Whether you love or loathe Ubuntu, 13.04 'Raring Ringtail' won't change your mind

Summary: A test of the newly-released Ubuntu 13.04 release across four systems shows it's a solid release. But if you've previously been a fan of Ubuntu or feared it, this isn't the release to make you think otherwise.

As just about every Linux blogger on the planet has noted, the final release of Ubuntu 13.04 (Raring Ringtail) was made available last week. I'm running behind most of them with this post, because I wanted to get it loaded onto several of my laptops and test some specific points before writing. My initial impressions are good, in that it installs relatively easily and runs well, and some particularly troubling problems from the pre-releases have been fixed in the final release.

However, my overall opinion is still the same: if you liked Ubuntu before, your are probably going to like this release even more.

There are significant improvements, both cosmetic and functional, in this release but if you didn't like it before, you are almost certainly not going to like this release either. I fall in the 'dislike' category, and I haven't seen anything in this release that changes my feelings. I don't see that as being a problem on either side — I don't like it, so I don't use it other than to load it and make sure that it works on my systems, and then keeping it available in case I need to look at something to help one of my friends whom I have set up with Ubuntu; I don't think I am part of the 'target market' for Ubuntu, so they most likely don't care about my likes and dislikes of various parts of the OS.

Less intimidating?

I was in a SANS training class last week, and I happened to talk to a couple of other attendees about Linux in general, and Ubuntu in particular. They were very experienced Windows users, and I found their comments quite interesting and enlightening. They said that they found Ubuntu to be the easiest distribution to understand, and the least "intimidating" conceptually compared to other Linux distributions that they had tried.

I have to say honestly that I am baffled by the "easiest to understand" statement, as I would have thought that Unity would be completely foreign to them, but they seemed to have picked it up very quicky, so maybe this is a function of what you want to use it for, and what kind of access to the system or applications you're trying to get.

On the other hand, the part about "less intimidating" I think is because of the way Ubuntu has been presented and treated over the past couple of years. It seems like Ubuntu has gone to a lot of trouble to present itself as an 'out of the box solution' — there hasn't been the talk about downloading/compiling/modifying the kernel, drivers, or whatever other parts of the operating system.

For the general public and average users, that might be shielding Ubuntu from a lot of the criticism that's directed at other Linux distributions. I think that might be a bit unfair, because I can treat openSuSE, Fedora and Linux Mint the same way if I want — just load and use them and not do anything else. However, Ubuntu clearly has a stronger reputation for this kind of use than other Linux distributions.

Anyway, I consider this to be a good thing, because it helps expand the general distribution of Linux. It doesn't matter even a little bit whether I, or any other experienced Linux user, loathes Ubuntu and refuses to use it. We are already convinced, and we'll use whatever distribution we're comfortable with.

What is important is showing that Linux can be a viable and even superior alternative for desktop use, and if the approach that Ubuntu is taking to this is working (which it appears to be) then more power to them. I don't often agree with a lot of the things that Mark Shuttleworth says (that probably doesn't concern him very much either), but I recently read something that I thought was exactly right. If you don't like Ubuntu, don't use it, move on to whatever suits your needs — but there's no reason to "poison the well" for others just because it isn't right for you.

Four system test

OK, that was a much longer digression than I had intended, so let me get back to what I started to write about. I have now installed it on the following systems:

  • Fujitsu Lifebook S6510: Intel Core2Duo, Intel graphics and wi-fi, 14-inch display, Legacy (DOS) BIOS
  • Acer Aspire One 725: AMD C-70, Radeon graphics, Atheros wi-fi, 11.6-inch display, UEFI BIOS
  • HP Pavilion dm1-4310ez: AMD E2, Radeon graphics, Ralink wi-fi, 11.6-inch display, UEFI BIOS
  • Acer Aspire One 533: AMD C-60, Radeon graphics, Atheros wi-fi, 10-inch display, Legacy BIOS

The results so far have been very good.

S6510: This is a golden oldie these days, but I still have it on my desk and it still works. Ubuntu installed with absolutely no problems, and everything worked. I was able to configure dual displays with the laptop screen at 1,280 by 800 and an external 1,280 by 1,024 (another golden oldie...). Both wired and wireless network adapters work just fine. On this one I noted that if you have an internet connection while you are running the installation, it does a good job of determining your local timezone and likely keyboard configuration itself.

AO725: This is a relatively new system with UEFI BIOS and Secure Boot, and it was my first really pleasant surprise with this Ubuntu release. When I tried a 13.04 daily build last week, it did not work properly with Secure Boot enabled. They seem to have fixed that problem in the final release, because it installed and booted with Secure Boot enabled with absolutely no problem, and no extra configuration, repair or tweaking on my part. (Note for those who have read my previous UEFI posts: the one thing it does not do is get itself installed as the default boot object, after Ubuntu installation finished the laptop still booted Windows 8, and I had to hit the Boot Select key to interrupt that, but I was then able to select and boot Ubuntu from there, which I could not do last week.)

Ubuntu Menu
Ubuntu Menu

Pavilion dm1: This was my second pleasant surprise. This system has a Raling 3290 wi-fi adapter, and the daily build I tried last week didn't have the firmware file included for that adapter. During the installation this time it showed me a list of available networks, rather than just the name of the adapter, so I knew already then that they had fixed this problem. Sure enough, wireless networking works just fine now.

AO522: I wanted to try it on at least one of my netbooks. Again, it installed with absolutely no problem, and everything works. The screen is correctly detected and configured at 1,024 x 600, and as with the others the wired and wireless networking are just fine.

Shutdown
Ubuntu Shutdown/Reboot Dialog

So, to summarise, Ubuntu 13.04 Raring Ringtail is available, and seems to work well on everything I have tried so far. If you are an Ubuntu follower, this is very good news. If you haven't tried it yet, don't let the negative opinions and criticism from various experienced Linux users dissuade you — give it a try! You might find that you like it — a lot of people I have talked do certainly do.

Topics: Ubuntu, Linux, Open Source, Operating Systems

J.A. Watson

About J.A. Watson

I started working with what we called "analog computers" in aircraft maintenance with the United States Air Force in 1970. After finishing miliary service and returning to University, I was introduced to microprocessors and machine language programming on Intel 4040 processors. After that I also worked on, operated and programmed Digital Equipment Corportation PDP-8, PDP-11 (/45 and /70) and VAX minicomputers. I was involved with the first wave of Unix-based microcomputers, in the early '80s. I have been working in software development, operation, installation and support since then.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

72 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Ubuntu

    It's not that I like or hate Ubuntu... it's just that I don't care at all. Windows and OSx does the job nicely.
    gbouchard99@...
    • Thank you

      For taking the time to post this very informative comment. Do you think that anybody cares if you care or not?
      mil7
      • Important

        I wanted to make you personnaly knew how much I didn't give a ***t about linux. You are the only one I wanted to inform.
        gbouchard99@...
        • At first I thought it was

          just apathy, but now I can see that you are enthusiastic about how much you don't care.

          I guess it is safe to say you are enthusiastically apathetic about Linux.
          DancesWithTrolls
          • I used to be apithetic

            But now I just don't care.
            Aussie_Troll
        • gbouchard99: I am really flattered

          … and I would like to thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to inform me about your level of ignorance and discontent towards Linux.

          I do not know of course the roots of your issues with Linux…did you have some traumatic experience during your childhood and you decided somehow to blame Linux for it? Or you are just scared to widen your horizons a bit?

          In any case we are here to help.
          mil7
        • And yet you read the article

          Is it possible that you were offended by Jamie's writing about Linux, instead of Windows or OSX?
          John L. Ries
    • Good for You

      While you continue to spend $$ on M$ I plan on spending my time embracing freedom!
      pfeiffep@...
      • As if the source of Ubuntu isn't a corporation that has making a profit

        high on the list.

        If you want real freedom, you would be using Debian not Ubuntu.
        sjaak327
        • Freedom isn't about whether or not someone makes a profit

          It's about whether or not I can access the source and make changes as I please.

          'Freedom' is about my freedom to use the software as I see fit.

          'Free' is about my ability to obtain the software without expense.

          And actually Ubuntu is free in both ways, regardless whether it's backed by a corporation seeking to make money, or a community interested in making great software, or some mix. of both.
          blakjak.au
          • Nobody

            Really cares if something like an operating system is theirs to change. Hell the vast vast majority of people wouldn't even know how. I as a programmer don't care either, nothing so boring as having to wade through other people's code.

            As for freedom to use the software as you see fit, I have never ever been restricted in using Windows as I see fit, which basically means I load it onto the hardware it came with (which again is being done by the vast majority of users) or onto other hardware in case of the retail version of Windows. Microsoft has never prevented me from running the software on a 8 year old whitelabelbox any more than it prevented me from running it on a 2013 Mac.

            Whilst Ubuntu might be free when it comes to obtaining it, the company behind it, and their opt-out policy is certainly a reason for concern and I stand by my comment that if you care about things like that, it is vastly better to run a linux distro that does support GNU standards completely and is not depended on the backing of a multi million dollar corporation.
            sjaak327
          • Some people do care

            Clearly, the Talkbacker to whom you responded cares. Richard Stallman cares enough that he has devoted much of his life to creating and promoting software that can be freely used, studied, modified, and distributed.

            Just because you don't care doesn't mean that nobody else does.
            John L. Ries
          • True

            Of course the vast majority doesn't and can't. That is a statement I stand by. The marketfigures seems to indicate that remark as well, after all the marketshare of open operating aystems on the desktop has barely made it past 1%. People care about what applications they can run on an os, Windows and to a lesser extend OSX provide application compatibility, Linux doesn't. They don't care about it being open, just as much as they don't wade through other people's code to change it.
            sjaak327
          • open operating aystems on the desktop has barely made it past 1%

            Not according to Steve Ballmer, who estimated Linux to have about the same desktop market share as Apple, and that was back in 2009.

            "Windows and to a lesser extend OSX provide application compatibility, Linux doesn't."

            Yes it does, in fact it provides more application compatibility than windows does, Linux can run windows applications as well as Linux applications, windows only runs windows applications.
            guzz46
          • As You See Fit?

            Well, what if I want to take my Ubuntu CD/DVD and install it on, let's say, 12 computers. Now take that Windows DVD that you purchased and try installing it on 12 computers. That's how I am using software as I see fit... but I can't do that with the Windows media, only with the Ubuntu (or choose your Linux distribution) media.

            Or, I'm developing for old hardware and software so I have to grab a Windows XP CD in order to load a VM on Windows 7. Using the CD as I see fit, I no longer use the machine that the CD was originally purchased for, but... I can't use that CD without jumping through Microsoft's hoops in order to transfer the install to a VM.

            Of course, you probably don't do these things, so it all works "as you see fit", right?
            benched42
      • There are different kinds of freedom.

        I'm not entirely sure what yours is.. but for some, freedom from having to do your own tech support - finding applications that are well written and 100% compatible with my existing workflow - having the best development tools on the planet... these are also freedoms.
        TheWerewolf
        • Are we developing a sense of entitlement?

          When people think of freedom, they're usually thinking about what they are or should be free to do, not about what other people should do for them.
          John L. Ries
          • I think that what he is implying:

            Is that Windows is the product of a socialist corporation (Microsoft) that forces you to buy in by selling to OEM partners at below retail prices and then threatening to cut off their OEM partners if they build Linux desktops. Apple is equally guilty of socialism, though, as they don't let other manufacturers install their platform, thus over-valuing the hardware. Based on that information, Linux truly is the only free platform.
            Richard Estes
          • Richard Estes: "Linux truly is the only free platform"

            Linux fanbois are truly parochial. The BSDs aren't free platforms? Really?!

            One could reasonably state that the BSD license is more free than is the GPL. Because one is free NOT to contribute their own work back to the original source and one can legally distribute their own work along with the original source. This, in fact, is what Android is based on within the Open Handset Alliance. And the Apache 2.0 license used by Google for Android (minus the Linux kernel) is quite similar to the BSD license.
            Rabid Howler Monkey
          • You are quite right.

            However, Linux lovers promote the gpl because it is the overwhelming reason Linux based OS have advanced and been adopted beyond BSDs on the desktop; you have to share so the whole group goes forward.

            Additionally have you posted on FreeBSD forums?? Helpful is not the word. I love PC-BSD, it's one of my favourites, but there are a lot of things the BSD community in general could learn from the Linux one
            MarknWill