Did Ubuntu jump the shark in 9.10? Yeah … they did.

List of things they changed is long. Some major ones … some … I dunno … bad ideas mebbe? like Grub2? Like incompatibilities with various motherboards (struggling with this right now on a home machine rebuild). Like unchangable login windows, and crappy icons for power, mail, volume, unchangable options in gnome … the xorg config debacle.

I could go on. The big one is the nVidia issue. Install restricted drivers. Sure. No problem. Then reboot and … No display. Its gone. Kaput.

This release is better called “our way or the highway”.

Well, its not hard to figure out what to do next (as he watches FC12 hit the 11% download mark). Gonna re-look at Debian as well. Ubuntu 8.04 was pretty good. 8.10 started disappointing, 9.04 was a significant disappointment, and 9.10 was a mistake.

This is ridiculous. Can’t anyone put together a half decent desktop Linux distribution, and not go off into directions they really shouldn’t? Not looking for a distro war … just blown away by how bad this stuff is.

Viewed 9254 times by 2035 viewers

5 thoughts on “Did Ubuntu jump the shark in 9.10? Yeah … they did.

  1. Hmm, I’m actually finding 9.10 to be much better than 9.04, but then again I’m using the KDE version (Kubuntu) and have graphics cards well supported by open drivers (either Intel or old ATI).

  2. This is, I think, one of the strengths of linux community. I have been exasperated by the number of distros out there. The ~300 distributions you see consist of mostly mediocre me-too clones, but the competition is fierce at the top. If anyone drops the ball, there are 2-4 very competitive distros out there ready to pick it up and run hard with it.

  3. “Greatest strengths of Linux”? Gimme a break. i’m only a dog, but istm Joe has encountered — as he has before — the greatest weakness: you can’t trust even the most reputable distros to continue to release stuff that works. Unless you’re some kind of hobbyist or aficionado with infinite time, interest, and expertise at the os level, you’re up the creek. If you’re developing an end-user app that runs on top of Linux, why would you want to concern yourself with these issues? Linux is in danger of becoming “the os we love to hate.” Arrogance is, as usual, the source of these evils.

  4. @Sam

    Not so sure that you can’t trust reputable distros to release stuff that works. The sense I have is that good ideas eventually go awry in the perpetual drive towards featuritus.

    The new Ubuntu is, fundamentally, ugly. It is harder to configure, fewer options available, things don’t work as well on it as they did in previous releases.

    I don’t know why they made mud brown the default login screen background, or what brainiac was behind the idea to make it immutable … you can’t change it easily!

    The OS itself without the bells and whistles is basically sound, and in good shape. They just made the user experience dealing with it less palatable.

    Whats nice from my perspective is it is easy to switch. So I did. Laptop won’t get any more Ubuntu upgrades unless they do something drastic, and enable me to make the changes I want to make. Home desktop is already FC12. Office desktop is Ubuntu 9.04, no reason to upgrade.

    From my perspective, Windows 7 actually has Linux beat on UI. XP was terrible IMO, and 8.10 Ubuntu was pretty much top of the heap.

    This does matter a little to me, as we use a distro base for DeltaV. We may change it, but we insert our own kernel to provide our own services … so the distro is less important.

Comments are closed.