Canonical releases first alpha of Ubuntu 12.04
Canonical has released the first alpha build of Ubuntu 12.04, dubbed “Precise Pangolin,” and the organization said that the latest version would be a long term support (LTS) release. Version 12.04, available for x86 and 64-bit platforms, is based around the Linux kernel 3.2 release, and a lot of work has gone into bugfixing …
This topic is closed for new posts.
alpha release coverage!
So you now provide alpha release coverage for Canonical but don't even mention beta or full releases of many many other distros out there. Get real. Many things existed long before Ubuntu and still do
Move Along there, nothing to see
339 work items done out of more than 2.3K.
Says it all.
Why bother? Not a lot has changed.
As for Cloud... Clouds don't last forever unless you are Jupiter/Saturn or Venus.
Sounds
Like a windows release to me
2.3k things to fix and thats when they release it to the paying customers
<<never buys a windows OS until it has Sp1 under its belt
You do know...
...what an alpha release is? Slagging an alpha release of anything is rahter like moaning because the development mule for a car doesn't have millimetre perfect fit and finish on the door trim.
Never has the phrase "better to be thought of as a fool and keep your mouth shut, than to open it and remove all doubt" been more apt.
I'll reserve judgement on 12.04 until one of the later betas turns up, whereupon I'll install it - then I'll make a full judgement once the final release is out.
Steven R
MS has cottoned on to that
All the cool kids now wait for SP2
@Steve
"I'll reserve judgement on 12.04 until one of the later betas turns up, whereupon I'll install it - then I'll make a full judgement once the final release is out."
That actually makes sense (which is novel around here) but it does raise the question of what is the point in this article?
Is Ubuntu so game changing / market leading that we need to know the regularly scheduled releases are going to schedule?
Good idea, wait for 12.04.1 then and you'll be fine. Alphas usually run stable. The fun and breakage start at Beta.
3.2 kernel? (11.10 uses 3.0)
I thought the point of an LTS release was to consolidate past changes into a stable platform that someone could safely adopt and stick with for a few years. Perhaps such releases are simply called "Debian" now.
@Ken Hagan, indeed, but the changes up till the freeze on said release, not up to the freeze on the previous release, what would be the point of that? The LTS would just be the previous version by another name.
3.2 kernel
With the 2.6 kernel the advancements were mind boggling, with 3.2 it keeps getting better.
I have to say Ubuntu has a powerful base.
Looking forward to a quieter longer-running laptop
as with 3.0 the power management problems are still there so there's another six months of annoyance
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/11/10/07/237222/kernel-bug-means-linux-power-usage-remains-high
but I see that they are blaming the hardware.
Can someone explain?
Is this better than Windows 7 or not?
No
About the same for most work, but certainly a bloody site cheaper!
It depends on the apps you want to run. Most people find that Linux distros are quite shit at running Windows apps, and vice versa.
The fact that you've asked the question suggests quite strongly that the correct answer in your case is to buy a second-hand machine with Windows XP on it.
it is
a bastard step-child to it. It certainly isnt an OS I would use. EVER!
Editor at the pub?
[quote]
leaving a massive job of work to do before the expected release...
[end quote]
The grammer-nator cannot let this pass.
Now if you'll excuse me I need to get back to my job of work.
WR
Strictly speaking-
An *English* thing.
All others being derived...
@Can someone explain
This one goes upto 12 - that 5 better !
AMD
Hopefully AMD will have ensured that the next version of Ubuntu will work with Llano processors. The older version of Ubuntu, 11.04 works (sort of), but the 11.10 crashes during booting for most users. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 doesn't work well with llano processors, either.
Indeed
I've been Windows only since I got my little notebook :(
FAIL indeed.
I'll be waiting for the Mint 12.04 then..
As per the title. As soon as Ubuntu started insisting on shipping with Unity I abandoned ship and switched to Mint. Same code base but no Unity.
@Andy 17
Well said, Sir.
Mint is truly the Distro of Kings, while Unity is the spawn of the antichrist.
Surely that's not the only reason
Otherwise you'd have used kubuntu, or lubuntu, or xubuntu, or whatever (there's probably a gubuntu too, these days).
Supporting ARM for the first time?
No, Ubuntu used to support ARM, up to 9.04 IIRC
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-April/000563.html
They missed a trick there.
They were trying to think of an animal whose name began with P, to name a linux distribution, and they only managed 'pangolin'?
Surely it should've been "Perceptive Polar-bear"!
@Boris the Cockroach, a) As a few said it's an alpha. b) Agreed though! I've found almost every Ubuntu release to be shockingly buggy until about a month after release. Then I can upgrade, or (for a fresh install) install and run the update manager right away.
All I can say, is they really better get a gnome-2-like interface (which they were calling "Ubuntu Classic") working again or I'm bailing. I'm running 11.04 right now; in 11.10, Unity might be OK for a tablet but it's awful for a desktop. And "gnome-session-fallback" in 11.10 is based on gnome 3 instead of gnome 2, and it's like they got midway through setting it up then quit. It looks just plain broken.
No.
Who cares? Not touching it with a barge pole until there is a non-retarded GUI.
The bug fix stats are not unusual, and are always close to or at zero come release.
However I am too surprised that El Reg is covering alpha releases, I mean with a production release every 6 months, and there normaly being 2 Alphas and 3 Betas (from memory) plus the release itself, that's an article per month. What's the point?
mixed feelings
i've been so happy with 10.04 and now i'll soon have to go over the install procedure again. i've felt the occasional itch to try a new version of linux, but as i get older the itch is less intense.
there was a time not too long ago when i felt ubuntu was over hyped, but after getting a tad fed-up of fedora 1 year cycles (6 months for the current + 6months for the next) i decided to try ubuntu 10.04. that was close to 3 years back.
part of me is sad that such a wonderful product is nearing it's last days, but the kid in me is looking forward to a new install. maybe even a new distro like linux mint. something to look forward to on a free weekend.
Shock horror!
First Alpha release not up to Gold Standard!
Slow news day huh?
Epic Fail!
Installed the alpha on a 64-bit Intel I3. Was promptly greeted by the screen vomit known as Unity.
I fdsk'ed the harddrive and installed Fedora. Congrats canonical for the technical yawn that will forever be known as ubuntu.
I run linux because of its clean lines and uncluttered appearance. I cant say that about ubuntu. Did you ever think that there is a REASON why the linux UI is the way it is? Not something to be bastarized and made to look like the fugly stepchild of OS X/OS 2/Windows 7.
Epic fail!
This topic is closed for new posts.
