Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Sean Miller wrote: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? You do have to wonder about the PR cost, don't you? mac -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
2009/11/3 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? Sean There will never be a 'one size fits all' If six months is too fast for someone, then they should use only LTS releases. Alternatively, they could use Debian, or Suse or RedHat etc. An ambitious schedule will cause some problems, but I think it will also drive progress. It must be good for developers who come out with a shiny new version of their software knowing that they only need to wait maybe six months before it is included in a major distribution. Also, from a users perspective, it helps having up-to-date software available directly from the main repositories. -- Philip Stubbs -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
2009/11/3 mac ammonius.grammati...@gmx.co.uk: Sean Miller wrote: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? You do have to wonder about the PR cost, don't you? Note that there are also people saying their upgrade went smoothly.. http://www.geekzone.co.nz/nzsouthernman/6906 - Karmic works like a treat - everything 'Just Worked' http://scottnesbitt.net/ubuntublog/?p=543 - Upgraded my installation of Ubuntu, I mean. To 9.10. And it went even more smoothly than the last couple of times. http://josephbrower.com/2009/11/01/ubuntu-9-10-first-impressions/ - We’ll see how it holds out, but right now, I would strongly suggest anyone using an older version of Ubuntu to upgrade. Balance.. Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Karmic dual monitor problems...
2009/11/3 Luke-Jennings ubuntujenk...@googlemail.com: Hi, Sorry for the late reply but I have the 185 driver installed on my laptop with a NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS 256MB graphics card. I use disper as it is a quick means of changing screen outputs. http://willem.engen.nl/projects/disper/ My dual screen set-up works nicely. I did accidentally install the 173 driver but that didn't work with my set-up. It is very good at auto detecting display resolution you just have to run one command after login. Luke On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 16:28 +, tim.ritt...@doctors.org.uk wrote: Hi all, Good to hear lots of people are having no problems with karmic. Unfortnately I've hit a big problem. I use two monitors as two separate X servers using a geforce GTS8600 graphics card. This was working well under jaunty, but only one screen is now supported under karmic. I've filed a bug and it looks like at least one other person has had problems with a similar card. I wonder if anyone else has struggled with this. I've switched to debian in the meantime, but having resolution issues there! How many people out there use dual monitors? Is the general poor support for dual monitors a conequence of the closed source nature of the graphics drivers? I would ideally like to use kde, but this doesn't support dual screens at all. Any comments? Regards, Tim I probably should have mentioned I'm using the 190.43 drivers (with nvidia-settings-190) from a PPA. They seem to work quite well for me - I'll have to try disper though, sounds quite useful. Jonathon -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Karmic dual monitor problems...
Different card (9600GT), but I have dual screen working with TwinView via the nvidia-settings. It's not ideal for a permanent dual screen setup as it needs to be reapplied each boot, but at least it should work as a temporary solution. twinview should work fine after a reboot. run the nvidia-settings with sudo make the required changes Hit the save button - this will save the changes into xorg, hence why you need to run the program as root Then reboot and all should be fine Dan -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Philip Stubbs wrote: 2009/11/3 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? Sean There will never be a 'one size fits all' If six months is too fast for someone, then they should use only LTS releases. Alternatively, they could use Debian, or Suse or RedHat etc. Yes, I think you have a serious point there. I suppose the question may be the wisdom, in PR terms, of pitching the six-month releases, rather than the LTS releases, as challengers to Windows and Mac OSX. If you get a noticeable minority of people having issues with sixth-month releases (even acknowledging Al's point in another post that there is on balance a majority of successful experience) the PR consequences may be too great a risk. mac -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Alan Pope wrote: 2009/11/3 mac ammonius.grammati...@gmx.co.uk: Sean Miller wrote: Snip=== Note that there are also people saying their upgrade went smoothly.. Snip=== Just to add my two pennyworth ... I upgraded my Acer Aspire One with the Netbook Remix flavour of 9.10 and it went just fine with the exception of there being no means of shutting down the machine. However, Given that this was a known issue with a readily available work around from ubuntu.com, it caused no problem. I do wonder whether some charge into an update without doing their research first. Having said all that, I am holding back on upgrading my laptop and server ... just for a bit, you understand. Bob G. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Please don't get me wrong: I was merely asking the question, as I think that 6 months is a very ambitious timescale to get a completely new distribution built. The LTS vs. regular releases thing is, imho, rather a red herring - the implication seems to be that it is okay to market an unfinished release as long as it isn't LTS, which I could not agree with. The LTS is, unless I'm very much mistaken, supposed to give people reassurances that they will not HAVE to upgrade to maintain support, not a moniker that says LTS are the proper stable releases and everything else is unstable - if this is in fact the case then why don't we use the terms stable and unstable rather than long term support which intuitively has to do with support a year down the line rather than the quality of the delivered product. If I was considering a novice user and I was about to install a new desktop I'd look at 9.04 and 9.10 and say right, what's the difference? and the sites etc. would tell me 9.04 is older but will be supported longer so I'd think well, don't use support anyway and may upgrade before then so I'll go for 9.10 - wouldn't most people??? So I do not agree with the idea that non-LTS versions are inherently buggy. For that is not what the acronym says, and if that is what it is meant to mean I suggest we get a new acronym. Sean -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Sean Miller wrote: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? Sean Maybe it is, but I guess the problem is that it would mess with the easy to remember release dates (x.04 and x.10). Maybe it would be better to have say a 6 monthly or so point release and a yearly major release so say a major release in April, and then a point release in October. Rob -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Just to throw my oar in, I've upgraded 2 boxes to Karmic, one elderly Acer laptop, and an ancient desktop. Both of which just worked. As someone said earlier, people are clearly not doing any research on hardware prior to upgrading, and the bad press is getting outweighed by the good press.As Popey mentioned.. balance.. From my experience, users will normally only complain about something; they expect something to work out of the box, so when it does it's not considered newsworthy... The large majority of people i've spoken to are loving Karmic... Ed 2009/11/3 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net Please don't get me wrong: I was merely asking the question, as I think that 6 months is a very ambitious timescale to get a completely new distribution built. The LTS vs. regular releases thing is, imho, rather a red herring - the implication seems to be that it is okay to market an unfinished release as long as it isn't LTS, which I could not agree with. The LTS is, unless I'm very much mistaken, supposed to give people reassurances that they will not HAVE to upgrade to maintain support, not a moniker that says LTS are the proper stable releases and everything else is unstable - if this is in fact the case then why don't we use the terms stable and unstable rather than long term support which intuitively has to do with support a year down the line rather than the quality of the delivered product. If I was considering a novice user and I was about to install a new desktop I'd look at 9.04 and 9.10 and say right, what's the difference? and the sites etc. would tell me 9.04 is older but will be supported longer so I'd think well, don't use support anyway and may upgrade before then so I'll go for 9.10 - wouldn't most people??? So I do not agree with the idea that non-LTS versions are inherently buggy. For that is not what the acronym says, and if that is what it is meant to mean I suggest we get a new acronym. Sean -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- Ed Morgan Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken http://last.fm/user/mo6020 http://dontfightthefuture.com -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
mac wrote: You'll probably have seen this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/karmic_koala_frustration/ Not the press we'd have hoped for - and from a usually friendly source. I must say, I, too, had a bit of a problem with an upgrade from 9.04 (just a failure of the automatic restart, and, on manual reboot, some warnings about unmet dependencies that were easily fixed with apt-get). On the other hand, a clean install went fine. Both of these boxes were elderly, and were machines I keep for playing with, so no big deal if they go wrong. I must say, though, that I won't be upgrading my 'production' machines just yet. mac I've not had any major issues as such. I've noticed a couple of bugs though (such as with Wubi, when you remove a Wubi installed copy of Ubuntu from XP it doesn't remove the entry from the Boot.ini file) but no real show stoppers. I did find another issue too with an older Athlon XP motherboard with NVidia MCP2 chipset with integrated GeForce 2MX. I couldn't get higher than 800x600 with the FLOSS driver and the official NVidia driver was so unstable it just didn't work. I gave up and went out and bought a GeForce FX5200 which works much better (although still not flawless, but good enough for my liking). I'm not putting this down to Ubuntu though, I think it's more a case of an obscure graphics card (I've read about problems with other distros too). Rob -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 07:35 +, mac wrote: You'll probably have seen this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/karmic_koala_frustration/ Not the press we'd have hoped for - and from a usually friendly source. I must say, I, too, had a bit of a problem with an upgrade from 9.04 (just a failure of the automatic restart, and, on manual reboot, some warnings about unmet dependencies that were easily fixed with apt-get). On the other hand, a clean install went fine. Both of these boxes were elderly, and were machines I keep for playing with, so no big deal if they go wrong. I must say, though, that I won't be upgrading my 'production' machines just yet. mac just to note that article is filled with statistical crap of the highest ridiculousness, as always, the loudest voice is never of the people who are happy, but rather of the few who have problems. -- Gordon Allott gord.all...@canonical.com Canonical signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Exactly, the thousands of people who've installed Karmic won't be seen moaning online about it... As I said earlier, people expect something to work, and when it does they won't be seen screaming about it... Ed Morgan Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken http://dontfightthefuture.com http://identi.ca/mo6020 2009/11/3 Gordon Allott gord.all...@canonical.com On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 07:35 +, mac wrote: You'll probably have seen this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/karmic_koala_frustration/ Not the press we'd have hoped for - and from a usually friendly source. I must say, I, too, had a bit of a problem with an upgrade from 9.04 (just a failure of the automatic restart, and, on manual reboot, some warnings about unmet dependencies that were easily fixed with apt-get). On the other hand, a clean install went fine. Both of these boxes were elderly, and were machines I keep for playing with, so no big deal if they go wrong. I must say, though, that I won't be upgrading my 'production' machines just yet. mac just to note that article is filled with statistical crap of the highest ridiculousness, as always, the loudest voice is never of the people who are happy, but rather of the few who have problems. -- Gordon Allott gord.all...@canonical.com Canonical -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
I agree with you Ed. They expect out of the box complete working. Neil Perry 2009/11/3 Ed Morgan ejr.mor...@gmail.com Exactly, the thousands of people who've installed Karmic won't be seen moaning online about it... As I said earlier, people expect something to work, and when it does they won't be seen screaming about it... Ed Morgan Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken http://dontfightthefuture.com http://identi.ca/mo6020 2009/11/3 Gordon Allott gord.all...@canonical.com On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 07:35 +, mac wrote: You'll probably have seen this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/karmic_koala_frustration/ Not the press we'd have hoped for - and from a usually friendly source. I must say, I, too, had a bit of a problem with an upgrade from 9.04 (just a failure of the automatic restart, and, on manual reboot, some warnings about unmet dependencies that were easily fixed with apt-get). On the other hand, a clean install went fine. Both of these boxes were elderly, and were machines I keep for playing with, so no big deal if they go wrong. I must say, though, that I won't be upgrading my 'production' machines just yet. mac just to note that article is filled with statistical crap of the highest ridiculousness, as always, the loudest voice is never of the people who are happy, but rather of the few who have problems. -- Gordon Allott gord.all...@canonical.com Canonical -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Neil Perry wrote: I agree with you Ed. They expect out of the box complete working. Neil Perry this is a perfectly reasonable expectation. When this expectation is not met the correct response is to file a bug and work with others on fixing it. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Agreed. Sorry my point was more that the people who have installed Karmic successfully more than likely won't be seen chundering online about it. Hence why those that haven't managed a successful install may seem to be more prevalent... I don't think it's a reasonable suggestion to expect Ubuntu to work on -every- system flawlessly straightaway though, there is always going to be bugs, and as Alan said, there is a procedure in place to fix bugs that are reported... Ed Morgan Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken http://dontfightthefuture.com http://identi.ca/mo6020 2009/11/3 Alan Bell alan.b...@theopenlearningcentre.com Neil Perry wrote: I agree with you Ed. They expect out of the box complete working. Neil Perry this is a perfectly reasonable expectation. When this expectation is not met the correct response is to file a bug and work with others on fixing it. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
2009/11/3 Alan Bell alan.b...@theopenlearningcentre.com: this is a perfectly reasonable expectation. When this expectation is not met the correct response is to file a bug and work with others on fixing it. That may be the desired response, but often it's not what actually happens. What often happens is one or more of the following:- * Reinstallation * Switch to a different distro * Blogging about the experience * Posting to forums/mailing lists about how rubbish the system is and how it trashed the laptop/desktop etc.. Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
Gordon Allott wrote: just to note that article is filled with statistical crap of the highest ridiculousness, as always, the loudest voice is never of the people who are happy, but rather of the few who have problems. Yes, the article does make a meal of the vote on the Ubuntu forum, which is clearly not a random sample of users, and is bound to be biased towards people experiencing difficulties. I guess you may have more information than most of us about what's happening with this release. Is the frequency and severity of problems with Karmic commensurate with earlier releases? mac -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Ed Morgan ejr.mor...@gmail.com wrote: Is is possible that the Karmic release is getting something of a higher profile in the mainstream press due to it's release pretty much coinciding with Windows 7, and the hype that's been generated about it? I think it's equally possible that increased exposure is currently happening due to the ongoing efforts of the community as a whole to build a desktop friendly, user friendly distro. Ubuntu is generally ahead of the pack in it's no-hassle installation and is rapidly becoming a distribution for the masses - the danger is, of course that the wrong party line is getting issued and Ubuntu ( Linux in general) is getting touted as a free version of Windows - not something that is *not* Windows, has nothing to do with Windows and cannot be expected to behave in the same way as Windows. Software compatibility is an equal issue. Gripes like I can't install Photoshop/Sage/etc need to be countered before the user blitzes their copy of Windows and suddenly realizes they need to learn to use a new product to do things they knew how to do previously.. For the most part it's about managing expectations, as with most things in life. Improperly managed expectations will undoubtedly result in disappointment - however I have to say that Karmic is the plushest release yet - and the difference in performance and integration of applications between 9.04 and 9.10 is amazing... -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On 3 Nov 2009 at 8:13, Philip Stubbs wrote: 2009/11/3 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net: Maybe it is time to ask the question again -- is the 6-month cycle too ambitious? Sean There will never be a 'one size fits all' If six months is too fast for someone, then they should use only LTS releases. Alternatively, they could use Debian, or Suse or RedHat etc. An ambitious schedule will cause some problems, but I think it will also drive progress. It must be good for developers who come out with a shiny new version of their software knowing that they only need to wait maybe six months before it is included in a major distribution. Also, from a users perspective, it helps having up-to-date software available directly from the main repositories. As I take a particular interest in OpenOffice.org it seems that even a six month release schedule has been too infrequent, as recently the latest version of OOo has emerged just too late to be included. Windows users can update immediately. Ubuntu users had to wait six months. OK, there was options to go to PPAs etc, but these are not regular options we should expect users to know about. And poor old LTS users have to wait ages for an OOo update. Also, we should not be expecting users to 'do research' before hitting the 'Upgrade to 9.10' button, or at least there should be some warning, perhaps even some pre-install testing like the 'Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor', before users commit to the upgrade. I myself had a problem because of the new boot methods. I got round it easily, but it would have really freeked out the sort of every day, non tech user we are aiming for. We really must aim for 'out of the box' working for all users upgrading from one version to the next. Tony -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
[ubuntu-uk] Clean Install!
Many thanks for the offer of help Rob Beard but I have eventually had to re install 9.10. I sent details of my problem to the developers and they were unsure of the cause! I have installed Moovida and had no success with that. When opening the program, it just locks up. I have installed it a couple of times with synaptic, with the same results. Any ideas ? Many thanks John Davis -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Clean Install!
What happens if you install it with apt-get, could you copy the errors it prints to the terminal? Ed Morgan Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken http://dontfightthefuture.com http://identi.ca/mo6020 2009/11/3 john davi...@wanadoo.fr Many thanks for the offer of help Rob Beard but I have eventually had to re install 9.10. I sent details of my problem to the developers and they were unsure of the cause! I have installed Moovida and had no success with that. When opening the program, it just locks up. I have installed it a couple of times with synaptic, with the same results. Any ideas ? Many thanks John Davis -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Clean Install!
Try launching from a terminal, does it output any errors? Neil Perry 2009/11/3 john davi...@wanadoo.fr Many thanks for the offer of help Rob Beard but I have eventually had to re install 9.10. I sent details of my problem to the developers and they were unsure of the cause! I have installed Moovida and had no success with that. When opening the program, it just locks up. I have installed it a couple of times with synaptic, with the same results. Any ideas ? Many thanks John Davis -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
an upgrade advisor is an excellent idea, in fact a hardware testing tool that scans PCI and USB bus and summarises the level of support for each item by looking it up on the web would be an excellent tool. Thinking about it there is no reason why such a tool shouldn't be available on other operating systems too so that people can get a level of comfort before switching to Ubuntu Alan. Tony Pursell wrote: On 3 Nov 2009 at 8:13, Philip Stubbs wrote: Also, we should not be expecting users to 'do research' before hitting the 'Upgrade to 9.10' button, or at least there should be some warning, perhaps even some pre-install testing like the 'Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor', before users commit to the upgrade. I myself had a problem because of the new boot methods. I got round it easily, but it would have really freeked out the sort of every day, non tech user we are aiming for. We really must aim for 'out of the box' working for all users upgrading from one version to the next. Tony -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On 3 Nov 2009 at 17:47, Alan Bell wrote: an upgrade advisor is an excellent idea, in fact a hardware testing tool that scans PCI and USB bus and summarises the level of support for each item by looking it up on the web would be an excellent tool. Thinking about it there is no reason why such a tool shouldn't be available on other operating systems too so that people can get a level of comfort before switching to Ubuntu Alan. There is, of course, a tool for people thinking of switching to Ubuntu - its called the Live CD! But an upgrade is all together a different matter - we pride ourselves on being able to provide an upgrade without the need for a CD. So if a new release is about to pull the plug on a piece of legacy hardware, some way of warning the user would be a great idea. MS, of course, makes no pretence that its new version, made every 2-5 years, will suit an old machine. Tony -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
2009/11/3 Alan Bell alan.b...@theopenlearningcentre.com: an upgrade advisor is an excellent idea, in fact a hardware testing tool that scans PCI and USB bus and summarises the level of support for each item by looking it up on the web would be an excellent tool. Thinking about it there is no reason why such a tool shouldn't be available on other operating systems too so that people can get a level of comfort before switching to Ubuntu There's also the -s option to do-release-upgrade which does a test upgrade using an aufs overlay :) Never tried it but it sounds fun. In theory you can undo the upgrade if it fails, rolling you back to the previous release. Any takers? :) Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
2009/11/3 Tony Pursell a...@princeswalk.fsnet.co.uk: Once done, is this sort of ugrade useable? To test if the upgrade works on the target machine? Then committed or rolled back? Or can it just be rolled back if someway into the upgrade process there is a failure (eg lack if disk space)? No idea. never tried it. Report back and let us know :) Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] OpenOffice.org problems
2009/11/4 David King linux...@avoura.com: I am having some serious problems with OpenOffice.org. It was all okay until an Ubuntu update. So can I go back to an earlier version that worked? Or is a simple solution to just remove/install/fix something with the current installation to get it working again? David King This sounds similar to a problem I had a little while ago - basically after an update the icon set that was selected previously (the default set) had been uninstalled. IIRC I had to install openoffice,org-style-galaxy, which let me load OOo correctly. I could then choose the Human icon set. This wasn't fixed by clearing the .openoffice3 dir as it just defaults back to the Galaxy style! Jonathon -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On 3 Nov 2009 at 18:21, Alan Pope wrote: 2009/11/3 Alan Bell alan.b...@theopenlearningcentre.com: an upgrade advisor is an excellent idea, in fact a hardware testing tool that scans PCI and USB bus and summarises the level of support for each item by looking it up on the web would be an excellent tool. Thinking about it there is no reason why such a tool shouldn't be available on other operating systems too so that people can get a level of comfort before switching to Ubuntu There's also the -s option to do-release-upgrade which does a test upgrade using an aufs overlay :) Never tried it but it sounds fun. In theory you can undo the upgrade if it fails, rolling you back to the previous release. Once done, is this sort of ugrade useable? To test if the upgrade works on the target machine? Then committed or rolled back? Or can it just be rolled back if someway into the upgrade process there is a failure (eg lack if disk space)? Tony -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Not a good press
On 3 Nov 2009 at 22:34, Alan Pope wrote: 2009/11/3 Tony Pursell a...@princeswalk.fsnet.co.uk: Once done, is this sort of ugrade useable? To test if the upgrade works on the target machine? Then committed or rolled back? Or can it just be rolled back if someway into the upgrade process there is a failure (eg lack if disk space)? No idea. never tried it. Report back and let us know :) Sorry, no chance. I only have my 4GB EEEPC 701 left to upgrade and that's enough of a challenge just to do the ordinary upgrade:) Tony -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] OpenOffice.org problems
Maybe try removing the .openoffice.org and .openoffice.org2 subdirectories in your home? Worth a shot, anyway. Sean -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Karmic dual monitor problems...
tim.ritt...@doctors.org.uk wrote: How many people out there use dual monitors? Is the general poor support for dual monitors a conequence of the closed source nature of the graphics drivers? I would ideally like to use kde, but this doesn't support dual screens at all. I don't know if it's the same thing but I can plug an external monitor into my karmic laptop and it works absolutely fine. I'm using the open source intel drivers so it probably is driver related. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
[ubuntu-uk] OpenOffice.org problems
I am having some serious problems with OpenOffice.org. All was fine with version 3.0.something in Ubuntu 9.04, then one day recently the update manager gave me a new version. Since then it will not work properly. Every time I start OOo I get an error message saying Failed to set the look and feel. The icon on the message is the Java icon. So I decided to uninstall that version, and install OOo 3.1 from the OOo website using a .deb for Ubuntu (64-bit). But this has the same problem, and it keeps crashing and then it fails to recover documents. Also I could not import an image into a file in OOo Writer, due to a problem with the Graphics Filter. It was all okay until an Ubuntu update. So can I go back to an earlier version that worked? Or is a simple solution to just remove/install/fix something with the current installation to get it working again? I really need this to work, as I have an important document to work on and I really do not want to use an alternative like MS Office. David King -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
