[kwlug-disc] Lucid is disappointing .. was Android everywhere ...

[R. Brent Clements]

Once again (couple of bugs aside) it is the arguement about whether to
show debug info to people who can't debug their system.

I think it is time for any disro that wants to appeal to both the
tech-savy AND the tech-slow to start asking during install.

Ubuntu wants to appeal to the audience that doesn't care. So they make
it as sleek looking as possible. For anything to appeal to the
tech-slow, it has to look non-threatening. And seeing a debug stream
always makes me think it is unfinished

Having said that, I would chose to leave the debug stuff on

Brent

On 9/15/10, Paul Nijjar <paul_nijjar at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 08:48:46AM -0400, Ralph Janke wrote:
>> On 09/14/2010 04:10 PM, Paul Nijjar wrote:
>>>
>>> Until the disappointing Lucid release, I think the conventional wisdom
>>> was "Start with Ubuntu".
>>>
>>
>> Why is lucid disappointing?
>
> I'll try to keep it brief:
>
> 0. Lucid is the least lucid distro I have used in years. It wants to
> be silent and pretty on bootup, which means that when bootup fails for
> some reason it is hideous to try and figure out what went wrong.
>
> 1. I get video problems again and again, because support for very
> common Intel chipsets is basically broken. I install Lucid and end up
> with a blank screen. This is because KMS support in the X.org video
> drivers is broken. But Ubuntu released Plymouth anyways, which depends
> pretty heavily on KMS.
>
> 2. I have mixed feelings about GRUB 2, but I definitely do not like
> the decision to hide the GRUB menu unless you happen to press the
> shift key at the magical right time. (I also despise having to run
> "update-grub" after editing config files -- wasn't that why we
> switched away from LILO?)
>
> 3. Plymouth is not ready for prime time, and again you need to know
> the secret magic keystroke to make it display anything useful. I don't
> know of any Plymouth theme that actually displays useful information
> by default.
>
> My basic complaint is that Ubuntu pushed fast, pretty bootup over
> reliable, debuggable bootup. Fast, pretty bootup screens are nice when
> the system boots up consistently, but in Lucid's case the bootup is
> buggy on all kinds of video cards.
>
> I cannot in good conscience hand somebody a Lucid CD and expect that
> they will have a usable system at the end of it. That feels a lot
> different than previous versions of Ubuntu (Hardy and earlier).
>
> I cannot even get our automated installer to work consistently when
> installing Lucid.
>
> I have spent hours and hours working around these problems so that I
> can actually install Ubuntu systems for work and for sale.
>
> Apparently I am the only person on this list who gets bitten by these
> bugs again and again. Lots of other people (including people at my
> workplace) are thrilled with the new features that Lucid supports. But
> I personally am pretty unhappy with the release. It has cost me a lot
> of time and a lot of frustration.
>
> My basis of comparison for this is Hardy, because I am a conservative
> who tends to ignore the 6-month releases.
>
> - Paul
>
> --
> http://pnijjar.freeshell.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device