PDA

View Full Version : Earlier Versions of Ubuntu



sports fan Matt
May 7th, 2009, 02:17 AM
I was just wondering if anyone was using any earlier versions (earlier then Hardy) of Ubuntu for what ever reason? If you are, I'm intrigued to know why

monsterstack
May 7th, 2009, 02:41 AM
For me, Ubuntu has been getting steadily better with each release. It started with 7.10 not randomly freezing up all the time, which made me repartition my hard-disk to dual-boot Ubuntu alongside Debian, 8.04 working perfectly on my laptop, 8.10 recognising my graphics tablet out-of-the-box, which caused me to make Ubuntu my primary OS, and finally 9.04, which now knows how much battery power my laptop has.

I suppose the only reason to go back to an older Ubuntu would be if I had some monstrously old hardware of the sort you'd find in the 2.24 kernel.

stwschool
May 7th, 2009, 03:17 AM
For me, Ubuntu has been getting steadily better with each release. It started with 7.10 not randomly freezing up all the time, which made me repartition my hard-disk to dual-boot Ubuntu alongside Debian, 8.04 working perfectly on my laptop, 8.10 recognising my graphics tablet out-of-the-box, which caused me to make Ubuntu my primary OS, and finally 9.04, which now knows how much battery power my laptop has.

I suppose the only reason to go back to an older Ubuntu would be if I had some monstrously old hardware of the sort you'd find in the 2.24 kernel.
If you had monstrously old hardware wouldn't you use crunchbang, slitaz or puppy?

myusername
May 7th, 2009, 03:48 AM
because not all old hardware is supported in the newer kernels

HappyFeet
May 7th, 2009, 06:44 AM
because not all old hardware is supported in the newer kernels

Thankfully, Puppy has a "retro" version with an older kernel, specifically for older pc's.

bashveank
May 7th, 2009, 06:49 AM
Thinking of rolling back.
7.04 was the most stable version of Ubuntu on my Linux desktop. 7.10 and 8.04 both made progressions towards instability and a cheap feeling. 9.04 wont even install on my computer yet.

the8thstar
May 7th, 2009, 07:14 AM
I use Jaunty. It works great on the three computers I use.

calvinps
May 7th, 2009, 07:57 AM
There's no point on using older versions of Ubuntu.

Tipped OuT
May 7th, 2009, 08:08 AM
I disagree with that statement. People may want to use older versions because the newer version might of stopped supporting critical hardware that they have, such as graphics card, wifi, sound card, etc.

Irihapeti
May 7th, 2009, 08:46 AM
Ive got Hardy running on three computers: a desktop, an Eeepc 900 and an old Toshiba Satellite A10 that was given to me. It does pretty much all that I want with a bit of tweaking.

If I did end up with a machine that couldn't run Hardy, I think I'd install Puppy with the retro kernel. In fact I had it on an old desktop (given to me) with 128 Mb of RAM. It did fine until the machine decided it didn't like me and refused to boot up any more (DRAM error or something).

skymera
May 7th, 2009, 10:14 AM
I used 7.04 when it first came out.

it was the best version i tried. Fast, easy to use and crashes were rare.

Ubuntu 9.04 is easier to use without a doubt. But it's no way near as good as Feisty was. </3

linux phreak
May 7th, 2009, 10:21 AM
Fiesty fawn was the first ubuntu i tried and i agree with skymera.It was the best ubuntu release.I would say it was near perfect.