All Ubuntu releases in recent years end in 04 or 10 because they are released in April or October respectively. The number before the dot refers to the year. So 8.04 was released in April, 2008.
Not all 04 releases are considered "stable". Normal releases have only 18 months of support and they are updated continuously. Stable releases are not. Stable updates are less frequent and usually only deal with security problems, etc. As such you can expect to be running OpenOffice 2.4 until 2011 while Ubuntu 9.04 users will be running OpenOffice 3.0. Stable releases are referred to as LTS which stand for Long Term Support and the desktop version has three years and the server five. Ubuntu 8.04 was LTS and it will expire in April 2011 for the desktop and April 2013 for the server. Ubuntu 8.10 which came out six months after 8.04 expires April 2010 by contrast. LTS releases overlap and the next one is due next spring in April, 2010 one year before the previous one expires (desktop version). Roy Linux: Fast, friendly, flexible and ... free! Support open Source <,*)}}+< Only dead fish go with the flow. 2009/4/1 smr <[email protected]> > > Well, no. I install the updates that get pushed out to me every day, > I don't think I'd be allowed to live it down if I caught an exploit > from an unpatched version of Linux (not to mention I've got a > positively draconian network policy at my university which bans your > MAC address for breaking it, so anti virus and every patch the world > provides as soon as it provides it as a standard operating policy). > Distribution updates are done incrementally on the top of the previous > installation without breaking stride and I aim to upgrade to Jaunty > the day the stable release comes out. > > It was pretty immediately clear that we were talking about different > editions from the outset (you had regular crashes and mine survives > physical bag malfunctions onto pavement and resumes immediately > afterwards) but the differences are vast. I use the regular 32 bit > Ubuntu with a kernel recompiled for my laptop's Pentium M and I also > play pretty free with Compiz plugins, which if it comes from the > supported sources stay working and responsive. It does seem fair > enough to change to another distribution if you want the opposite of > everything Ubuntu wants to provide. > > The x64 is required to address all the memory that OpenOffice needs > comment doesn't fit with my experience - I get by with 1GB and, > firstly, don't use swap but also didn't find OpenOffice would crash > when I was using a 512MB system that did swap. That seems to point to > much more drastic underlying issues than just Cannonical's lesser > adoption of a niche window manager and a relatively, though > increasingly well supported, niche platform. Bearing in mind that > Ubuntu is currently designed around the assumption that you're using > it on something like i386 and with Gnome you've basically decided to > drive upside down on the other side of the road. Suse will probably > work better than Gnome at KDE (since it's the primary system) but will > have a incredibly hard time handling apt. It's a choice you'll just > have to make, my choice of Gnome over KDE dates from the days of Red > Hat Linux, I was turned off by Keramik and simply didn't find it > worked the same way I did and was just operating it rather than > enjoying it. The only application I've found I can't really replace on > Gnome or just download the KDE libs and run that I'd quite like is a > Fuzzy Clock (hardly leading the fight against cancer, tbh) that ties > in the panel and to Google Calendar, beyond that I've been happy. > > The huge success that regular Ubuntu has had has caused an upswell of > debian compatible (and even written-for) software which I currently > can't see changing, it's not dissimilar to how Windows became the > market leader and caused everyone to write for it or get out of the > way. > > On Apr 1, 4:05 pm, yyyc186 <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was running 64-bit 9.01. A 32-bit OS is absolutely useless to me. > > It sounds to me like you turn off (or ignore) the automatic updates. > > That would explain how you are able to be happy. Cannonical has a > > history of releasing updates which are no where near ready for prime > > time. I don't download OS versions. I purchase DVD versions from on- > > disk. They have always been a reliable source. Since one of my > > connections is a satellite with a 300MEG/day limit, downloading an OS > > isn't an option. > > > > I also run KDE because Gnome is from a time when programmers lived in > > caves, ate their young, and fouled their own nest. KDE is a much more > > mature front end. If you need to add a font for a document it is a > > menu option. Until recently to add a font in Gnome you had to copy a > > file here, hack a file there, then find a cryptic command line to > > execute so the font would work. > > > > Picture a 5 gallon pail sitting on a sidewalk surrounded by grass. > > Cannonical pours water from a one gallon pail into the 5 gallon pail. > > The water in the 5 gallon pail is the amount of resources they put > > into the 32-bit Gnome release. Water which is blown by the wind onto > > the sidewalk is the amount of resources they put into KDE. Any water > > which manages to somehow find its way into the grass is the amount of > > resources they put into the 64-bit edition. > > > > I'm guessing you only run the 32-bit Gnome version and you never apply > > the automatic updates. I need to be able to address 8Gig of RAM > > because OpenOffice and other applications don't work when parts of > > them are in the swap file...at least on Ubuntu. In theory I could get > > by with only 6Gig, but why risk it when you can get a pair of 2Gig > > modules shipped to your door for under $50. > > > > On Apr 1, 10:07 am, smr <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Despite my gut instinct of "obvious troll is obvious" this is fair > > > enough, it sounds like you're either running counterfeit Ubuntu ("you > > > wouldn't steal a car") or a very different edition to me. It's very > > > possible to run an edition of Ubuntu which is so bleeding edge it's > > > still having the kinks worked out and I reckon that's what you've > > > stumbled upon. I'm in the suspend your laptop at the end of the day > > > and open the lid the next and continue until you install the next > > > edition group and that really does work for me. I'm aware that I > > > really can't do anything productive to an operating system that's > > > still in testing, that's just not my area of expertise, but I do know > > > that if I stick to the regular, supported kind of Ubuntu release I can > > > keep it working for about 6 months at a time and that's just because I > > > update my distribution given half a chance. > > > > > On 30 Mar, 20:30, yyyc186 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I have completed my migration to SuSE and pretty much advise all > > > > others to try it. Cannonical simply had too unstable of a release > and > > > > a complete lack of control when it came to cranking out patches. > > > > Those last few rounds of kernel updates were the final straw. > > > > > > Gone are the days of 3-5 lockups/crashes per day. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ubuntu Linux" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ubuntulinux?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
