Snap is what broke it for me also – the breaking point was when Cypress suddenly stopped working on Ubuntu and on Ubuntu only, and to no fault of their own – Ubuntu just changed something about their Chromium, either moved it to Snap all of a sudden or just updated the Snap (which updates automatically). Made me realize that my OS is failing at just getting out of the way and letting me do my job.
Moved to Pop_OS on the desktop and Debian Sid on the laptop. In retrospect I should’ve just gone Debian with both.
Yeah I don’t like the snap stuff. What has been your experience with Debian coming from Ubuntu?
I installed Debian on a machine maybe 5-8 years ago and it worked more or less fine. But there was one issue which I think Ubuntu handled smoothly, probably some graphics thing or an installer. I think I also got used to newer packages, where at the time Debian had very old packages.
I want to give it another try after all the snap stuff.
What has been your experience with Debian coming from Ubuntu?
IMO Debian is cleaner. By default it has fewer bells and whistles. My systems are lean. I prefer them to allocate resources for my workloads, instead of giving them away to some snaps (for ex, to let them check their updates periodically).
I don’t like when upgrades are forced on me by Canonical’s team. I like to be in control of my upgrade schedule. It lets me clearly see what’s going on with my systems.
But there was one issue which I think Ubuntu handled smoothly, probably some graphics thing or an installer.
Yes, sometimes recent video controllers (esp.closed source ones like nvidia) require non-free repo.
If it’s still not enough you can always build your own kernel.
BTW recent kernels have improved support of AMD hardware quite significantly. I see no point in buying nvidia, taking into account their hostile attitude to the Linux community.
I think I also got used to newer packages, where at the time Debian had very old packages.
This point is valid. Stable Debian is behind Ubuntu in most of the cases. But there are testing and backports Debian repos available, so if someone wishes they can run more recent software.
I personally prefer to run stable branch with backports.
WRT the newer packages, I think nix/guix(my preference) is the future. Ability of functional package managers to tap into the upstream repo and keep your software up to date, or pin it to the specific git hash, or roll the system’s state back is very powerful.
WRT the newer packages, I think nix/guix(my preference) is the future. Ability of functional package managers to tap into the upstream repo and keep your software up to date, or pin it to the specific git hash, or roll the system’s state back is very powerful.
When I was regularly using desktop Linux, I used to use the ordinary repo packages for most things, and installing nixpkgs alongside for things like ffmpeg. Generally seemed a nice experience, aside from slightly extravagant disk usage.
Today, Canonical released Ubuntu 21.10 – the most productive environment for cloud-native developers and AI/ML innovators across the desktop, devices and cloud.
Getting harder and harder to tell the difference between satire of tech and just regular tech these days.
I have no idea what’s actually in Ubuntu 21.10 except “new stuff” that’s supposedly better for me somehow. I have a very good idea of what’s in OpenBSD 7.0 now.
It’s definitely different, but it does not seem like a good example of release announcement to me. It’s mostly a very long list of changes grouped by area, not even sorted by “how likely is it that people would care”. For instance, “Unlocked the top part of the VM fault handler on i386.” is the first item in the list of kernel improvements…
I find the Debian 11 announcement much better in terms of focusing on the important changes users may care about https://www.debian.org/News/2021/20210814 - though perhaps a few more details would have been interesting.
Heh, I had the opposite reaction. The Ubuntu announcement mentioned a few high level points surrounded by marketing jargon, but the OpenBSD one read like a commit history.
Ubuntu is honestly a great experience for the most part. I think that using Ubuntu + Gnome 3 means you are getting a system that is stabler by the release, and honestly has most all the functionality you would need.
There is some of the Gnome “really obvious feature doesn’t exist in this” (though honestly it’s more a problem when comparing with Mac OS’s built-in software, Windows doesn’t even ship a PDF reader), but I’m able to get work done and not have to struggle with my UI over and over.
I do think that Canonical (and I guess Debian) really shoot themselves in the foot with their package management strategies though. I know a lot of people who stick to LTS releases…. and end up with systems that just don’t get bugfixes because packages don’t end up in the older repos.
For server stuff there’s a lot of logic there, but for the desktop stuff in particular I have fellow users complain to me about issues that were fixed a while back except for the packaging.
Chrome’s rolling release schedule, for all the whining I see in some places, at least for me proved that “release early and often” leads to software that works. Systems software is harder, but I think it’s more because of the lack of muscle-flexing more than anything.
I find that difference works out fine for me - Debian servers and Ubuntu desktops. I use debian server-side because it’s stable and less prone to change/snap etc and so I can plan and feel like I can rely on it more, with less concern about things being changed out from under me, and less attention having to be paid to breakage from unattended upgrades etc; I use Ubuntu if I ever need desktop or laptop installs, because it’s easy and quick to setup and has more useful desktop/GUI stuff, along with much wider availability and more up-to-date tools and packages in the repos by default.
Seems like a reasonable, pragmatic response to me.
I must admit, I am as guilty as anyone in that for years, after Mandriva imploded, I tended to consider that the choices were Debian/Ubuntu family or Fedora/CentOS family. I overlooked openSUSE, which is odd as I ran SUSE Pro back in the day. I suspect that openSUSE Leap as a server has a lot going for it, but people tend to overlook it.
Some time ago I pivoted back to Debian and started slowly phasing out Ubuntu systems I run. The reasons for it were the following:
These release notes have (sadly) just upheld my decision to keep phasing the Ubuntu out.
Snap is what broke it for me also – the breaking point was when Cypress suddenly stopped working on Ubuntu and on Ubuntu only, and to no fault of their own – Ubuntu just changed something about their Chromium, either moved it to Snap all of a sudden or just updated the Snap (which updates automatically). Made me realize that my OS is failing at just getting out of the way and letting me do my job.
Moved to Pop_OS on the desktop and Debian Sid on the laptop. In retrospect I should’ve just gone Debian with both.
Yeah I don’t like the snap stuff. What has been your experience with Debian coming from Ubuntu?
I installed Debian on a machine maybe 5-8 years ago and it worked more or less fine. But there was one issue which I think Ubuntu handled smoothly, probably some graphics thing or an installer. I think I also got used to newer packages, where at the time Debian had very old packages.
I want to give it another try after all the snap stuff.
IMO Debian is cleaner. By default it has fewer bells and whistles. My systems are lean. I prefer them to allocate resources for my workloads, instead of giving them away to some snaps (for ex, to let them check their updates periodically).
I don’t like when upgrades are forced on me by Canonical’s team. I like to be in control of my upgrade schedule. It lets me clearly see what’s going on with my systems.
Yes, sometimes recent video controllers (esp.closed source ones like nvidia) require non-free repo. If it’s still not enough you can always build your own kernel.
BTW recent kernels have improved support of AMD hardware quite significantly. I see no point in buying nvidia, taking into account their hostile attitude to the Linux community.
This point is valid. Stable Debian is behind Ubuntu in most of the cases. But there are testing and backports Debian repos available, so if someone wishes they can run more recent software. I personally prefer to run stable branch with backports.
WRT the newer packages, I think nix/guix(my preference) is the future. Ability of functional package managers to tap into the upstream repo and keep your software up to date, or pin it to the specific git hash, or roll the system’s state back is very powerful.
When I was regularly using desktop Linux, I used to use the ordinary repo packages for most things, and installing nixpkgs alongside for things like ffmpeg. Generally seemed a nice experience, aside from slightly extravagant disk usage.
My 40 years younger self awaits Ubuntu to release 21.12.
21.12 LTS (Turbulent Temple)
I have been wracking my damn brain to figure out how to make a “meek shall inherit the earth” joke, dammit.
nice release, I wish the announcement was less marketing buzzwords galore though.
Holy shit you weren’t joking.
Getting harder and harder to tell the difference between satire of tech and just regular tech these days.
Compare with the OpenBSD 7.0 release announcement: https://www.openbsd.org/70.html
It’s shockingly different for sure!
I have no idea what’s actually in Ubuntu 21.10 except “new stuff” that’s supposedly better for me somehow. I have a very good idea of what’s in OpenBSD 7.0 now.
It’s definitely different, but it does not seem like a good example of release announcement to me. It’s mostly a very long list of changes grouped by area, not even sorted by “how likely is it that people would care”. For instance, “Unlocked the top part of the VM fault handler on i386.” is the first item in the list of kernel improvements…
I find the Debian 11 announcement much better in terms of focusing on the important changes users may care about https://www.debian.org/News/2021/20210814 - though perhaps a few more details would have been interesting.
Heh, I had the opposite reaction. The Ubuntu announcement mentioned a few high level points surrounded by marketing jargon, but the OpenBSD one read like a commit history.
Well, the new OpenBSD 7.0 is the most productive OpenBSD environment for AI/ML innovators and cloud-native developers thus far!
(I guess everything that runs numpy better than before due to a newer compiler with better optimizations qualifies)
there’s always the release notes: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/impish-indri-release-notes/21951
Ubuntu is honestly a great experience for the most part. I think that using Ubuntu + Gnome 3 means you are getting a system that is stabler by the release, and honestly has most all the functionality you would need.
There is some of the Gnome “really obvious feature doesn’t exist in this” (though honestly it’s more a problem when comparing with Mac OS’s built-in software, Windows doesn’t even ship a PDF reader), but I’m able to get work done and not have to struggle with my UI over and over.
I do think that Canonical (and I guess Debian) really shoot themselves in the foot with their package management strategies though. I know a lot of people who stick to LTS releases…. and end up with systems that just don’t get bugfixes because packages don’t end up in the older repos.
For server stuff there’s a lot of logic there, but for the desktop stuff in particular I have fellow users complain to me about issues that were fixed a while back except for the packaging.
Chrome’s rolling release schedule, for all the whining I see in some places, at least for me proved that “release early and often” leads to software that works. Systems software is harder, but I think it’s more because of the lack of muscle-flexing more than anything.
I find that difference works out fine for me - Debian servers and Ubuntu desktops. I use debian server-side because it’s stable and less prone to change/snap etc and so I can plan and feel like I can rely on it more, with less concern about things being changed out from under me, and less attention having to be paid to breakage from unattended upgrades etc; I use Ubuntu if I ever need desktop or laptop installs, because it’s easy and quick to setup and has more useful desktop/GUI stuff, along with much wider availability and more up-to-date tools and packages in the repos by default.
Seems like a reasonable, pragmatic response to me.
I must admit, I am as guilty as anyone in that for years, after Mandriva imploded, I tended to consider that the choices were Debian/Ubuntu family or Fedora/CentOS family. I overlooked openSUSE, which is odd as I ran SUSE Pro back in the day. I suspect that openSUSE Leap as a server has a lot going for it, but people tend to overlook it.
Why is PHP of all things suddenly the headliner?
PHP 8 is much faster. That’s pretty good for something that’s basically old and boring tech nowadays.
Going purely off memory here, but doesn’t Wikipedia run on Ubuntu and use PHP?
PHP is still pretty massive.
also, the next major release 8.1 is about to be released in about a month. I don’t think “all new” is a valid qualifier any more.