3 ms·

> From my experience, 0.05% of the people who have an Ubuntu x.y chose it because of "stability promises" of the LTS release. Your experience and my experience

> From my experience, 0.05% of the people who have an Ubuntu x.y chose it because of "stability promises" of the LTS release. Your experience and my experience differ greatly, then. I manage around a hundred virtual and bare-metal Ubuntu 18.04 LTS systems. Most of our docker containers (not included in the number above) are based on an Ubuntu 18.04 image because that's what we have standardized our infrastructure around. The LTS choice was an easy one to make. We are too busy focusing on delivering value to the business to spend much time constantly playing around with the underlying technology. We are not early adopters for much of anything (except hobby projects at home) because we need our technology to be an asset to the business rather than a liability. Depending on new and bleeding-edge software for production systems just creates unnecessary risk. We'll probably start thinking about upgrading to 20.04 in six months or so.

jcelerier 6y ago
> We are too busy focusing on delivering value to the business there are a lot more linux users out there than business users
- ddulaney 6y ago
  This disagreement is why multiple distros exist. Ubuntu LTS is a reasonable choice for entities that want stability and are willing to accept the occasional migration cost of upgrading to the next LTS (note: this applies to lots of desktop users as well as businesses). Fedora and Arch are reasonable choices if you want cutting-edge software, but come with risks as software changes under them.
- ricktdotorg 6y ago
  > there are a lot more linux users out there than business users maybe, but there are a LOT more linux servers out there than linux users, if by "linux users" you meant "people running linux on their computers". those servers (and the people that run them) generally require stability. would you care explaining what you mean? is it not fair to say that there are many orders of magnitude more instances of linux running on servers than there are instances of linux running on people's home or work computers? that is indisputable, no?
  - jcelerier 6y ago
    It makes as much sense for me to count individual servers than to count individual docker containers. It's the amount of people administering those systems which matters - having many servers to manage just means that you have to know how to setup automation
dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
> We are not early adopters for much of anything (except hobby projects at home) because we need our technology to be an asset to the business rather than a liability. I'm really glad there are still companies with such values. For some strange reason, these days people equate innovation with using fancy/barely tested tools.

jcelerier 6y ago

> We are too busy focusing on delivering value to the business there are a lot more linux users out there than business users

ddulaney 6y ago
This disagreement is why multiple distros exist. Ubuntu LTS is a reasonable choice for entities that want stability and are willing to accept the occasional migration cost of upgrading to the next LTS (note: this applies to lots of desktop users as well as businesses). Fedora and Arch are reasonable choices if you want cutting-edge software, but come with risks as software changes under them.
ricktdotorg 6y ago
> there are a lot more linux users out there than business users maybe, but there are a LOT more linux servers out there than linux users, if by "linux users" you meant "people running linux on their computers". those servers (and the people that run them) generally require stability. would you care explaining what you mean? is it not fair to say that there are many orders of magnitude more instances of linux running on servers than there are instances of linux running on people's home or work computers? that is indisputable, no?
- jcelerier 6y ago
  It makes as much sense for me to count individual servers than to count individual docker containers. It's the amount of people administering those systems which matters - having many servers to manage just means that you have to know how to setup automation

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago

> We are not early adopters for much of anything (except hobby projects at home) because we need our technology to be an asset to the business rather than a liability. I'm really glad there are still companies with such values. For some strange reason, these days people equate innovation with using fancy/barely tested tools.