Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty Jackalope)

[Sazafraz]

I am really excited for this one because it seems they took a step away from trying to add as much software as possible to improving its performance. For those who have tried it, is it significantly faster than 8.10? Also, they have officially declared ext4 as stable, how much better is it than ext3 and are there any big problems with it?

Can't wait!!

[JAC]

More importantly, can the damned thing boot to a single SATA drive system.

[mr_raider]

More importantly, can the damned thing boot to a single SATA drive system.

What's this now?

[gordholio]

More importantly, can the damned thing boot to a single SATA drive system.

Yes, of course it can. I have Ubuntu 9.04 beta and it works great!
Not using Windows at all except within VirtualBox in Ubuntu.

Ubuntu 9.04 final is coming out on April 23 for folks who want to give it a try by running it off a Live CD.
Pretty amazing what you get for free.

[RCGA]

Yes, of course it can. I have Ubuntu 9.04 beta and it works great!
Not using Windows at all except within VirtualBox in Ubuntu.

Ubuntu 9.04 final is coming out on April 23 for folks who want to give it a try by running it off a Live CD.
Pretty amazing what you get for free.

I've used the LiveCD, and for someone just using email and word, it's amazing

Now, trying to install the thing is another matter. I'm not computer illiterate by any means, but trying to install 8.10 messed up my computer so bad I had to reformat it.

[jz1n]

i nub :0)

[Mistro]

I believe its ext3 by default. Not Fat32. Fat 32 prevents files > 4gb.

You will have to repartition to install it anyways. Virtual machines or live CDs/Perisistant live usb's are usually the best bet if you wish to experiement or use it as a temporary system.

[Sazafraz]

I've used the LiveCD, and for someone just using email and word, it's amazing

Now, trying to install the thing is another matter. I'm not computer illiterate by any means, but trying to install 8.10 messed up my computer so bad I had to reformat it.

Haha yeah, I know what you mean. Partitioning was so frustrating when I first started cause I always gotten these random errors while trying to partition but once you practice more on your friends computers you get the hang of it.

[RCGA]

Haha yeah, I know what you mean. Partitioning was so frustrating when I first started cause I always gotten these random errors while trying to partition but once you practice more on your friends computers you get the hang of it.

I could partition the drive fine (with another program), but could never get ubuntu to install on it, it always gave me an error.

If they want people to switch or give it a try, they're going to have to make the installation process seamless first and foremost.

[Hugh]

I could partition the drive fine (with another program), but could never get ubuntu to install on it, it always gave me an error.

If they want people to switch or give it a try, they're going to have to make the installation process seamless first and foremost.

Ubuntu installs about as easily as I could imagine.

My guess is that partitioning is mysteriously arcane to most folks. That is a real barrier that I don't know how to surmount.

I have to admit that when I install Ubuntu, I take charge of partitioning (manual, not automatic) so I may not see what you see.

I don't know the exact rules, but when I resize a Vista partition, I've had Vista throw a snit. In ways that XP never did. I have a suspicion that Microsoft wants to make it hard. I think what worked for me was to resize, then boot into Vista (before installing Linux) and ask it to check the disk. Then all was well.

Anyway, you said that your problem was installation, not partitioning. I've rarely had problems with installation, and I've done quite a few on diverse machines. The Ubuntu community is generally very helpful -- have you asked for any help? What was the error message that you got?

[JAC]

What's this now?

Last few versions haven't worked for me after I upgraded my IDE drive to a SATA drive.

[someguy91]

I could partition the drive fine (with another program), but could never get ubuntu to install on it, it always gave me an error.

If they want people to switch or give it a try, they're going to have to make the installation process seamless first and foremost.

Heh... common misconception. The reason that windows installs easily on everything is that hardware manufacturers test their hardware with windows. Linux, on the other hand, is generally ignored. However, linux actually supports WAY more devices on a default install than does windows.

Anyway.... "update-manager -d" that's how you get Jaunty. I'm running it right now and it's fantastic. I would get it before the official release date anyway, because the servers are going to be swamped. On release date, it might be a couple megabyte download to update to the final release.

[Seiphas]

I have a production server running in my basement, running 8.10. Let's test out 9.04 right now, shall we?

[gordholio]

I have a production server running in my basement, running 8.10. Let's test out 9.04 right now, shall we?

I don''t know what a production server is, but if it's anything really important, I would suggest to wait for the final version of 9.04 on April 23.
I am using the 9.04 beta and it's been fine so far, but I wouldn't trust a beta if you have vital information.

[Gutty96]

I have 8.10 on one drive, and 9.04 beta on the other. So far, I am very pleased with 9.04, and can't wait for the final.

The first days with 8.10 were very frustrating, getting Java, and Flash working in 64bit. A quick install with Synaptic in 9.04 and done. Flash and Java fully functional.