10 ms·

Ubuntu 12.10 Quantal Quetzal released

189 points by shared4you 14y ago

timmillwood 14y ago
Might have to go and work from another computer as 12.10 installs on this one. Clean install really overdue as this machine started as Xubuntu 11.04 and is now Ubuntu 12.10 Beta.
- tresta 14y ago
  If you have kept the beta up to date you're already on 12.10.
  - timmillwood 14y ago
    Right, but it's a little buggy due to being a mashup of Xubuntu 11.04 and Ubuntu 12.10.
thomaslutz 14y ago
Switched to Mint with MATE (Gnome2 Fork) and am not looking back. Give it a try, it's worth it.
- rquirk 14y ago
  So I use Ubuntu 12.04 on my laptop and Linux Mint Debian Edition on the desktop. LMDE is OK, but I'm not sure Mate is a long-term solution. On the one hand it is great that they have maintained the old look and feel of Gnome 2, but forking so much "crap" seems like a huge wasted effort. For example the configuration changes - instead of gconf, you now have mateconf, which uses a whole other set of files that are not compatible with gnome. So switching from an old Gnome desktop (say) to Mint+Mate means your settings are all lost, even though the forked code between gnome2 and mate is really close. On a default LMDE install it adds gnome-terminal and mate-terminal, so on the menus you have 2 "Terminal" entries. Ditto for a load of other core applications that are in Gnome and Mate - stuff like Archive Manager, screenshot, and document viewer. Was there really a need to fork file-roller? Debian have already pretty much said "no" to including Mate - the reason being that the duplication and resuscitation of crufty old code is not a good idea. It would be better, the say, to work with Gnome upstream to get a more Gnome2-ish feel in Gnome3. I think Cinnamon is in Debian or will be shortly, which probably has a brighter future. Anyway, for now I'm happy with Mate - it works fine and didn't need any tweaking to get to a usable state, compare that to Gnome3 classic-session on Ubuntu 12.04 which I spent weeks tweaking and patching (!) to get back to a state that worked like 10.04 - but I think its days are numbered. The Mint devs alone can't keep a full-on Gnome2-fork alive forever, it has too many duplicated applications that are already fine in base Gnome, and eventually I think Cinnamon will be the only viable option for Mint.
vibrunazo 14y ago
One word of advice, don't do the automatic upgrade, do a full reinstall instead. After trying that for the last 5 or so releases. Always thinking that this time they fixed it. I'm not falling for that again. You'll see, as always, some reports of people saying they tried and it worked. But be careful, it's a trap!
- tresta 14y ago
  I really don't understand why the upgrade seems to be so hit and miss between people. My current laptop has been on the same ubuntu install since (at least) 10.04. I've even upgraded to beta versions a couple of times and the only problem I've ever had was when I upgraded to the 12.10 beta and it ran out of disk space in the middle of the install. But that was recoverable. Of course, this comment might be a trap. There's only one way to find out...
  - takluyver 14y ago
    Likewise, upgrades have always worked for me. I think I took one computer through about 5 consecutive versions without reinstalling it. Maybe it depends on hardware...
  - tomrod 14y ago
    For me, I put on nonstandard software that gets removed. Sometimes software sources aren't preserved--especially if I have messed with GUI configurations.
  - strictfp 14y ago
    Me too, upgraded from 7.04 to 12.04 without major problems.
  - ekianjo 14y ago
    I had problems updating from 9.04 to 9.10 -> I remember it messed up my system so bad I had to reinstall it from scratch. After that, i moved to Mint for a while, and then tried Ubuntu again for 11.10 then did the update to 12.04 without any issue. I will try upgrading to 12.10 within the system again this time.
digisign 14y ago
It's not yet released and ars didn't say it was released, rather: Ars has its hands on 12.10 and we'll be bringing you a full review within the next couple of weeks.
- regularfry 14y ago
  Maybe we are reading a different article: Today, Canonical has released version 12.10 of its Ubuntu Linux distribution, code-named "Quantal Quetzal" after a ridiculously awesome-looking bird.
  - aes256 14y ago
    Yet it hasn't actually been released. The download links on the website all point to 12.04, and 12.10 is not available through the update manager yet either. Looks like Ars jumped the gun.
    - EwanToo 14y ago
      It's in the update manager, I ran the upgrade a couple of hours ago on a VM on my work PC, worked fine.
      - aes256 14y ago
        I can only get it to show up in update manager as a developer release, with a warning that it is still in beta. This is using both the main and my local archive...
fiveliterstang 14y ago
Been using it a couple weeks now, it's actually not too bad. Trying to get used to Unity as it's obviously not going anywhere. I'm still not a fan but it is improving.
- thomaslutz 14y ago
  If you liked Gnome2, try MATE with Linux Mint.
  - rk0567 14y ago
    what about Cinnamon ? that is cool too.
- chousuke 14y ago
  How's the performace? I tried a beta of Quantal a couple weeks ago and Unity was so slow compared to vanilla Gnome that it wasn't really usable (I have a Radeon HD 3000 card, using the FOSS driver). I hope it's not that bad in the actual release.
  - rk0567 14y ago
    I had the same experience until I enabled the proprietary driver for NVIDIA graphics card.
- andyking 14y ago
  I couldn't get used to Unity and didn't want to stick with the increasingly antiquated and patched-up 10.04, so I made the switch a while ago at home to Xubuntu. It's not the perfect desktop, but I've got it almost how I want it, and it largely gets out of my way. I particularly enjoy the two-second login time.
- timmillwood 14y ago
  Unity has really grown on me, when it first came out I switched to Xfce, also train Mate, Cinnamon, Gnome3 and KDE, they all seem a little dated now compared to Unity.
- 14y ago
rlpb 14y ago
As of 0842 UTC, it's not actually released yet. The link still refers to 12.04. Ars appear to have jumped the gun a little.
- factorialboy 14y ago
  Yep .. headline got me excited for a moment .. :-S
- blaze33 14y ago
  1109 UTC, not yet released. Kind of surprised there's no countdown this time ^^
- blaze33 14y ago
  1500 UTC, the ubuntu.com homepage isn't updated but the 12.10 release is now available for download at http://releases.ubuntu.com/quantal/ http://releases.ubuntu.com/quantal/
meaty 14y ago
Have they turned the Amazon stuff off by default or are they giving an option to do so at install time? If not, I will not be downloading this.
- rk0567 14y ago
  `sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping`
  - takluyver 14y ago
    There's now a proper option in the privacy settings to disable remote searches.
    - trhtrsh 14y ago
      It really should be part of the installation questionnaire.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  You can disable it after installation.
  - meaty 14y ago
    I want the option to opt out before I'm forcibly opted in and can possibly trigger the functionality. Even Windows 8 religiously asks you these questions at first boot after installation.
    - patrickaljord 14y ago
      Windows 8 isn't gratis, you can complain but you can't demand anything from a free (as in gratis) product.
      - meaty 14y ago
        You can't demand anything from a non-free product either so I don't get what the difference is. However, I can not use it which is how I've decided to deal with this issue.
pimentel 14y ago
"includes Python 3.2.3 as standard" Won't this have any impact on existing python installers, designed to be used with python 2.x?
- paol 14y ago
  Python 2.x is still available, this just means it's not installed by default.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- pajju 14y ago
  If its only coming with 3.2.3 it will break many existing tools.(think django) If you see MAC, it does come with lower versions of python too, so it supports older python projects.(python2.7, python2.5 based and doesn't break the system) Latest Ubuntu might well come even with lower versions of python too - as many Ubuntu apps and tools itself use the lower versions of python. But the default python will be 3.2.3 To use the right version of python we have to - Manually install older versions if it doesn't have one. And do symbolic Linking the installed versions to /usr/bin and set $PATH appropriately for the correct Python version we need. Just use them as python2.7 python2.5 python2.6 while calling your scripts. Also see virtualenv.
  - takluyver 14y ago
    It will still be really easy to have Python 2 & 3 installed side by side, and "python" will still be Python 2. So you don't need to do any symlinking or messing with $PATH. I think Ars misunderstood, as well: 12.10 has both Python 2 and 3 by default. They're working towards dropping Python 2 from the default install, but it's not there yet. When they do, it will just be an "apt-get install python" away.
  - vilgax 14y ago
    I run a django based website, and this upgrade didn't break anything. "/usr/bin/python" still refers to Python 2.X instead of Python 3.X.
lhnn 14y ago
Everyone has their own preferred setup, and that's great! It's part of what makes FOSS great: Your choice. My choice is Xubuntu. I've been using Xubuntu on my laptop for the past 6 months, and the 12.10 beta for the past two. The link below is my tasklist after install to really make Xubuntu shine. Oh! And now with updates to the Ubiquity installer, FDE can be done with the GUI instead of fiddling with the debian-installer text partitioner! http://wiki.cyberfoxfire.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tech:xubuntu_tips http://wiki.cyberfoxfire.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tech:xubuntu_t...
- arocks 14y ago
  Thanks for this. I have been on the lookout for a lightweight OS like Crunchbag to upgrade my desktop from Ubuntu 10.10. Being a intermediate user, I do not want a lot of bells and whistles but appreciate a more responsive system. I manage a lot of Ubuntu servers so I would prefer an Ubuntu development environment as well. In fact, I am seriously considering using a virtual machine for this purpose.
  - autotravis 14y ago
    If you want responsiveness, check out openbox. For intermediate users, the setup isn't difficult.
  - elemenohpee 14y ago
    Lubuntu is also worth checking out.
- BitMastro 14y ago
  I was so fond of Ubuntu before they introduced Unity or Gnome 3. It was so responsive, easy enough for a beginner, yet it was not in the way for an expert user (apart for the lack of regex in the default editor, perhaps). I tried Xubuntu, Kubuntu and other distros, but I kept going back to the default Ubuntu one. I used it as my only OS for years, but now sadly it's the opposite and I boot it only when I need it. I guess I should give up trying to like Ubuntu and start using XFCE instead. Thank you for your list, I will use it to check this desktop environment.
knotz 14y ago
For those who prefer Gnome3 on the desktop instead of Unity, there's the Gnome Ubuntu Remix: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME/ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME/
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
pajju 14y ago
What I loved the most - the integration of webapps as native desktop apps. Awesome addition. This changes the whole game. The HUD will be a search bar for that webapp. Mind = Blown! Worth mentioning, I've used many Linux boxes before, but after using Ubuntu 12.04 from the past 5 months, its the most Productive System I've ever used. And It's only getting better over time. Many thanks for the team that's behind this change.
trotsky 14y ago
I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I actually like the innovations canonical keeps bringing to unity (although I'm not in love with the amazon searches). My problem with it is execution - run gnome shell on the identical hardware and it will always run circles* around unity especially in terms ui responsiveness. Just press the super key after you've been doing something else for a while and start typing - in my experience gnome shell seems to respond almost instantaneously while unity can take as long as several seconds to bring up the default lens on decent hardware. I like a lot of their design decisions like the global menu, dechroming maximized windows, easy custom lenses etc. But the compiz/custom code base just isn't up to the task. Worse, unity is so tied to their non-mainline gui stack that it is a herculean effort to get it to run on anything besides ubuntu, preventing them from getting fixes from outside their ecosystem. I know there is a lot of bad blood these days between gnome and canonical but they really need to bite the bullet and rebase on mutter, gtk3 & gnome shell. Canonical is great at a lot of things, but core performance oriented software just isn't one of them. Let somebody else do the heavy lifting. I haven't gotten a chance to try the gnome shell spin that they're producing this cycle. Can anyone comment on how well its working? My experience trying to go vanilla gnome 3 on ubuntu in the past has been less than stellar, but I really appreciate the ubuntu community and things like launchpad ppas. *250ms-2000ms lag
- morsch 14y ago
  I always thought Unity was all right in general, Compiz in particular has a wealth of functionality that just doesn't exist yet in Gnome3. The Unity dock is very good, particularly the way it deals with multiple application windows (broadly: first click: bring LRU to front, second click: expose all application windows). But I still think the "Lenses" thing is just awful. It's fine for starting a specific application by typing in the name (the most basic "Quicksilver" functionality). It used to be really slow, but I think that's better now. It still sucks for application discovery, which the old hierarchical menu excels at. And the other lenses are mostly just silly: you've got this simplistic interface, and people are trying to shoehorn all kinds of use cases into it. Look at [0] and [1]. Some of those would be much more useful if they weren't limited by the restrictions of the Lens framework (others are just hopeless). Fortunately the lenses are easy enough to ignore. [0] http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/10-unity-lenses-scopes http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/10-unity-lenses-scopes [1] http://askubuntu.com/questions/38772/what-lenses-for-unity-are-available http://askubuntu.com/questions/38772/what-lenses-for-unity-a...
BUGHUNTER 14y ago
what is the Java situation here?
- dignan 14y ago
  Perhaps you could be a bit more clear. What Java situation?
  - nobleach 14y ago
    I'm guessing he/she's asking what JDK/JRE is installed. Since 1.6 still seems to be the default for other OSes.
- sharms 14y ago
  I have been running Java on Ubuntu each release by just downloading directly from Oracle and exporting my JAVA_HOME and PATH variables. This is a pretty clean approach and allows me to use different JVMs for each type of application, and you can use update-alternatives to do it the Ubuntu way
- dschiptsov 14y ago
  What Java?)
RyanMcGreal 14y ago
In the past month or two, I've come around on Unity after hiding out in gnome-session-fallback and then cinnamon. With the launch bar icons shrunk to their smallest size and Docky on the bottom, the Unity interface has gotten to the point where it's smooth and usable. Call me a convert, but I decided Unity has gotten to the point where it's easier to work with it than to keep trying to work against it.
- trhtrsh 14y ago
  Well, not quite the level of praise that "it's worth the hassle of installing", but "not worth the hassle of uninstalling" is worth something, I guess.
  - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
    I'm interested to experience what changes 12.10 brings to Unity. I have a hunch that sooner or later, Unity will improve to the point where it meets your former criterion as well as your latter.
nnq 14y ago
How are people's experiences with using Juju based setups on real production servers? Was anyone "lazy" enough to try this? -- EDIT (adding context): the article says about the use-case for Juju "configuring and setting up complex services with lots of application components can still be a bit tricky"... then goes on to give a basic LAMP WordPress setup... the thing is that a LAMP WP setup is neither complex nor it has lots of components, it's basically the "drop dead simplest" case of web app deployment, so they are clearly missing the point using this as an example :|
jjm 14y ago
I question whether it is more profitable to move forward and have what amounts to really good devs build mashups than to go back and focus on OS stability and core functionality (the thing which you arm sales people with when selling to corp, and that provides for greater general user loyalty). The immediate rebuttals for my comment will be (1) user studies, (2) the os is fine, (3) were making money, (4) customers told us. The not so obvious rebuttals will be: (1) someone told us to do these, (2) we've reached user and customer saturation, (3) desktops aren't the rage, (4) core customer/users moved to using server only and were reeling them in to desktop, (5) corporate entities cannot perceive enough value thus all the new mashups. It is this second set which I want to hear discussed and why they are or aren't the case. Basically my guess is that core users are moving away from where these guys are spending money and they think spending more in the area will bring them back. take with a grain of salt but the marketing theory is people when obtaining something (convinced or otherwise) will benefit if product in context serves all their needs and more if possible. That grey area or boundry of core->nice to have is what is in question here. The more they use it, and the more it serves them, the more likely they will return to it (product context). Take with a grain of salt.
yason 14y ago
[Unity] has received a number of additions, all built around the idea of demolishing the walls between local applications and web applications Here's the thing why Ubuntu is on shaky ground these days. The above idea is grand but like everything that tries to be the future of something—in this case computing—it leaks. And leaky things will never take off for real much like leaky abstractions will not hold because the truth will leak out sooner or later, and then the abstraction isn't worth much since you can only trust it superficially. The early Ubuntu and Windows 95 and XP had something in common: they all were built mostly on how the computer worked. These operating systems tried to make the underlying computer available to the user, give or take a few sugar-coatings. And they all pretty much succeeded. Conversely, I think most systems that try to pretend to be something that they aren't will not succeed. Web applications won't become local applications just like that: the user will just see some visible glue that holds some parts together. You've seen it so many times: something comes with great features that only work till you really want some things done, and then it turns out the system doesn't do its magic all the way through. You just see the one kind of magic that has been preprogrammed into it and you've already observed that besides an initial impression, that one kind of magic can't deal with everything you need from the system. Then you can't trust the system anymore since you know there's more available than the system can agree to offer you. Ubuntu is still basically a local installation: some stuff can originate from the cloud but it can not be a grand computing environment that unifies web and local services because it matters that the user has his own local installation. You can't boot Ubuntu from a USB stick and have your environment seamlessly load from the cloud. Something like Android or iOS are much better positioned for seamlessly integrating local and web applications and local and cloud services. Using a tablet interface you don't really have the sense of local vs. web at all: you just have apps and once you sign up another device your apps will be available automatically. This is maybe what Shuttleworth is envisioning with the Unity and his current plans for Ubuntu, but the downside is that the regular Ubuntu desktop will suffer. Ubuntu suffers because it doesn't pay respect to its natural, physical environment that is a local computer. It can be a highly tuned system that takes the most out of your hardware or it can be an ethereal, ubiquitous cloud service that's available regardless of hardware. But not both.
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
Florin_Andrei 14y ago
Getting Ubuntu to work reliably on a laptop that is sometimes docked to a dual-screen setup is a pain. It used to work very well. But recent releases - not so much. I'll give this one a try again (sigh).
- mayneack 14y ago
  No problems here with lenovo t500.
pimeys 14y ago
I've been using 12.10 for several weeks now. The only difference I notice is the new kernel, otherwise my xmonad desktop looks just the same as in 12.04. Although the installation was a bliss. The fastest OS installation I've ever done. Even the boot time is pretty fast, around 6 seconds with my workstation.
leeoniya 14y ago
Juju reminds me of Linode's StackScripts, no?
dschiptsov 14y ago
fglrx xserver module segfaults (at least for me). Without hardware OpenGL it is just a crap. unity-2d-shell eats tons of memory, more than chrome. No wonder when ldd `which unity-2d-shell` |wc -l 93 including Qt and Gtk-3.. idiots. but without running X11 it is nice and fast.) gcc-4.7, linux-3.5.0, python3.2, etc.
jcjmcclean 14y ago
What is likely to be quicker/easier and the best decision in the long term ... Upgrading to 12.10 from 11.10 or moving to Linux Mint? This is for my work machine which I run PHPStorm for web development, virtualbox for CS5 and Chrome and various other apps.

189 points by shared4you 14y ago

Might have to go and work from another computer as 12.10 installs on this one. Clean install really overdue as this machine started as Xubuntu 11.04 and is now Ubuntu 12.10 Beta.

tresta 14y ago
If you have kept the beta up to date you're already on 12.10.
- timmillwood 14y ago
  Right, but it's a little buggy due to being a mashup of Xubuntu 11.04 and Ubuntu 12.10.

thomaslutz 14y ago

Switched to Mint with MATE (Gnome2 Fork) and am not looking back. Give it a try, it's worth it.

rquirk 14y ago
So I use Ubuntu 12.04 on my laptop and Linux Mint Debian Edition on the desktop. LMDE is OK, but I'm not sure Mate is a long-term solution. On the one hand it is great that they have maintained the old look and feel of Gnome 2, but forking so much "crap" seems like a huge wasted effort. For example the configuration changes - instead of gconf, you now have mateconf, which uses a whole other set of files that are not compatible with gnome. So switching from an old Gnome desktop (say) to Mint+Mate means your settings are all lost, even though the forked code between gnome2 and mate is really close. On a default LMDE install it adds gnome-terminal and mate-terminal, so on the menus you have 2 "Terminal" entries. Ditto for a load of other core applications that are in Gnome and Mate - stuff like Archive Manager, screenshot, and document viewer. Was there really a need to fork file-roller? Debian have already pretty much said "no" to including Mate - the reason being that the duplication and resuscitation of crufty old code is not a good idea. It would be better, the say, to work with Gnome upstream to get a more Gnome2-ish feel in Gnome3. I think Cinnamon is in Debian or will be shortly, which probably has a brighter future. Anyway, for now I'm happy with Mate - it works fine and didn't need any tweaking to get to a usable state, compare that to Gnome3 classic-session on Ubuntu 12.04 which I spent weeks tweaking and patching (!) to get back to a state that worked like 10.04 - but I think its days are numbered. The Mint devs alone can't keep a full-on Gnome2-fork alive forever, it has too many duplicated applications that are already fine in base Gnome, and eventually I think Cinnamon will be the only viable option for Mint.

vibrunazo 14y ago

One word of advice, don't do the automatic upgrade, do a full reinstall instead. After trying that for the last 5 or so releases. Always thinking that this time they fixed it. I'm not falling for that again. You'll see, as always, some reports of people saying they tried and it worked. But be careful, it's a trap!

tresta 14y ago
I really don't understand why the upgrade seems to be so hit and miss between people. My current laptop has been on the same ubuntu install since (at least) 10.04. I've even upgraded to beta versions a couple of times and the only problem I've ever had was when I upgraded to the 12.10 beta and it ran out of disk space in the middle of the install. But that was recoverable. Of course, this comment might be a trap. There's only one way to find out...
- takluyver 14y ago
  Likewise, upgrades have always worked for me. I think I took one computer through about 5 consecutive versions without reinstalling it. Maybe it depends on hardware...
- tomrod 14y ago
  For me, I put on nonstandard software that gets removed. Sometimes software sources aren't preserved--especially if I have messed with GUI configurations.
- strictfp 14y ago
  Me too, upgraded from 7.04 to 12.04 without major problems.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  I had problems updating from 9.04 to 9.10 -> I remember it messed up my system so bad I had to reinstall it from scratch. After that, i moved to Mint for a while, and then tried Ubuntu again for 11.10 then did the update to 12.04 without any issue. I will try upgrading to 12.10 within the system again this time.

digisign 14y ago

It's not yet released and ars didn't say it was released, rather: Ars has its hands on 12.10 and we'll be bringing you a full review within the next couple of weeks.

regularfry 14y ago
Maybe we are reading a different article: Today, Canonical has released version 12.10 of its Ubuntu Linux distribution, code-named "Quantal Quetzal" after a ridiculously awesome-looking bird.
- aes256 14y ago
  Yet it hasn't actually been released. The download links on the website all point to 12.04, and 12.10 is not available through the update manager yet either. Looks like Ars jumped the gun.
  - EwanToo 14y ago
    It's in the update manager, I ran the upgrade a couple of hours ago on a VM on my work PC, worked fine.
    - aes256 14y ago
      I can only get it to show up in update manager as a developer release, with a warning that it is still in beta. This is using both the main and my local archive...

fiveliterstang 14y ago

Been using it a couple weeks now, it's actually not too bad. Trying to get used to Unity as it's obviously not going anywhere. I'm still not a fan but it is improving.

thomaslutz 14y ago
If you liked Gnome2, try MATE with Linux Mint.
- rk0567 14y ago
  what about Cinnamon ? that is cool too.
chousuke 14y ago
How's the performace? I tried a beta of Quantal a couple weeks ago and Unity was so slow compared to vanilla Gnome that it wasn't really usable (I have a Radeon HD 3000 card, using the FOSS driver). I hope it's not that bad in the actual release.
- rk0567 14y ago
  I had the same experience until I enabled the proprietary driver for NVIDIA graphics card.
andyking 14y ago
I couldn't get used to Unity and didn't want to stick with the increasingly antiquated and patched-up 10.04, so I made the switch a while ago at home to Xubuntu. It's not the perfect desktop, but I've got it almost how I want it, and it largely gets out of my way. I particularly enjoy the two-second login time.
timmillwood 14y ago
Unity has really grown on me, when it first came out I switched to Xfce, also train Mate, Cinnamon, Gnome3 and KDE, they all seem a little dated now compared to Unity.
14y ago

rlpb 14y ago

As of 0842 UTC, it's not actually released yet. The link still refers to 12.04. Ars appear to have jumped the gun a little.

factorialboy 14y ago
Yep .. headline got me excited for a moment .. :-S
blaze33 14y ago
1109 UTC, not yet released. Kind of surprised there's no countdown this time ^^
blaze33 14y ago
1500 UTC, the ubuntu.com homepage isn't updated but the 12.10 release is now available for download at http://releases.ubuntu.com/quantal/ http://releases.ubuntu.com/quantal/

meaty 14y ago

Have they turned the Amazon stuff off by default or are they giving an option to do so at install time? If not, I will not be downloading this.

rk0567 14y ago
`sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping`
- takluyver 14y ago
  There's now a proper option in the privacy settings to disable remote searches.
  - trhtrsh 14y ago
    It really should be part of the installation questionnaire.
ekianjo 14y ago
You can disable it after installation.
- meaty 14y ago
  I want the option to opt out before I'm forcibly opted in and can possibly trigger the functionality. Even Windows 8 religiously asks you these questions at first boot after installation.
  - patrickaljord 14y ago
    Windows 8 isn't gratis, you can complain but you can't demand anything from a free (as in gratis) product.
    - meaty 14y ago
      You can't demand anything from a non-free product either so I don't get what the difference is. However, I can not use it which is how I've decided to deal with this issue.

pimentel 14y ago

"includes Python 3.2.3 as standard" Won't this have any impact on existing python installers, designed to be used with python 2.x?

paol 14y ago
Python 2.x is still available, this just means it's not installed by default.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
pajju 14y ago
If its only coming with 3.2.3 it will break many existing tools.(think django) If you see MAC, it does come with lower versions of python too, so it supports older python projects.(python2.7, python2.5 based and doesn't break the system) Latest Ubuntu might well come even with lower versions of python too - as many Ubuntu apps and tools itself use the lower versions of python. But the default python will be 3.2.3 To use the right version of python we have to - Manually install older versions if it doesn't have one. And do symbolic Linking the installed versions to /usr/bin and set $PATH appropriately for the correct Python version we need. Just use them as python2.7 python2.5 python2.6 while calling your scripts. Also see virtualenv.
- takluyver 14y ago
  It will still be really easy to have Python 2 & 3 installed side by side, and "python" will still be Python 2. So you don't need to do any symlinking or messing with $PATH. I think Ars misunderstood, as well: 12.10 has both Python 2 and 3 by default. They're working towards dropping Python 2 from the default install, but it's not there yet. When they do, it will just be an "apt-get install python" away.
- vilgax 14y ago
  I run a django based website, and this upgrade didn't break anything. "/usr/bin/python" still refers to Python 2.X instead of Python 3.X.

lhnn 14y ago

Everyone has their own preferred setup, and that's great! It's part of what makes FOSS great: Your choice. My choice is Xubuntu. I've been using Xubuntu on my laptop for the past 6 months, and the 12.10 beta for the past two. The link below is my tasklist after install to really make Xubuntu shine. Oh! And now with updates to the Ubiquity installer, FDE can be done with the GUI instead of fiddling with the debian-installer text partitioner! http://wiki.cyberfoxfire.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tech:xubuntu_tips http://wiki.cyberfoxfire.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tech:xubuntu_t...

arocks 14y ago
Thanks for this. I have been on the lookout for a lightweight OS like Crunchbag to upgrade my desktop from Ubuntu 10.10. Being a intermediate user, I do not want a lot of bells and whistles but appreciate a more responsive system. I manage a lot of Ubuntu servers so I would prefer an Ubuntu development environment as well. In fact, I am seriously considering using a virtual machine for this purpose.
- autotravis 14y ago
  If you want responsiveness, check out openbox. For intermediate users, the setup isn't difficult.
- elemenohpee 14y ago
  Lubuntu is also worth checking out.
BitMastro 14y ago
I was so fond of Ubuntu before they introduced Unity or Gnome 3. It was so responsive, easy enough for a beginner, yet it was not in the way for an expert user (apart for the lack of regex in the default editor, perhaps). I tried Xubuntu, Kubuntu and other distros, but I kept going back to the default Ubuntu one. I used it as my only OS for years, but now sadly it's the opposite and I boot it only when I need it. I guess I should give up trying to like Ubuntu and start using XFCE instead. Thank you for your list, I will use it to check this desktop environment.

knotz 14y ago

For those who prefer Gnome3 on the desktop instead of Unity, there's the Gnome Ubuntu Remix: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME/ https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME/

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

pajju 14y ago

What I loved the most - the integration of webapps as native desktop apps. Awesome addition. This changes the whole game. The HUD will be a search bar for that webapp. Mind = Blown! Worth mentioning, I've used many Linux boxes before, but after using Ubuntu 12.04 from the past 5 months, its the most Productive System I've ever used. And It's only getting better over time. Many thanks for the team that's behind this change.

trotsky 14y ago

I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I actually like the innovations canonical keeps bringing to unity (although I'm not in love with the amazon searches). My problem with it is execution - run gnome shell on the identical hardware and it will always run circles* around unity especially in terms ui responsiveness. Just press the super key after you've been doing something else for a while and start typing - in my experience gnome shell seems to respond almost instantaneously while unity can take as long as several seconds to bring up the default lens on decent hardware. I like a lot of their design decisions like the global menu, dechroming maximized windows, easy custom lenses etc. But the compiz/custom code base just isn't up to the task. Worse, unity is so tied to their non-mainline gui stack that it is a herculean effort to get it to run on anything besides ubuntu, preventing them from getting fixes from outside their ecosystem. I know there is a lot of bad blood these days between gnome and canonical but they really need to bite the bullet and rebase on mutter, gtk3 & gnome shell. Canonical is great at a lot of things, but core performance oriented software just isn't one of them. Let somebody else do the heavy lifting. I haven't gotten a chance to try the gnome shell spin that they're producing this cycle. Can anyone comment on how well its working? My experience trying to go vanilla gnome 3 on ubuntu in the past has been less than stellar, but I really appreciate the ubuntu community and things like launchpad ppas. *250ms-2000ms lag

morsch 14y ago
I always thought Unity was all right in general, Compiz in particular has a wealth of functionality that just doesn't exist yet in Gnome3. The Unity dock is very good, particularly the way it deals with multiple application windows (broadly: first click: bring LRU to front, second click: expose all application windows). But I still think the "Lenses" thing is just awful. It's fine for starting a specific application by typing in the name (the most basic "Quicksilver" functionality). It used to be really slow, but I think that's better now. It still sucks for application discovery, which the old hierarchical menu excels at. And the other lenses are mostly just silly: you've got this simplistic interface, and people are trying to shoehorn all kinds of use cases into it. Look at [0] and [1]. Some of those would be much more useful if they weren't limited by the restrictions of the Lens framework (others are just hopeless). Fortunately the lenses are easy enough to ignore. [0] http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/10-unity-lenses-scopes http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/01/10-unity-lenses-scopes [1] http://askubuntu.com/questions/38772/what-lenses-for-unity-are-available http://askubuntu.com/questions/38772/what-lenses-for-unity-a...

BUGHUNTER 14y ago

what is the Java situation here?

dignan 14y ago
Perhaps you could be a bit more clear. What Java situation?
- nobleach 14y ago
  I'm guessing he/she's asking what JDK/JRE is installed. Since 1.6 still seems to be the default for other OSes.
sharms 14y ago
I have been running Java on Ubuntu each release by just downloading directly from Oracle and exporting my JAVA_HOME and PATH variables. This is a pretty clean approach and allows me to use different JVMs for each type of application, and you can use update-alternatives to do it the Ubuntu way
dschiptsov 14y ago
What Java?)

RyanMcGreal 14y ago

In the past month or two, I've come around on Unity after hiding out in gnome-session-fallback and then cinnamon. With the launch bar icons shrunk to their smallest size and Docky on the bottom, the Unity interface has gotten to the point where it's smooth and usable. Call me a convert, but I decided Unity has gotten to the point where it's easier to work with it than to keep trying to work against it.

trhtrsh 14y ago
Well, not quite the level of praise that "it's worth the hassle of installing", but "not worth the hassle of uninstalling" is worth something, I guess.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  I'm interested to experience what changes 12.10 brings to Unity. I have a hunch that sooner or later, Unity will improve to the point where it meets your former criterion as well as your latter.

nnq 14y ago

How are people's experiences with using Juju based setups on real production servers? Was anyone "lazy" enough to try this? -- EDIT (adding context): the article says about the use-case for Juju "configuring and setting up complex services with lots of application components can still be a bit tricky"... then goes on to give a basic LAMP WordPress setup... the thing is that a LAMP WP setup is neither complex nor it has lots of components, it's basically the "drop dead simplest" case of web app deployment, so they are clearly missing the point using this as an example :|

jjm 14y ago

I question whether it is more profitable to move forward and have what amounts to really good devs build mashups than to go back and focus on OS stability and core functionality (the thing which you arm sales people with when selling to corp, and that provides for greater general user loyalty). The immediate rebuttals for my comment will be (1) user studies, (2) the os is fine, (3) were making money, (4) customers told us. The not so obvious rebuttals will be: (1) someone told us to do these, (2) we've reached user and customer saturation, (3) desktops aren't the rage, (4) core customer/users moved to using server only and were reeling them in to desktop, (5) corporate entities cannot perceive enough value thus all the new mashups. It is this second set which I want to hear discussed and why they are or aren't the case. Basically my guess is that core users are moving away from where these guys are spending money and they think spending more in the area will bring them back. take with a grain of salt but the marketing theory is people when obtaining something (convinced or otherwise) will benefit if product in context serves all their needs and more if possible. That grey area or boundry of core->nice to have is what is in question here. The more they use it, and the more it serves them, the more likely they will return to it (product context). Take with a grain of salt.

yason 14y ago

[Unity] has received a number of additions, all built around the idea of demolishing the walls between local applications and web applications Here's the thing why Ubuntu is on shaky ground these days. The above idea is grand but like everything that tries to be the future of something—in this case computing—it leaks. And leaky things will never take off for real much like leaky abstractions will not hold because the truth will leak out sooner or later, and then the abstraction isn't worth much since you can only trust it superficially. The early Ubuntu and Windows 95 and XP had something in common: they all were built mostly on how the computer worked. These operating systems tried to make the underlying computer available to the user, give or take a few sugar-coatings. And they all pretty much succeeded. Conversely, I think most systems that try to pretend to be something that they aren't will not succeed. Web applications won't become local applications just like that: the user will just see some visible glue that holds some parts together. You've seen it so many times: something comes with great features that only work till you really want some things done, and then it turns out the system doesn't do its magic all the way through. You just see the one kind of magic that has been preprogrammed into it and you've already observed that besides an initial impression, that one kind of magic can't deal with everything you need from the system. Then you can't trust the system anymore since you know there's more available than the system can agree to offer you. Ubuntu is still basically a local installation: some stuff can originate from the cloud but it can not be a grand computing environment that unifies web and local services because it matters that the user has his own local installation. You can't boot Ubuntu from a USB stick and have your environment seamlessly load from the cloud. Something like Android or iOS are much better positioned for seamlessly integrating local and web applications and local and cloud services. Using a tablet interface you don't really have the sense of local vs. web at all: you just have apps and once you sign up another device your apps will be available automatically. This is maybe what Shuttleworth is envisioning with the Unity and his current plans for Ubuntu, but the downside is that the regular Ubuntu desktop will suffer. Ubuntu suffers because it doesn't pay respect to its natural, physical environment that is a local computer. It can be a highly tuned system that takes the most out of your hardware or it can be an ethereal, ubiquitous cloud service that's available regardless of hardware. But not both.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

Florin_Andrei 14y ago

Getting Ubuntu to work reliably on a laptop that is sometimes docked to a dual-screen setup is a pain. It used to work very well. But recent releases - not so much. I'll give this one a try again (sigh).

mayneack 14y ago
No problems here with lenovo t500.

pimeys 14y ago

I've been using 12.10 for several weeks now. The only difference I notice is the new kernel, otherwise my xmonad desktop looks just the same as in 12.04. Although the installation was a bliss. The fastest OS installation I've ever done. Even the boot time is pretty fast, around 6 seconds with my workstation.

leeoniya 14y ago

Juju reminds me of Linode's StackScripts, no?

dschiptsov 14y ago

fglrx xserver module segfaults (at least for me). Without hardware OpenGL it is just a crap. unity-2d-shell eats tons of memory, more than chrome. No wonder when ldd `which unity-2d-shell` |wc -l 93 including Qt and Gtk-3.. idiots. but without running X11 it is nice and fast.) gcc-4.7, linux-3.5.0, python3.2, etc.

jcjmcclean 14y ago

What is likely to be quicker/easier and the best decision in the long term ... Upgrading to 12.10 from 11.10 or moving to Linux Mint? This is for my work machine which I run PHPStorm for web development, virtualbox for CS5 and Chrome and various other apps.