Jaunty to 9.10
>
> The ubpgrade installation went ok but:
>
> Slower start with a "fancy" login, I liked the look and feel of jaunty
> much better. Boottime increased from 35 to 1Minute 10Sec under 9.10.
>
> IBM Thinkpad T40p Ati 9000.
> 3d Screensavers with good performance, but crash every second time ?
>
> I think stability is much more important than superfast boottimes
> anyway. Jaunty for me was a leap forward, 9.10 is no improvement for me.
> I hope you take Jaunty again, and try to really improve that.
>
> What I would like to see, is a "cleaned up menu navigation, which works
> with categories and does not dropdown the whole List right away for
> example in preferences, which I find disturbing.
>
> What I liked in OSX and Windows is the possibility to navigate through
> menus of the system over an explorerlike window.
>
> Don't fool yourself and think you bring out a new OS-version every year,
> users like me get annoyed to install software that has new bugs every
> season, thats rubbish. Take your time have a break overthink it, maybe
> in an interval of three years, then come out with a great new product.
> Look at Microsoft, between 2002 and now they didnt manage to bring out a
> great new version, it took them 7 or 8 years and those development crews
> and resources are slightly bigger than yours I guess.
>
> I am completely happy with a really improved Version in the beginning of
> 2013. I would also like to be a Betatester when I see interesting
> innovation of ubuntu. But I dont't like to be a Betatester of a final
> Version Anymore.
> Again Jaunty was a really a great OS and its a pitty you only support it
> until the end of this Year, i am a bit pissed off.
> I think, an OS should surviva a PC-lifecycle which I would say is 4
> Years, so like XP, a good OS survives this period, or something is not
> well engineered. I am not impressed by faster startuptimes by a few
> seconds at all, what counts is Stability Stability and again Stability
> in every respect, which means, you cant change the System every year and
> think all The Hardware will work with it every time a new version comes
> out.
> By the way people get annoyed, there is no point in changing your System
> every year, maybe 3 thats ok for me, AMEN.
>
> Many thanks to the guys who fixed the Atheros wireless.
> And never forget the people with low-end Systems.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
>



-- 
Carlos Ribeiro
Consultoria em Projetos
twitter: http://twitter.com/carribeiro
blog: http://rascunhosrotos.blogspot.com
mail: carribeiro at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20100207/3dc5c382/attachment.htm