Should I have gotten Ubuntu 9.10 instead of 10.04?

I thought I would give linux one more try, but because of my limited mobile broadband bandwidth, I ordered discs through Canonical instead of downloading. I have a T410 which is running the arrandale platform. I've been reading about 10.04's integrated software, such as their new social networking integration, Ubuntu's new music player which lets you connect to their music store, etc. I really dislike integrated software, especially that which connects to the internet. My question is, because of that, and because I'm running the latest arrandale platform, do you think I should just keep 10.04, or order 9.10? I'm not sure that 9.10 officially supports arrandale.
But again, I really dislike the integration to the internet like this.

 

I'd also like to know the answer. I'm just trying to learn linux as well. I don't care much for the other stuff. Any social networking I want to do I'll do on my own. I do like having things like openoffice already installed. At least the software I have doesn't go online by itself, I'm still stuck at trying to figure out how to get the drivers working.

 

I don't use Ubuntu but I would think that for the newest laptops you're going to want to use 10.04, since it will be based on the Linux kernel 2.6.32, (or better). Posts like this one, and this one, seem to support this notion. I just installed 2.6.33 on my Arrandale based laptop, and it was helpful to have the more current drivers, (although I don't have an Intel IGP / Arrandale laptop).

I would guess that balanced against the fact that you should be able to not install, or uninstall, anything you don't want in the distro, 10.04 should be more trouble free for your system.

Good Luck..

 

Uh, "their new social networking integration" is some new apps (Gwibber, Empathy) resp. plugins for existing apps (e.g. Music Store/Ubuntu One for Rhythmbox, etc.) and a Gnome panel indicator (indicator-me) to tie things together a bit.

Nothing you'd be forced to use, leave enabled, or even keep installed.

 

I'm new to Linux as well. Ive tried 9.04, 9.10 and 10.4 and my favorite still seems to be 9.04 it seemed to work best with my Dell Vostro but when I compare it all to Windows 7 I decided to stick with W7.

I find I can do more in W7 than I can in Ubuntu AND maybe it's just me but since i've been using Windows since 1993 I don't feel like learning another OS, it's daft I know.

Another thing that is always in the back of my mind is security with Ubuntu. I know people say don't worry yada, yada, yada but I don't like hitting the net, buying stuff on the net with my debit card without worry about spyware and viruses. I'm still not totally convinced it can't happen in Ubuntu.

At least in Windows, Microsoft quickly patches security issues and you can install AV, Anti-Malware programs and the like.

edit: DR650SE: that's one smoking avatar

 

As for your concern about online services: you typically need to actively take some action before they start eating up MBs from your data plan. For example, for Ubuntu One, you'd need to register/login first. Rhythmbox won't scrobble your music unless you login to last.fm. The Gnome panel won't show you any updates on your Facebook account unless you let it know about your Facebook account. Etc.

As for the question in the title: I'd still go for 9.10. I'm running 10.04 on my desktop since its release and am not happy with stability. It's just not polished enough yet. I think it's better to wait another month or two before installing 10.04.

 

Stick with 10.04...it'll cohere soon and be a great release. Uninstall any of the stuff you don't want. You can use their software store and synaptic to find a ton of free apps you will want.

 

first command I used on turning on ubuntu 10.04...

Code:

sudo apt-get purge ubuntuone* && apt-get remove empathy gwibber

then I killed the entire gnome-panel but that's sorta unrelated.

 

If you're using ubuntu as a main OS, then I would go ahead and get set up with 10.04. It's an LTS release so once you have it up and running you won't have to make another switch for 3 years. Like someone else said, the integration features aren't forced on you, you don't even hear about Ubuntu One until you set up the account manually.

 

I had a hard time getting 10.04 to pick up the intel x3100 in my desktop. Ended up going with server and running apt-get install ubuntu-desktop in order to be able to get everything working. Seems now, I have no problem.

On my netbook I uninstalled ubuntu one and some other unnecessary stuff. Certainly doesn't count as bloatware and I'm not upset with it, but since I don't need it I figured it would be better to just get rid of it.

 

Thanks for the replies everyone. It helps a lot.

Edit: I do have one question though. Is there any software for Ubuntu, like ghost, or windows backup and restore, that lets you create a complete system image of your HDD? Preferrably free software.

 

I'm sorry but I have to address this, I can't let information like this sit in public without being discussed.

So let me get this straight, you're more comfortable using an OS where you HAVE to install 3rd party security features to feel comfortable using the internet? That's outrageous.

Secondly, as per microsoft patching security quickly. Ubuntu (and therefore linux) is open source. ANYONE can patch a security issue and submit it. You'd rather wait for the people at microsoft to get around to patching something? Open source communities are notorious for getting things patched EXTREMELY quickly compared to the likes of apple and microsoft.

Linux is used for almost every single mission critical server that exists. I'm sorry you get a funny feeling that its security isn't up to your standards, but the rest of the world, as well as the facts, disagree.

Linux is built around security. Unless you willingly (by installing something with sudo and not using the repositories) install a virus, it's virtually impossible to become unknowingly infected.


As for the thread, go with 10.04 and uninstall what you don't want. Or try Kubuntu 10.04, that's what I run. Gnome has become ridiculous.

 

If you're really worried, and you can wait, wait for 10.10.

Ubuntu 10.10 a.k.a. Maverick Meerkat - Due for release in October 2010 - Softpedia

 

To all of the above yes. I rather trust a source like MS or third party developers over open source.

 

I have just had a clean install of 10.04 version on my laptop.
Now the flash player will crash if I try to play in fullscreen mode. This happens to both Firefox and Chrome.

Anyone has same problem?

 

1) "dd" can copy partitions into files and vice-versa. Has been around on pretty much every unix since the beginning of time.

2) Arrandale support needs 10.04, you won't get anywhere with 9.10

3) Some versions of the intel xorg driver crashed X with fullscreen flash video. Wait for update

 

Thanks. It's good to know.

 

Another problem that most aren't aware until you start noticing it, is the nvidia powermizer problem. What you'll get is your Nvidia graphics card being unable to fulfill its full potential. So far there's no fix for 2x0m series GPU. I know the newer 3x0m gpus are ok. Not sure about anything below 2x0m series.

 

Hehe, You man, are completely lost case Not even worth to explain to You how much in error You are....

For others - wouldn't it be worth to try another distro than Ubuntu?

 

Oh brother...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/01/16/1239212/German-Government-Advises-Public-To-Stop-Using-IE
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9176511/New_attack_tactic_sidesteps_Windows_security_software?taxonomyId=145
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security-Enhanced_Linux#Overview
http://blog.fpmurphy.com/2009/05/linux-security-capabilities.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_and_Linux#Security
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/security_report_windows_vs_linux/#execsummary
http://www.wikivs.com/wiki/Linux_vs_Windows#Security

 

But Ubuntu *is* from a source like MS, Canonical! Just because anyone can contribute, doesn't mean *every* contribution gets accepted, it all gets reviewed by the staff at Canonical.

 

True, but the reason I trust MS over open sauce is if security problems arise I trust that MS will act on it because they charge for their OS and the pressure is on to fix it. Also with Windows Vista or Seven you are notified of security updates.

 

There are flaws on both sides. That's just the way it is. There's no free lunch, no matter what MS do, or the open source people do, the security breaches will adjust and work around the obstacles. What ever you use, you should make sure it's safe.

Doesn't matter who you trust, you should make sure yourself when possible.

 

You are also notified of updates on Ubuntu, my friend. Ubuntu may not charge for the OS, but they DO charge for tech support, and are pushing their platform, they fix security flaws and bugs, for sure. Someone will issue the patch, and then a MOTD will approve it, it's simple, effective, and worth trusting. Linux and opensource are used on servers for a reason.