9.10 is a black eye for Ubuntu

Rashkae ubuntu at tigershaunt.com
Fri Nov 6 02:27:18 UTC 2009

thomas wrote:
>  > It's the most stable it's been in 18 months, and it's
>  > working for almost everybody.
> You are not being trufull in this statement. Version 9.04,
> which was the first that I used, was much better. There
> are too many problems to go into details again since so
> many people have mentioned them in their postings. I
> agree with the statement.

9.04 was a disaster by comparison.  KDE updated to KDE4, before it was
ready by far, Amarok destroyed, god help you if you had an Intel graphic
chip and upgraded without taking the warning in release notes to heart..
Early adopters of ext4 having config files truncated to 0 bytes,
followed by a kernel that would lock up when you delete too many files
that wouldn't get patched for months; I could go on.

I love 9.04 personally, but subjectively, to say that 9.04 release was
'better' than 9.10 is a joke.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list