Silly to return to 9.10 ?

[zami]

I've been with Ubuntu since 6.x, Dapper Drake. And so far, my favorite, smoothest, least buggy, prettiest, and fastest starting release, was 9.10, Karmic Koala.

I had problems with 10.04, and it's gotten worse with 10.10. And I seem to be troubleshooting something every time I sit at the machine.

Weird startup noises, all sorts of troubles with Plymouth, always restart with an 800x600 resolution, had to wrestle to get things like the battery applet back in the panel, audio problems, wireless driver problems... it's just always something. I don't enjoy Ubuntu like I used to. I've even started looking at different distros, but I'm just not in the mood to relearn all the ins and outs (synaptic vs yum and so forth).

But I'm hesitant to go *back* in editions.

Is this a bad idea?

I'm *hopeful*, that the worse that can happen is I wont like Natty when it's released either, but can stick with Koala while I start looking at other distros. Right? Any risks I'm overlooking on going back to 9.10?

Any advice?

Thanks!

-zami

[koleoptero]

I'd advice you to check Linux Mint Debian Edition. No reason to stay with an outdated distro, there are plenty of solutions out there.

[madjr]

i see no problem in using and older version that has worked for you. heck some people still use windows 2000...

use what works for you.

but dont give other distros the boot, this is probably a good chance to get a few blank cds and try the ones not directly based on ubuntu: pclinuxOS, linuxmint debian, mandriva, opensuse, etc.

On the other hand Natty may work again for you, but you never know when a change to a distro will have problems with your hardware, so is good that we have other options.

[kaldor]

I've been with Ubuntu since 6.x, Dapper Drake. And so far, my favorite, smoothest, least buggy, prettiest, and fastest starting release, was 9.10, Karmic Koala.

I had problems with 10.04, and it's gotten worse with 10.10. And I seem to be troubleshooting something every time I sit at the machine.


That's absolutely hilarious to me, because I consider 9.10 to be Canonical's equivalent to Windows ME. I had nothing but problems and 9.10 lasted less than a week on my laptop.

10.04 improved for me in some areas, but was too slow. 10.10 (or I should say the kernel) has a problem with my wireless, so I can't complain there.

I second LMDE.

[Spice Weasel]

Strange, 9.10 was the last Ubuntu release that I managed to install without problems. After 10.04 I just gave up trying to fix the stability issues and replaced the tech-support-slave PCs with whacked out versions of CentOS. :P

ymmv applies to everything. My only advice is that if it works for you there are no problems with you using it.

I would recommend 8.04 though, since it has KDE 3.5 (:D) and will be supported for a while longer.

[themarker0]

I also say go even father back to 8.04. If it works, don't bother changing it.

[Timmer1240]

Im still Using Karmic Im reluctant to upgrade I do like the sound of Linux mint debian but a rolling release makes me nervous.If it isnt broke dont fix it!

[uRock]

I loved Karmic. I think it was great release.

As for the problems with 10.04 and 10.10, did you do a full clean install or did you leave the /home.

When I installed the 10.04 release, I backed up all of my data and the .mozilla folder, then completed a full clean install. I tried just clean installing and leaving the /home, but the themes and such were all messed up and some of the apps were unhappy.

[ilovelinux33467]

My favorite release of Ubuntu is Hardy. Had problems in Karmic on my laptop to do with Graphics issues so it wasn't my favorite.

[Ahava591]

I loved 9.10; it was my first *buntu installed. I used Kubuntu 9.10 for a while and then switched to Ubuntu 9.10. I was happy with Kubuntu, but wanted to try Ubuntu.

I tried Kubuntu 10.04 and promptly screwed it up; it was all my doing and so I don't blame the release or distribution.


If you like 9.10, stick with it. If you want to try other distributions, go for the Live CD's for a few days and see how they work out.

Keep in mind updates and security.

[WorfSOM]

One important thing to consider is are you wanting to use 9.10 on a short or long-term basis?

I ask because security updates will cease in April.

[Primefalcon]

agreed you want to keep a supported oS installed if that's not ubuntu, then try Mint or even OpenSuse

[kaldor]

Im still Using Karmic Im reluctant to upgrade I do like the sound of Linux mint debian but a rolling release makes me nervous.If it isnt broke dont fix it!

I've been using LMDE ever since release, and the only errors I had were caused by my own doing. Ubuntu is based on Debian *Sid* :)

LMDE is pretty stable.

[NightwishFan]

LMDE is not stable (unchanging) by nature but I am sure it works very well. If reliability or long term use are important I would not "rule out" using such a distro, but I would advise you use something on a time based release like most other popular distros (including normal Mint). This means you can be assured that programs you have will not be upgraded to new versions that change features or in some case are even made unavailable over time. (Example is Gnome Shell, which on Debian Sid is often on/off in availability)

I would advise if you like Ubuntu to try 10.04, it is not slower than 9.10, and is supported very long. Base from there and try to work out your issues with it one by one.

[koleoptero]

I would like to add, on the rolling release fears, that you can actually tell aptitude to hold any package from upgrading. Plus you can do some research before upgrading.

[madjr]

I would like to add, on the rolling release fears, that you can actually tell aptitude to hold any package from upgrading. Plus you can do some research before upgrading.

that's even built into mint's GUI

[zami]

Thanks for the input, all!

I love how everyone has varying recollections of which edition installed/worked the buggiest. And which was golden.

The gold was 9.10 for me, all the way. (Though Drapper was smooth too, and I only had minor annoyances to deal with between Dapper and Karmic.)

So last night I partitioned, and installed LMDE. So far, I reaaaaaly like it! Being Debian based and a Gnome desktop, it feels really familiar. There are a couple of things I was missing from Ubuntu, that I'd taken for granted. Easy-to-install Nvidia drivers, and the nautilus-wallpaper extension, an easy-to-install wireless driver, etc. Conversely LMDE is already tweaked out in so many ways... I understand why Ubuntu doesn't come with Flash and various codecs, but it *was* nice to not have to get all that set up (and deal with there being 5 different flash player options for Firefox - bleh!) Alternate colors are used when I'm using Nautilus as super-user, which I think is fabulous. I understand some find it insulting, but I also get a kick out of the fortune-cookies in terminal.

And I love that I don't have that #%$@ing Plymouth three minute boot time!!
=D>
(Yes I know that's a system problem and not really an Ubuntu or Plymouth thing... but on THREE computers I can't get Plymouth to be anything but buggy, ugly, and slow!)

A couple other things I've sort of ooh'd and aaah'd about, but I can't recall now.

Anyhow I'm happy because so far, it's all working well!

And... I waver between being relieved, and being disappointed, that Debian/Gnome is so familiar. I do *not* have the time to learn a complete new setup right now. But I was also *almost* looking forward to being forced into something entirely different. Mostly releived.

I've shrunk my Ubuntu partition (and pulled the buggy Nvidia drivers) and it's now my "emergency OS" in case I really muck something up in LMDE.

Thanks again for all the input!

-zami

[Khakilang]

Not silly at all. Wish I could return myself to version 17.

[BrokenKingpin]

I'd advice you to check Linux Mint Debian Edition. No reason to stay with an outdated distro, there are plenty of solutions out there.

This.

[keithpeter]

Thanks for the input, all!
I love how everyone has varying recollections of which edition installed/worked the buggiest. And which was golden.

Hello All

I've found variations between different computers as well: for instance, 10.04 minimal runs sweet on my T42 laptop, but there were several issues on an ASUS desktop (AMD/nvidia). 10.10 is fine on that.

Just in case LMDE doesn't work out, I'd add a vote for scientific linux. SL5.5 has support until end of Jan 2012 and the new release SL6 is due out soon. The distro is RHEL based and has a conservative roll out, i.e. each version is supported for longer than the sell by dates on the tins in my food cupboard :twisted:

SL comes with codecs, flash and some non-free wifi drivers. There is a live CD available with a basic installer maintained by an academic in Switzerland, i.e separate from the main DVD based iso. This is what I have on my spare 'emergency' partition.

Part of all this is widening my knowledge of linux by using a differently constructed distribution.

[Duncan J Murray]

Hello All

I've found variations between different computers as well: for instance, 10.04 minimal runs sweet on my T42 laptop, but there were several issues on an ASUS desktop (AMD/nvidia). 10.10 is fine on that.


Interesting you have the same experience - my T40 ran best on 10.04. I'm currently running 10.10, mainly because I can't be bothered to do a clean reinstall of 10.04 and I like the font - but it has some graphics issues which are niggling. Also, I find 10.10 seems to do a windows-esque hard-disk accessing thing after start-up, which is annoying.

However, I have installed human-theme to take me back to the good old days of Jaunty.

D

[mips]

Just try another new distro. Ubuntu contrary to popular belief is not the be all & end all of linux distros.