Is 9.04 Ready?

[BluShift]

Is 9.04 ready for use on a production machine? I was going to give it 3 months and now here I am asking the same question. With the new version of X.org and all this new spiffy polish, is it ready? I'm also considering downgrading from 8.10 to 8.04. I have heard that Hardy is very very stable... although I have alot of troubles with hardware acceleration (hoping 9.04 will improve on this) and like to be on the bleeding edge (provided it's reasonably stable). What are your thoughts? Downgrade or upgrade?

[snek]

Is 9.04 ready for use on a production machine? I was going to give it 3 months and now here I am asking the same question. With the new version of X.org and all this new spiffy polish, is it ready? I'm also considering downgrading from 8.10 to 8.04. I have heard that Hardy is very very stable... although I have alot of troubles with hardware acceleration (hoping 9.04 will improve on this) and like to be on the bleeding edge (provided it's reasonably stable). What are your thoughts? Downgrade or upgrade?

It sort of depends what you use your machine for and how much of a Ubuntu nut you are :)
I currently run 3 Jaunty workstations and 3 Hardy servers. I prefer to stick to Hardy for servers since it's, like you said, rock-solid. Jaunty is just fine for the worktstations, I have absolutely no complaints about it so far.

You mention hardware acceleration, what kind do you mean? 3D or 2D?
Don't think so much has changed between the versions, but they DID add DKMS which allows you to reinstall graphics drivers etc in a much easier fashion, especially if you upgrade your kernel. Although, I think you can install DKMS under Hardy as well.

One thing I do know is that I prefer 9.04 (Jaunty) to 8.10 (Intrepid) any day!

[Mark Phelps]

... although I have alot of troubles with hardware acceleration (hoping 9.04 will improve on this)
If by this, you mean Video hardware acceleration, 9.04 no longer does that for legacy ATI cards/chipsets and there are problems with some Intel drivers. So, depending on what video card/chipset you have, 9.04 could actually make the situation worse, not better.

[BluShift]

Well ok... would the 945GM chipset be considered legacy? I've kind of accepted the fact that Intel driver support sucks, so if there is no difference so be it. I'm mostly just curious if it is a.) stable enough and b.) software is still functional

[vdawg]

I'd downgrade. The Server LTS has 5 years of support and the Desktop LTS 3 years. In the next 2 years you'll find yourself forced to upgrade and if the newer releases break some legacy stuff you're stuck in no man's land. My vote goes to stability anyday.

[Mark Phelps]

Well ok... would the 945GM chipset be considered legacy? I've kind of accepted the fact that Intel driver support sucks, so if there is no difference so be it. I'm mostly just curious if it is a.) stable enough and b.) software is still functional

Sorry, don't know the specifics regarding individual Intel chipsets, but if you search this or the Video subforum for that chipset, you may find some posts that deal with the specifics. Just have seen a LOT of complaints from folks with Intel chipsets which worked fine UNTIL they upgraded to 9.04.