Ubuntu details next project: 'Jaunty Jackalope'

A big thanks to all of the Ubuntu guys.

"Thanks for nothing, guys" would be a better phrase

get very significant updates every 6 months. You have to wait 6 years with an embarrassing Fisher Price toy interface, and then, all you get is a bloated pig!!!

This is getting pathetic.

They are fair game for anyone who has been pissed about by them

It's quite obvious from his comments that he's not an Ubuntu user or he wouldn't have made the comments in the first place! And given that Mac users seem perfectly happy with their OSX, that only leaves one left. QED.

Stooping to the lows of completely off-topic Windows-bashing, eh? How original. How productive. What a winning strategy to take.

Productive? Yes. Original? Yes. Microsoft bashing? No not at all, there was no windows bashing in fact he stated that Ubuntu has a lot of work to do to ensure it matches Microsoft/Apple. I dual boot with Ubuntu and Vista and barr the office packages and games I live in an open source world

Windows users receive updates via Windows Update.
For example, this month we get a Performance and Relialibility pack for Vista

they are bug fixes and patches. We're talking about regular Ubuntu version updates here not patches!

So what's the rule? Let's have it be the same for all OS vendors.

What truely constitutes a full version upgrade?
I don't see the qualifications for that in anything since 6.06.


That's my opinion, much like many say Vista is NT 5.2

It's a new version when the vendor says it is. On that basis MS bring out a new version very infrequently compared to Ubuntu. So that's 2 versions of desktop Windows actually released since Ubuntu was released in 2004, and in the same period Ubuntu has released a new version nearly every six months. You do the math?!

Ubuntu is not an OS, but it's an ammass of copied applications... Ubuntu code name photocopier...

Technically your remarks are accurate, because "Linux" is the OS. (GNU/Linux) Ubuntu is a distribution of Linux, which means that it is indeed a collection of various applications. Some are major, like the GNOME Desktop Environment, and some are comparatively minor, like Transmission, the bittorrent application.

GNU/Linux itself is derived from Unix...

None of which prevents me from having fun with Ubuntu, which is, after all, the point.

This should be fun to watch. I've been using Gentoo for more than five years, and their boot system is fast thanks to dependency-based scheduling. Kubuntu ain't bad, but if they can score some of the same parallel-dependency goodness that Gentoo has it'll be sweet.

Uhhuh,

Probably explains why none have ever actually been seen in the wild.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackalope

that it is the name of Ubuntu 9.04.

I just think so!

NT.

for Linux instead of this ridiculous frequency of updates.

Unless more companies start porting their apps for Linux, the desktop will always belong to Windows.

Linux geeks are the only ones interested in a new version every other day. The average desktop user just wants their programs to work.

are smart to focus on making the OS better. The applications will come, and it is out of their control anyway. We are also switching to a web centric world, where desktop applications have reduced importance.

And (in the end) they were giving it away free too.

How's that working for them then?

I haven't seen anything that looks beyond the ordinary. Most of it is just catch-up to Windows and Mac OSes.

Not too long ago it was hard to get wpa2 to work on wireless unless you were very selective about the hardware, you picked. You couldn't even add a hard drive and have the system notice it without editting a file. And it is the first OS where I had to recompile a driver in order to get it work and then it barely worked.

There's nothing particularly spectacular about Ubuntu. It does work and installs easy but I don't think it works better or installs easier than Windows or Mac OS-X.

The app vendors are the ones who must port. Its just job of the OS maker to add and fine tune features of their OS. Then if they weren't releasing rapidly people would say they aren't moving the platform forward and app vendors won't have any incentive to port.

Updating the OS must be done very carefully so it doesn't make the software obsolete. If you want the software vendors to port over "good" software, be careful not to change the OS so much that they have to rewrite the software again -- that gets expensive if it must be updated every six months.

Unless more companies start porting their apps for Linux, the desktop will always belong to Windows.

That hasn't been the case in our experience. We're doing just fine with Ubuntu here. We had planned for a lot of individual training and hand-holding but it didn't materialize. Most people adapted with very little difficulty.

If you're talking about Photoshop, not everyone needs that here. In fact, no one. For the minor graphics work that most people here would need, GIMP works just fine. If you're a specialized graphics or design shop, you're likely using Apple anyway.

OpenOffice is more than adequate for productivity, but most people are using GoogleDocs because of the sharing options.

Gmail replaced Outlook/Exchange with one minor hitch that delayed roll out for a week. Other than that it's been well received.

The most difficult transition was actually with one of our developers used to a different distro of Linux. Ubuntu implements sudo a little different than other distros. It takes some getting used to if you're comfortable with another flavor. I showed him how to make Ubuntu act like his old distro and he's been a happy camper ever since.

We're not worried about supporting games here, so I'm not sure what else you're talking about.

"Operating system rival Microsoft has also recently stated it wanted to make boot times one of its priorities for its incoming Windows 7 operating system, which has not yet been formally named."

Oi, Balmer - try concentrating on making a decent OS before you even think of optimising the boot time.

"Forgetting your mistakes is a terrible error if you are trying to improve your cognition."
Charlie Munger

is a 'more than decent' OS. Just the other day, Ubuntu celebrated the fact that it now has a domestic user base that exceeds 8 million worldwide and it's still growing.

What does that have to do with anything ?

Let me guess 2009 is going to be the year of Linux, people have been saying it for years but this time its really true...

...have to do with "the year of Linux"? Did you not get something that you wanted in a distro?

Sure, they've cried wolf before. But i think this time it's the real deal. There's a slow but certain phenomenon taking place...on the other side of the globe. Linux adoption is very low here in the US, but it's much higher and growing in Asia and South America. It's just a matter of time before an OS usage gap appears between Asia and the West.

What idiot comes up with these names. Otherwise Ubuntu is making great stides.

My good friends at Google tell me it is a mythical beast/thing.
I hope 09.04 is real and not a "real" Jackalope.

Shuttleworth said Ubuntu 9.04 would focus on improving boot time and blurring the line between desktop applications and the incoming wave of web-based software.



Besides the fact that Ubuntu should be at 6.6.5, in reality, we can see the pattern here is a now a chase toward a few of the things Microsoft has been doing for nearly a decade.


Vista released as a full point upgrade because it has thousands of updates and new technology, not a few items that have either been part of windows and are very much more so now with Vista (web apps platform) for a decade.



Wow. Even 6.6.5 is really going too far. This is nothing more than a minor new build of 6.06...like the last several "releases".

Vista released as a full point upgrade because it has thousands of updates and new technology, not a few items that have either been part of windows and are very much more so now with Vista (web apps platform) for a decade.
I wonder what thousand of updates you refer, do you mean document indexing and Aero? Document indexing has been available for *nix OSes (OSX included) for a long time and Aero's wondelful effects are just a 1% of what Compiz Fusion can do.

Besides I doubt Mark Shuttleworth's goal is to release a commercial failure as Vista.

By the way, the version numbering of ubuntu's realeses goes "year.month" that is 9.04 for april 2009.

Windows has had file indexing for a long long time as well. Who said file indexing was new to Vista? I used it in Win2000pro and XP, so i don't understand your statement.


Aero. Hmmm. Don't recall saying it was something new, but is Compiz Fusion part of the Ubuntu Operating System? That's what you are implying here, isn't it?


I've never seen anything but youtube videos as an example of what compix fusion is all about.


The proof is in the practical applications as the medical imaging apps built on Vista and Aero.



So versoin 6.06 LTS was released in June 2006?
Was 6.06 LTS ver 2 also in June 2006? Why would they release on LTS OS version and then another in the same month? That makes no sense whatsoever.


The naming convention aside, they are claiming this to be a full release, as with all of the other named releases since version 6.0. I don't see any of them as worthy.


Finally, i would say that Mr. Shuttleworth is doing a great job of not creating a commercial failure like Vista which has passed 200 million users. He has managed to create the most obscure OS in the world, it's not even worth mentioning among even the 200 million copy failures. Way to go Mark.

And this guy is more greedy than Steve Ballmer. He's definately not a Gates or a Jobs, he's nothing more than a slippery opportunist who uses people for his gain (he is a LOT like steve Jobs in that way, who became famous on Woz's brilliance then shorted him every chance he got) that thinks he sees an angle on making money with open source as his latest business "model". He could care less about the sanctity of it all, that the normal zealot thrives on.

6.06 WAS LTS. RESEARCH.

You gotta be joking...

While Vista is to the non ABM hotheaded radical, a very nice improvement over all OSes on the market, I'm joking.


While it's been noted by many security professionals, including one of Apple's own, that Vista has technical superiority over Leopard with it's security, I'm joking.


While the Gartner poll that so many have used here to show slow Enterprise uptake, but miss the part about the nearly 40 percent that has rolled out Vista, when polled almost 90% reported that it's a very good to excellent OS. Far beyond their perceptions and expectations, they found it to be a great value. Another vast majority of those same people responding to addtional poll questions said they'd definately recommend to others.
......

In other words, for those who have ignored the cries from Steve Jobs at the last 3 WWDCs and many other events, the apple ads, the FSF's bevy of "Stop Vista" websites and armies of people out to do the constant slamming and bashing of Vista on every technical or non-technical blog talkbacks on the internet, they have found the best OS they could have hoped to find. Surprise Surprise.

Both the gartner and klac polls show this. Again, I'm joking.


Modern OSes are almost a commodity. Linux is close and may have some strengths over Windows, i'm not stupid, but it's still in catch up mode with windows in many areas. You can ignore that and pretend I'm joking, or see it as reality, and that there are other OSes besides the ones you espouse, that are as good or better and become an objective professional along with those of us who don't guide our lives, professional careers and self worth by the OS we use or hate and retribution, but by how well we choose the tools to use in any given circumstance and give the world the best possible solutions we can.

You made a highly opinionated & emotive post, received condescending replies and then act mature about it. No-one's impressed. To draw comments comparing Vista to OSX out from left field make you appear very similar to the Ubuntu fanbois.

Back to the topic at hand - ignoring they hype and fanaticism, I hardly see Ubuntu as a 'wannabe' Vista. Both OS's have their strengths (as you mentioned in your 'mature post') and weaknesses, but in each point by point release, there are specific and set goals to achieve. Why was Vista released?

What's changed since 6.06?
Hardware compatibility, new utilities and "OS stuff"[process scheduling, filesystem stuff etc]".

What hasn't?
Much of the default interface, the default brown scheme. Feel free to correct me.

While I'm not overly keen on Vista, I would certainly choose it over XP at this point. Aside from hardware & software compatibility, I'm stuck thinking of aspects of Vista that Ubuntu is chasing. Oh, market share, I suppose.

Well, if you'll recall the industry, and these talkbacks have had thousands of posts over the last several years about XP security, it's been posted about more than probably any other single topic on these blogs in the past.


Along with other claims that stated MS needed to forget about compatibility and build a new OS from scratch. I read those very words on here hundreds of time....at least.


So, Andy, i think the fact that Vista was written from scratch using SDL and built a much more sound and far more secure OS. That's not reason enough? After listening to everyone wail about those 2 things more than anything here, i would have thought MS would have been congratulated.


Now talking about growing up, we didn't see this. Suddenly the same people that made those claims about XP are stating that XP is great and why do we need Vista. It gives us nothing.


This is off topic but you asked the question.


I'd like to see someone like you jump all over DonnieBoy or one of the hundreds of ABM regulars here for their comments, just once.

What if I told you I usually take an average talkback from a windows blog, and simply change the names around and paraphrase just a little.

What blows my mind is that nobody responds to those windows talkbacks that are asinine, but pick right up on them when the topic is Linux or OSX. That's where the growing needs to occur. We've made great progress from the days before censure when 80% of every subject line had foul language and the M$, Micro$haft, Micro$ucks etc etc. Some of those people went away thankfully but many remained to continue their incessent anti MS sentiments more subtley, but not all that much really.

Why not disapproval on both sides. That's worth working toward.


Also Vista has a very long list of new features beyond the fact it's a brand new kernel and OS built on security. And I think it's more than fair to compare Vista to OSX. It's common knowledge that Vista is faster on comparable hardware, OSX users have said that many times here. And security on Vista has been deemed by some of the security industry (straight from a zdnet blog over a year ago, and the osx people that showed up, agreed) as far ahead of OSX security-wise. Exploits is a different topic.


SMB 2.0 was important for Vista. It will run far faster on server 2008 than XP. Going forward that's a good thing, no?

The built in search has made my productivity go way up, YMMV. I never use anything else unless, like most of my apps, they are on the quick launch toolbar.


Much better graphics with 3D are great built in to the system. It will be standard on all OSes.



Many new group policy entries for Vista that make managing a windows network even easier.


Bread crumb address bar for windows explorer is great. Way better than the "up" button that many have said is "missing" (can you say clueless?)


The general feel and usage of the UI are so much better than XP and that is worth more than anyone is willing to admit.


too many new client networking tools to name.


Troubleshooting has been cut down by 3/4 in my book. With the new logs a problem can be found and a new window with event log entries pertaining to that error only can be brought up in seconds.

That goes for finding resource issues that are not really problems or creating errors but can be found and eliminated very easily. Most often it's a 3rd party driver.


New file copy code. On a server 2k8 network, copy speeds can be 75% faster than with XP when copying folders. 40 to 50% faster are normal for a wide variety of network file moving/manipulation needs.


With the new security came more secure driver interfaces. That is THE main cause of the majority of "incompatibilities" that cropped up. 3rd parties simply waited until well after Vista released to write new drivers.


In the meantime, detractors seized on compatibility issues with XP programs and drivers, but they purposely or otherwise CONSISTENTLY left out all XPSP2 apps and esp. drivers would load and run perfectly on Vista in compatibility mode. It took no more than an extra 5 seconds to install a driver in compatibility mode.



New foundation class libraries. Some of them can be used on XP, but they were designed for the Vista world, and obviously WPF have given Vista the ability for very good RIAs and regular windows apps with high end graphics, resolution. The GPUs that have come out in response to Vista have been great. I'm not sure why anyone would diss on them. There have been problems with the vendors building their drivers but now, even x64 Vista, which i run, has drivers galore. I've never ran into a driver related issue yet. I've had to install some in compatibility mode because they were older, but that was a snap and they work flawlessly.


Bitlocker. Great tool.


Readyboost. Much more than your swap file on a usb drive. Great technology for those on a budget, but memory is so cheap.....


MEDIA CENTER - This is a world class, top notch media center that has very very far reaching capabilities. It comes with Vista home premium and Ultimate, built in. It's GREAT. I've not seen many knocks on it and i can tell you why.


New subsystems are working great.


Dependencies have been lowered considerably which is one big reason it's so much more stable. This is just the beginning of a new era of windows OSes. Total dependency freedom is next.


I think the main goals were:
1. Build a new OS from the ground up. New subsystems, the whole works.


2. While doing so, build it with state of the art security which was frankly quite needed, at least a different model than XPSP2, which itself compares well to most OSes as it is.

3. Have an eye to the future and make new foundations classes and the ability to do RIAs (isn't that what 9.04 is shooting for?) built in and create many more new hooks for web based apps into the OS.
4. Make it the best developer platform with the best developer tools MS has ever had. And their developer tools KMA....everyone knows it.
5. Make the OS more stable. MUCH more stable. It's like a rock. At least my 64 bit Vista ultimate machine has not shown any tendencies toward anything but rock solid. Appls open very quickly, close and release resources very quickly. I can load 3 GB of apps and release all of them at once from task manager and it happens super fast. Wasn't so with XP, even with proper memory. It was good, but not this good.


6. reduce dependencies dramatically.


7. Make IE much more secure by allowing it to run in protected mode.


8. Much faster bootups and shutdowns. Mine are around 20 seconds up, 10 seconds down.


9. New memory management. Some erronously think that since memory usage, as a percentage of total memory, is high at startup means "Vista" is "hogging" it. It prefetches and loads parts of most commonly used apps making the system's overall performance much much better for most users, who are not using a new set of applications every time they use their PC.


This list is not complete and the order is not intended to be by importance. It's just a list.
I'm sure i'm missing many huge items.