Ubuntu 11.04 is out!

[SickBeast]

http://www.ubuntu.com

I'm downloading it now. I like the new interface. I might replace my Mint 10 installation with this.

 

[lxskllr]

I don't think it's for me. I'll keep testing new Ubuntu releases, but I think I've been stressing the interface changes too much. It's easy gto get caught up in the "I have to have the latest" mentality, but for something like my netbook, I don't /have/ to upgrade at all. I'll lose security updates in 2013, but the odds of exploiting my netbook with lapsed security, is almost zero, and even if it happens; it's just my netbook :shrugs:

A full install on my main desktop is still up the air, but I have awhile before that's a worry. As things stand, Debian with Xfce is the leader, but I'm still playing around with it.

 

[Bateluer]

Here are the Release Notes.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NattyNarwhal/ReleaseNotes

Better you grab the torrent versions if you want to grab it now. Their site is hammered, as usual.

 

[H54]

I'm forcing myself to use Unity for at least 2 months. So far, I kind of like it. There are some things I miss though.


Anyone having trouble with VLC sound quality? For every file, sound is crackly and popping.

 

[Barfo]

It seems to utilize my laptop's very limited screen real estate better than Linux Mint. I kinda like it.

 

[Steltek]

Here are the Release Notes.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NattyNarwhal/ReleaseNotes

Better you grab the torrent versions if you want to grab it now. Their site is hammered, as usual.

If you have Beta 2, you already have it.

 

[catilley1092]

Why do they always recommend the 32 bit version? I have a 64 bit computer (2 in fact), and 32 bit only "sees" 3.25GB of my RAM. Being that I run VM's, I need that .75GB "extra" RAM that they don't recommend that I use.

Cat

 

[lord_emperor]

Why do they always recommend the 32 bit version? I have a 64 bit computer (2 in fact), and 32 bit only "sees" 3.25GB of my RAM. Being that I run VM's, I need that .75GB "extra" RAM that they don't recommend that I use.

Cat

All 32-bit linuxes can address up to 64GB of memory. Something else is wrong.

 

[Barfo]

Why do they always recommend the 32 bit version? I have a 64 bit computer (2 in fact), and 32 bit only "sees" 3.25GB of my RAM. Being that I run VM's, I need that .75GB "extra" RAM that they don't recommend that I use.

Cat

Less headaches for people who don't know if their hardware supports it I guess.

 

[catilley1092]

All 32-bit linuxes can address up to 64GB of memory. Something else is wrong.

Thanks for informing me of that. So it's evidently just a Windows issue about the 32 bit OS not being to address over 3.25GB.

So, in that case, I should be able to run my VM's OK.

Linux does have good OS's, the main thing that holds it back is the lack of hardware (especially printers) support. Some does works, but many doesn't, or doesn't fully work. And the fact that there's so many choices, many wouldn't know where to start.

I've been using Mint (now dual booting between Win 7 Pro & Mint 9) for a couple of years, and really like it.

I'm downloading Ubuntu now. I can't wait to see FF4 on it.

Cat

 

[SickBeast]

You need a PAE kernel for 32 bit linux to address more than 4gb of memory.

The 32 bit version is better in terms of compatibility and stability, but not as good in terms of performance. It's a tradeoff that you'll have to weigh out.

I personally always go with the 64 bit version and I haven't had any issues.

 

[NitrouseXpress60]

I've been using ubuntu for years now, but I don't like the direction they are taking. I tested unity out and it definitely isn't for me. I just switched to opensuse and I absolutely love it, and how it manages updates and such.

 

[catilley1092]

You need a PAE kernel for 32 bit linux to address more than 4gb of memory.

The 32 bit version is better in terms of compatibility and stability, but not as good in terms of performance. It's a tradeoff that you'll have to weigh out.

I personally always go with the 64 bit version and I haven't had any issues.

That's what I do, I run 64 bit Mint 9. I'm going to run this new version of Ubuntu in a VM to check it out.

Mint usually follows Ubuntu, so hopefully they'll offer a new build soon. Mint 10 has been out for a few months, so it's time for an update. This also is why I stick with LTS releases for full installs, they're supported for 3 years. I don't mind a new VM, but I don't really care to do a full install that often.

Thanks,
Cat

 

[PreferLinux]

Thanks for informing me of that. So it's evidently just a Windows issue about the 32 bit OS not being to address over 3.25GB.

So, in that case, I should be able to run my VM's OK.

Linux does have good OS's, the main thing that holds it back is the lack of hardware (especially printers) support. Some does works, but many doesn't, or doesn't fully work. And the fact that there's so many choices, many wouldn't know where to start.

I've been using Mint (now dual booting between Win 7 Pro & Mint 9) for a couple of years, and really like it.

I'm downloading Ubuntu now. I can't wait to see FF4 on it.

Cat

Well, theoretically a 32-bit system can address 4 GB, but some address space is needed for other things. Linux can address up to 64 GB because there is a PAE kernel available which can address 64 GB. Windows with PAE could use 64 GB too. 64-bit has better performance (and also lets one process/thread [not sure which] address more than 2 GB of RAM [a limitation of any 32-bit system, including with PAE]).

 

[catilley1092]

I prefer 64 over 32 bit by far. I don't know about the 4 versus 2 lane analogy, but 64 bit runs faster, you can run several programs at once, and never skip a beat.

And one thing else that I like about Ubuntu & Mint, is that you don't have to hunt down drivers, normally. The OS "just works", no matter what you install it on.

Cat

 

[Nothinman]

Well, theoretically a 32-bit system can address 4 GB, but some address space is needed for other things. Linux can address up to 64 GB because there is a PAE kernel available which can address 64 GB. Windows with PAE could use 64 GB too. 64-bit has better performance (and also lets one process/thread [not sure which] address more than 2 GB of RAM [a limitation of any 32-bit system, including with PAE]).

2G of virtual space is used for the kernel, not physical. PAE has no affect on the virtual address space available. And Windows with PAE could do it if MS would let it, but they won't.

 

[SickBeast]

That's what I do, I run 64 bit Mint 9. I'm going to run this new version of Ubuntu in a VM to check it out.

Mint usually follows Ubuntu, so hopefully they'll offer a new build soon. Mint 10 has been out for a few months, so it's time for an update. This also is why I stick with LTS releases for full installs, they're supported for 3 years. I don't mind a new VM, but I don't really care to do a full install that often.

Thanks,
Cat

Mint 11 isn't going to use Unity, so don't count on there being any major changes.

 

[MrColin]

I like ubuntu but...
Natty Desktop, based on my trying it out in a VM is kind of disappointing. I think the idea of moving the desktop controls to the left is great but Unity violates a belief that I have that (big stupid buttons != user friendly). I hate when designers assume that it does. There are probably ways to tweak it so that it exposes the stuff I want to access but in the VM at least, it keeps crashing and reverts to a fugly unthemed gnome. The whole experience is leading me away from ubuntu though I still love my Maverick desktop.

 

[dma0991]

I tried version 10.10 and liked the Gnome interface but then they decided to change to Unity on 11.04. Just can't get use to the Unity interface. Feels slow to get to a program that I want to run. My Compiz Fusion on 10.10 was also ruined by 11.04 beta. The only nice thing about 11.04 is the GRUB interface has color and looks neater IMHO.

I removed Ubuntu completely and deciding whether I should go back to 10.10 or stick with 11.04 with classic interface. Unity :thumbsdown:

 

[lxskllr]

I removed Ubuntu completely and deciding whether I should go back to 10.10 or stick with 11.04 with classic interface. Unity :thumbsdown:

If you want to stick with *buntu, give Xubuntu a try. You can get it looking/acting very much like classic Ubuntu. Otherwise, you might like Mint.

 

[dma0991]

If you want to stick with *buntu, give Xubuntu a try. You can get it looking/acting very much like classic Ubuntu. Otherwise, you might like Mint.

Mint uses a greenish theme which I am not too used to but I like the interface. Very Windows like and easy to use compared to Ubuntu. I'll install Xubuntu on VirtualBox to test it out first. Don't want to make the same mistake with my now ruined dual boot Ubuntu.

 

[wheresmybacon]

So I blindly updated my 11.04 install and something nuked Chromium. There were a lot of updates and I just accepted all of them. Now Chromium won't work. As soon as I launch it it freezes solid and the process has to be killed. This is in Xubuntu 11.04 (Xfce).

I was so loving my latest iteration of Linux as a desktop, and now my browser of choice is dead. This kind of thing always happens to me...as soon as I begin to trust and like Linux as a desktop OS, BOOM! Something breaks.

I've removed and reinstalled the app to no avail. It could be a profile glitch, but I didn't feel like creating a new one since I was in a hurry...

*sigh*

 

[lord_emperor]

Apparently Canonical invested in some good servers as I just downloaded both ISOs at 9MB/s.

Edit:

Initially DO NOT LIKE Unity.

Kubuntu 11.04 seems fine, identical really.

 

[Mem]

I tried version 10.10 and liked the Gnome interface but then they decided to change to Unity on 11.04. Just can't get use to the Unity interface. Feels slow to get to a program that I want to run. My Compiz Fusion on 10.10 was also ruined by 11.04 beta. The only nice thing about 11.04 is the GRUB interface has color and looks neater IMHO.

I removed Ubuntu completely and deciding whether I should go back to 10.10 or stick with 11.04 with classic interface. Unity :thumbsdown:

I have gotten use to Unity now,I have added a few more icons so now my Unity icons/buttons go all the way down the bottom of screen on left hand side ,I have Opera opened up next to it so now have easy access to all those Unity buttons/icons plus looks ok on my 16:9 screen .

I was going to try Gnome 3 but heard its still a little buggy with 11.04 Ubuntu,I give it a good 6 months or so before trying Gnome 3.

Btw installed CompizConfig Settings Manager ,some nice tweaks in there and disabled sync to v blank for faster performance with AMD/Ati cards.

 

[Mem]

Another thing I like about CompizConfig Settings Manager is you can change the size of Unity icons so smaller or bigger according to your preference.