It will also be the first version to target a 750 MB ISO image, meaning that it will no longer fit onto a standard CD
Why are they targetting 750MB? Once you've decided to go above the capacity of a CD why restrict yourself to just a little more, rather than say 1GB (for small USB drives) or 4GB (for single layer DVDs).
Ubuntu's live disc creator does support persistent storage. You can have an iso image and then add some of the spare space for the storage. I use this with a 4Gb usb stick myself.
You can also install ubuntu to a stick with 8Gb+ of storage of course.
A bit over 950MiB if you are talking about pure space. Assuming a cluster size of 512 bytes (IIRC FAT32 doesn't need bigger blocks than this until the 2TiB mark) you are going to waste an average of 256 bytes per file (but lets be paranoid a consider the worst case: losing 511 bytes per file. The 10.04 CD contains 1300 files, if we suggest 12.04 is going to double that then you could lose you are only going to drop another Mib or two this way.
So 750 does seem to be an odd figure to aim for. They are not even thinking about people overburning on CDs, IIRC 735MiB is further than you can usually push that. Is there any common storage size that divides nearly neatly into 750MiB chunks?
This is pretty much the outcome of the session at UDS. I don't recall what the final agreement was but the idea is to ratchet things up as developers need it without just tossing everything onto the disc at once.
"Ubuntu 12.04 will be a Long Term Support (LTS) release that will be supported for five years on both the server edition and, for the first time, the desktop edition."
I was under the impression that previous LTS releases did include the desktop version. Is this article wrong or is my memory faulty?
There has previously been the distinction between server and desktop for the LTS support window, even though they are the same distribution just with different default packages selected by the installer (and the server D has the textual installer only, but you can install "desktop" from that or the "alternate" install CD).
I can only assume that the distinction is that they wouldn't guarantee support via security updates for desktop-only packages like OO.o, browsers, and so on (perhaps even GNOME in its entirety), after the first 2.5 years but would guarantee it for packages likely to be installed on a headless server (ssh, Apache, bind, samba, ...)
I use it and like it. I like the way that it gets out of your way when using applications. I'm still getting used to some of the configuration aspects, but I don't spend that much time tinkering with setup, so all told it's a solid win for me.
Last month I was forced to use a netbook for a week and decided to install Ubuntu with Unity on it. I was really impressed with the user experience. I was probably just as efficient (if not more) than on my macbook!
There are two Ubuntu using people in my office who've completely moved to unity and who are happy with it. But there's also third person who thinks it's crap and switched to Mint. Personally, I'm happy running Xubuntu and haven't looked too closely at the whole issue
I decided to try Gnome 3 (still on Ubuntu) and I am more satisfied with that right now. ( also think it's more aesthetically pleasing) I had some issues with the side dock but gnome's version is a little less intrusive.
Used it for half a year then did "sudo apt-get remove unity-desktop && apt-get install xfce-desktop". I dislike the concept of huge sidebars that move around and overlays etc. So I will probably not try it again. Xfce is nice and fast.
I personally enjoy Unity and while it took me a couple of weeks to get used to it, I find it's made me at least 5-10% more productive in the long run.
I would compare it to learning to drive manual transmission. Difficult to get used to at first, but once you've mastered it, automatic will feel awkward and unsafe.
I'm using Unity, and while it stays out of my way for the most part (I use a launcher for everything), I haven't noticed any features that would make me more productive. I'm curious about that now, can you elaborate?
When I say Unity I speak of mainly the Unity Dash (or whatever it's called), and it doesn't just save me time but also demands less mental strain to navigate.
The act of typing a single word, as opposed to browsing through menus of categories and programs, saves me at least 10-15 seconds each time I have to access a program. The only icons I keep in the launcher are Chrome, Terminal, Home, Inkscape and Gimp.
Same for documents. Starting Nautilus, clicking through to a bunch of folders, maybe going back a few times if I took the wrong path is significantly slower for me than just typing a keyword and getting maybe 5 or 6 results one of which is the document I was looking for.
I find this is similar to the functionality of the Spotlight search on the Mac which I also enjoyed.
You must know the exact name of the program's launch command before you type it in the terminal (in Unity I can simply type Music.. or whatever) and of course you must remember to follow the command with an ampersand if you want the app to run in the background and retain the usability of that particular terminal window. But other than that, I agree it's similar.
For me it's easier pressing the "Windows" key and just typing what I need. Not to mention that that key has regained its usefulness which, until Unity came around, hasn't been pressed since I stopped using Windows.
I agree with this but with an important qualification: speed of response. On a netbook (Atom processor), there can be a delay when invoking the Dash with a tap on the Windows key, as there can be on older hardware such as Centrino laptops. The delay reduces after the first invocation in a session. There appears to be 'type ahead' so even in the delay you don't lose the first (and most important) character of a program name. Sort of like Spotlight on older Mac laptops.
On a decent PC, you don't notice the delay anything like as much.
PS: before Unity, I just bound the Windows key so that it invoked dmenu (see 'suckless tools', dwm/dmenu for the minimalist approach to GUIs).
Oh I agree. If the Dash is lagging then I can understand how that can be annoying. My laptop is actually running a couple of generations old Centrino processor (SU9400) but I haven't noticed any slowdowns. I also run Oneiric on my home-built HTPC with an AMD A6-3500 Llano processor and it's also just as responsive.
If there are problems on Atom or other processors then there definitely need to be some optimization done there.
> must remember to follow the command with an ampersand if you want the app to run in the background and retain the usability of that particular terminal window
If you forget to to this from now on, just hit ^Z (to suspend the process) then run `bg' (to put it in the background).
> "pre-releases of Precise Pangolin
are not encouraged for anyone needing a stable system or anyone who is not comfortable running into occasional, even frequent breakage".
From my experience I would say the same of Ubuntu release versions. They can't be counted on for at least 3-6 months after release, and even then bugs other than security are rarely if ever fixed, (though many can be blamed on upstream of course).
Why are they targetting 750MB? Once you've decided to go above the capacity of a CD why restrict yourself to just a little more, rather than say 1GB (for small USB drives) or 4GB (for single layer DVDs).