Slashdot Log In
What Normal Users Can Expect From Ubuntu 8.10
Posted by
timothy
on Sat Oct 25, 2008 05:31 PM
from the abnormal-users-can-expect-whatever-they-want dept.
from the abnormal-users-can-expect-whatever-they-want dept.
notthatwillsmith writes "With Ubuntu 8.10 due to be released in just a few days, Maximum PC pored through all the enhancements, updates, and new features that are bundled into the release of Intrepid Ibex and separated out the new features that are most exciting for Linux desktop users. Things to be excited about? With new versions of GNOME and X.Org, there's quite a bit, ranging from the context-sensitive Deskbar search to an audio and video compatible SIP client to the new Network Manager (manage wired, Wi-Fi, VPN, and cellular broadband connections in one place)."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
What normal users can expect (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Interesting)
When using previous Ubuntu versions, the first thing I would do after installation was the theme to something less brown. I downloaded and installed the 8.10 beta the day it was released and it was beautiful - no need to change a thing - I loved it.
Sadly an update replaced the beta's wallpaper with, what I imagine is, the wallpaper for the final release. It looks like crap so I changed to a solid brown background.
Ubuntu are employing people to do design work now and it really shows. Yes, you get a brown desktop background, no, this isn't what Microsoft or Apple would sell you (unless you've got a Zune, I guess), but yes, it looks wonderful.
An operating system is more than the colour of the background image, of course, so I really shouldn't be labouring the point so hard, or feeding the troll; if you don't like it you could change it - don't judge the whole thing on its theme. Having said that, in 8.10 brown works well.
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the problems Ubuntu has from a selling standpoint is that Gnome's look, even with the Ubuntu customized settings, look like a dull hodgepodge ripoff of Windows XP and OS X Panther.
If you can't get people to use your distro because it looks like it's way past its prime, then it doesn't matter how useable it actually is. People need to see past ideology and make something that looks like what people are likely to want to use.
In other words, brown is bad in this instance.
Unfortunately I don't think you've really got the gist of this thread, nor used the software in question. The OP was talking about the colour of the desktop wallpaper - let's not bring ideology into this. Also I don't agree with you when you say that Ubuntu looks "look like a dull hodgepodge ripoff of Windows XP and OS X Panther."
Yes, previous brown Ubuntus looked bad, that was the starting point of my original post, but in this instance brown Ubuntu looks good.
And that's ignoring the fact that I've shown 8.10 to a number of people, both highly technical and those who find double clicking hard, all of whom seemed to be impressed by the default look of the software. To repeat myself then:
In other words, brown is good in this instance.
Parent
The 8.10 wallpaper looks like... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it with these morons complaining about default colours? The unspoken premise of all their whinges is that the chosen hues are bad, and that if only a different (and obviously superior) colour had been chosen, then there would be no complaints.
What these idiots don't realise is that if it were XP-blue instead of earthy African reds and browns, then a million other idiots would be making exactly the same complaint in reverse.
Fools, please try to understand: a strange quirk of human beings is that we each have a favourite colour. This means that you will never be able to design a colour scheme that nobody dislikes. Your whining is therefore utterly pointless. It's redundant before it even leaves your mouth. I have three machines: they run Ubuntu Hardy, Kubuntu Intrepid beta, and Xubuntu Hardy. They are red-brown, cyan-black, and white-cerulean, respectively. And you know what? They are all perfectly fine. No, they do not "make me hurl with those turd colours"; no, they do not "give me a headache". They're just fucking colours. If the defaults are not in line with your personal inclinations, then learn how to click on the Preferences menu. Fuck.
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Funny)
I use babelfish to auto-translate my documentation to French to encourage people who don't like it to submit patches. Ubuntu is simply applying the same principle of ugly defaults to the desktop, brilliant!
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Insightful)
I do like it, and I think it's great branding. It's a color scheme absolutely unlike any other desktop OS. You know when you're sitting down at an Ubuntu machine, and I think that was the point.
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Funny)
In most cultures, brown is associated with shit, scat, gay sex, etc.
Really? I never had any particular color association with gay sex. But perhaps that's because I'm not so involved in that sort of thing.
Parent
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:4, Interesting)
Um...
Not to try and troll or anything, but while Ubuntu Studio is cool and all, particularly if you are doing sound mixing, wouldn't it be easier to just install Compiz Fusion and then pick from DOZENS of cool skins?
I guess it's just a matter of what you want/need your machine for.
(Although Ubuntu Studio DOES look pretty)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I like Ubuntu's warm theming. Other distros and OSes are so cold by comparison. I like red and orange as well, though, so right now I'm using the Kin Dust theme created by a member of Ubu
Re:What normal users can expect (Score:5, Interesting)
yes, changing your desktop wallpaper is a sure sign of intelligence and creativity. i approve of the logic of your statement.
i mean, changing your desktop from its default background is much more important than configuring your firewall, re-installing device drivers/your personal applications, restoring backed up files & documents, or setting up your network connection.
and nothing says "i'm a tech savvy hipster" like changing your desktop background to one of the throwback stock wallpapers that came with your OS--like a close-up shot up of wet leaves of grass/a frog/a butterfly, wind-blown sand dunes, tranquil autumn leaves, or any of the other kitsch backgrounds that expresses your personality--after all, what better way to show your sense of individuality than by personalizing your computer with a determined set of wallpapers, user avatars, and desktop icons?
so are you the skateboarder, guitar, soccer ball, or the chess pieces?
Parent
Newbie Question (Score:4, Interesting)
Is Ubuntu the easiest version of Linux to set up? I like the ease of just clicking "install" and everything automagically takes care of itself. (Like my Windows XP disc.)
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Informative)
No. Try Mandriva and PCLOS for the easiest - they've still got the jump on Ubuntu for "it just works" with no fiddling. And their Control Center feature is better.
Otherwise I prefer and use Ubuntu. Been using it for three years on three boxes.
Ubuntu /does/ seem to work without fiddling for some people, and no doubt a few will flame here that I'm some sort of Microsoft Shill or whatever, but that's my experience. When I install Mandriva or PCLOS, those just work from GO, and I really wish Ubuntu would have a good look at what they're doing different.
Haven't installed Ibex yet. I was one of the approx 25% of beta testers who had a wretched time, so filled out the bug reports and am now going to wait a month or two past release before trying the final.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Informative)
What version of Windows XP are you using? Any time I've installed XP from a normal disk, it requires at least agreeing to some license agreement, partitioning, formating, configuring your network to some degree, choosing username, clicking "Next" a bunch of times, some other random stupid things I'm preobably not remembering, and then installing several drivers. I'd love a copy of XP that installed as easily as hitting the "install" button.
Anyway, yeah, Ubuntu is about as easy as installing Windows-- potentially easier because it's likely that it will recognize more of your hardware without installing drivers. Also, you can boot up the install CD as a LiveCD and try using the OS before you install.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Informative)
I think he's probably talking about a restore cd or similair.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Informative)
Which he'll get, if he buys something like an Ubuntu computer from Dell:
http://www.dell.com/ubuntu [dell.com]
I bought an Ubuntu laptop from Dell and I'm very pleased.
You get support, a restore disk, "legal" DVD playback support and some very nice equipment.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd love a copy of XP that installed as easily as hitting the "install" button.
nLite [nliteos.com]
You can slipstream in service packs and hotfixes, set all those little options you always change, chose not to install certain components (even Luna), set your CD-key...
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Informative)
Huh. That happened to me, but I just started it up in some kind of safe mode where it started X without loading unusual drivers, and I uninstalled the nvidia stuff. Pretty easy. No reinstall needed.
If all else fails, you can usually just press Ctrl-Alt-F1 to switch away from a broken X and get a terminal, then use "sudo apt-get uninstall nvidia-glx nvidia-glx-new" and restart.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Any time I've installed XP from a normal disk, it requires at least agreeing to some license agreement, partitioning, formating, configuring your network to some degree, choosing username, clicking "Next" a bunch of times, some other random stupid things I'm preobably not remembering"
any big name OEM install includes about exactly picking your username, waiting while installs tons of garbage, (trial ware everything, stupid OEM software, those drivers you mentioned, etc) and then removing all the crappy sof
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Interesting)
In my experience it's more JustWorkish than Windows. My ancient Bt878whatever capture card and Chinese junk Bluetooth adapter were both a pain to set on Windows. On Ubuntu I just get a recognized capture device and a nice little BT icon on the tray. :-)
Haven't looked back since. Kudos to Shuttleworth and employees.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what doesn't work for me? Dual monitors. Every time I try to use dual monitors with Ubuntu it gets all confused and ends up giving me two copies of a 640x480 desktop or some crap like that. I've never had it work without writing my own xorg.conf which makes all the video control panel stuff break.
Why can't I just have what I have in Windows - A properly working Xinerama type desktop (not Twinview)? I don't want all my dialogs centered on the seam in the middle and I don't want to maximize across both monitors. Has any progress been made in this area?
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Insightful)
As a Linux Zealot with Mod points, I'd love to mod your exaggerations down. But, I use dual monitors and it never works as well as it should. On my laptop, I can only clone screens. On my desktop it works well except that compiz gets confused with dual monitors (so I turn it off). The latest Fedora and Ubuntu are making strides but it is still extremely disappointing. I love Linux, I'd never go back to Windows but I really wish dual monitor setup was better.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not that hard. You just add one line to your xorg.conf (something like "Virtual 2048 768" to the Display Subsection of your Screen section). Then you do a `xrandr --output VGA-0 --left-of DVI-0'. This gives you one X screen split across your two monitors. I have this working fine on multiple machines with the open source radeon drivers. The only hiccup from compiz is that if your total screen size if bigger than the maximum texture size of your card, you get some strange artifacts in the extra screen area. It's still quite usable, and a reasonable workaround is to just stick some window there pinned to all workspaces (I use an Eterm tailling /var/log/messages pinned using devilspie).
It used to be possible to run each monitor as a separate X screen using a little more hackery in the xorg.conf file. I thought that was nicer than using a single screen; however, Xorg broke that sometime in the past 10 months. Now trying to make that work (at least with the radeon drivers) will cause X to crash, which is really just pathetic.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Informative)
I use twinview on my laptop all the time, switching between dual and single a lot. The problem with it is really a Gnome issue. If you start up with a single monitor and switch to dual, Gnome doesn't think of it like two monitors, and so panels span both, windows maximise across both, etc.
The solution is to add 'Option "twinview" "1"' (or whatever it is) to your xorg.conf and the first time you use dual monitors after starting gnome, logout and login with the second monitor attached. Then it works.
You'll need to use the nvidia control panel to set up the monitor layouts etc.
With the exception of this (which is really less of a problem than it sounds, it meant that every couple of weeks I'd have to log out and log back in), twinview works fine.
In Intrepid, even this isn't necessary. Plug in a monitor, turn on twinview through the control panel, and it's all happy. Twinview is pretty much just an nvidia implementation of xinerama.
The reason it doesn't work like all the other cards is thanks to nvidia. Nothing that can be done until they see the light and make their drivers free software.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Informative)
It's actually easier than Windows, IMHO. It boots into Ubuntu without asking a single question, so you can decide if you like it. If you do, double-click "Install" on the desktop, answer the same type of questions as you would on Windows, and while it loads onto the hard drive, you can continue using it.
Or, if you prefer, stick the disk into a computer running Windows, click "Install", and it will install as if it were a Windows application. After installation, when you reboot, you get the usual grub menu to select either Ubuntu or Windows. If you later decide you don't like it, boot Windows and select Ubuntu and Uninstall from Add / Remove Programs, and it uninstalls.
I really can't imagine anything easier. Well, other than buying [dell.com] it [system76.com] pre-installed [tuxmobil.org]. :-)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Posts like yours are always fun because they're always wildly biased. First, you overstate the Windows partition step while over-simplifying the Ubuntu partition step. Second, I love how you include Microsoft Office in the Windows steps just to pad the list, as if most Windows PCs and their factory reinstall discs don't already include some form of Office. You also pad the list with things like "Windows installs more files," as if Ubuntu doesn't also, you know, install files. You even throw in Windows U
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And Ubuntu's version of the partitioner is that it gives a "use whole disk" option and a "drag the slider to show how much of the disk goes to each OS" thing. There is a more advanced partitioner available, but the user doesn't have to see it.
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Insightful)
How so? What I said is exactly that. On an unformatted disk you get three options, 1- use the whole disk, 2- custom partiton, and.. wait. there's only two.
I can't figure out what I mean by me over simplifying it because that's what it is, simple.
Since you didn't include an example of what you mean (no need to backup your claims, right) i'll just have to assume you don't know what you're talking about.
I did that because Ubuntu comes with Office software already on the disk.
You do realise that people use office software don't you?
This is nonsense, how can you do a fair comparrison of installing the operating system on a custom pc and come up with "the vendor disk".
It's totally irrelevant anyway because it's still not a click install even with the vendor disk. Which was my whole point in the first place.
Yes because it would be irresponsible not to download updates for Windows. It's so important that your box can get owned in less then 4 minutes [slashdot.org].
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone else is probably going to rip you to shreds for this, or if you're lucky try to give you a solution that by now you've discovered on your own anyway.
I won't do that. I'll say this instead: The stress you describe in your post is in no way related to "X being hard" or "Y being easy" or the technicalities of an install process or anything like that. What you experienced there was the fear of breaking out of your comfort zone and moving into the unknown. That's natural, it's part of what makes us people.
I remember that "are you sure?" moment from my first Linux install very well. I had to stare at that "Yes No" dialog for something like twenty minutes. Two or three cigarettes were smoked. I was petrified thinking of all the horrible things that could happen. And looking back on that now, that stare-down with my monitor didn't have a damn thing to do with partitions or installers or even the prospect of losing all my data. I was just scared of the unknown, as you were, and that's fine. Then we faced that fear and now we're more self-sufficient people because of that. So go us.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Informative)
He'll hit +5 because he's right. I install Windows XP every day, multiple times per day, on every piece of hardware you can imagine. As a matter of fact, what he described as the windows setup (which you claim is overstated) actually left out a few steps. Starting at what he should have listed as step six, you still have to install device drivers (this requires multiple reboots as you cover all hardware), install AV software, product activation (may require a telephone call if you've re-installed too many times, or changed any hardware), windows updates (more reboots)...
He was modded up because he was right. The entire Ubuntu installation, configuration, and applying all updates takes less then 1/2 hr (no, I'm not exaggerating, try it) and is finished while Windows XP is still formatting the disk.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Informative)
4) Wait for installer to finish then restart taking out the disk.
And meanwhile you can access the Internet (in most cases) or play some games.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Interesting)
You never just "click install" on windows xp..
1) Pop in disk
2) First you have to [...]
Almost correct.
1-5) as you said.
6) Look at the popup that says lsass.exe will shut down your box in 30 seconds
7) Pull the box off the network
8-12) Do step 1-5 again
13) Download antivirus without connection to the network. Pixies and leprechauns are helpful here.
14) Install the antivirus
15-16) step 6-7
Based on a true story. I can't tell you how much I hated windows when I saw the sasser popup.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:5, Interesting)
13) Download antivirus without connection to the network. Pixies and leprechauns are helpful here.
Which is why you should always install XP with at least one of the following:
a) Behind a firewall (may not be completely safe, though).
b) With a laptop besides you.
c) With an Ubuntu LiveCD.
Option c) is specially funny though, all things considered, but it's the one I usually recommend. In fact, many of my friends' PCs used to have a relatively small FAT32 partition for LinuxWindows file exchange during install/troubleshooting, before Linux got reliable NTFS support.
Parent
Re:Newbie Question (Score:4, Interesting)
2) First you have to setup a partition to install windows.. lets assume it's an empty disk so you'd press c (create partition) and number the number of disk space for that partition then enter, then you press enter again to install on that partition.
As an interesting anecdote to back up your point: a friend/roommate bought a new computer and got ahold of a warez XP 64-bit install CD. None of the cd keys from my secret stash worked, naturally, so he decided to go buy a legit copy of XP. Because the 64-bit installer had already loaded stuff on the drive (yeah I know real technical language—it's the weekend jeez) the legit disk refused to do anything.
So I got out a handy Linux livecd to nuke the partition table so the legit XP CD would install from scratch. So he was all set.
A few weeks later he motioned me into his room after I got home from work and explained that Windows wasn't seeing his whole drive. I immediately noticed that Windows had only created a 300 GB partition on his 750 GB drive! I mentioned a few tools I could get together to expand the NTFS filesystem, but he decided to just make the other 450 GB a D: drive.
Moral of the story is that installing Windows is, as you suggest, not just hitting some big red "Install" button.
Parent
What about Kubuntu 8.10? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sticking to 8.04 until I hear otherwise.
jdb2
The one Ubuntu feature I want most: (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't care if I have to pay for it. I just want to be able to play all Bluray media, including stuff with only HD audio codecs that are currently unsupported in Linux.
Now, I know some of you think this is unnecessary fluff. However, if Linux wants to compete with Windows it has to tackle the crucial stumbling blocks that force people to continue using Windows. Linux has lots of great home theater software and many aspirations towards filling that niche, but they amount to a hill of beans without support for all HD media.
Re:The one Ubuntu feature I want most: (Score:4, Insightful)
I see a few stumbling blocks between Blu-ray and Linux being licensed to play it.
1. The distro would likely have to rewrite most of the driver architecture to support the required media path protection.
2. It would almost certainly have to go closed source.
Somehow I don't see that happening.
Personally, I'm not touching Blu-ray with a ten foot pole due to the DRM. DVDs were bad enough, but at least they would never tell me "sorry, I don't like your TV so I won't let you watch me". Once region free DVD players became the norm, I was ok with spending money on them. As for Blu-ray.. Until they are willing to sell me a product I feel comfortable buying, I'll enjoy HD content via mkv on my Tvix.
Parent
Re:The one Ubuntu feature I want most: (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Very little apparently (Score:5, Informative)
I'm using Kubuntu 8.04 right now. The article claims "The last six months of development have brought tons of new functionality that make running Linux easier for all users". I hardly see anything awe-inspiring. Here's my perspective as a current KDE user:
1. GNOME: I see nothing revolutionary or even exciting here. Ekiga is their picture for this. That's definitely a niche app. Better bluetooth support and resolution controls are good I guess. I've had the on KDE for a few years now I believe.
2. X.org: Hotplugging mice/keyboards "works now"? Well, it works now for me with 8.04. They must've had to dig deep to find something like that. So does resolution switching and xrandr support for multiple displays (which is a huge deal, but has already been around for a year).
3. New kernel: always good for my laptop which typically get a few more things running more smoothly with each kernel release
4. Network manager: Anyway who has a 3G connection probably has a laptop. And laptop's need network profile. I need one for work and one for my apartment. Ubuntu doesn't support these and this article doesn't mention anything new. Everything listed is minor improvements. Personally, I have to use wicd, which is decent, but isn't quite as well integrated as networkmanager.
5. Guest account: I see no point for this. Either you trust the person or you don't. And you can create your own guest account if you really want to and switch to it. At least I can do that from KDE. I suppose one click is nicer than click, type in guest/guest, and log in. So maybe a worthwhile feature, though hardly earth-shattering
6. Flash video: Eh, what was stopping things from working before? I assume this just means version 10 is supported. Which is great, but 64 bit support is still lacking so I'll still have problems with it. No, not an ubuntu problem, but I can complain anyway.
7. Secret hidden folders: Just use truecrypt. This doesn't even encrypt your home directory based on the article. And you need to go to the terminal to set it up?
8. Config-less x.org: Now this is nice. Hopefully it'll work well. I haven't had to use an xorg config file for a few years now beyond the default, though to support multiple monitors I've had to include a virtual screen line. Hopefully this will fix that problem.
Personally, I'm more intereted in Kubuntu dropping KDE3 in 8.10. KDE4 can be set up well, but it certainly doesn't support everything that's in KDE3 and still isn't quite as smooth (though I actually like it a lot).
Eclipse (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish Ubuntu would get their act together on Eclipse.
From http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/1265/ [ubuntu.com]
My attempt to run Ganymede from a folder was unsuccessful. Maybe it was the AMD64 thing, I never figured it out, and I don't want to.
Ibex appears to be stuck at 3.2.2. That's Callisto from July 2006. If Jaunty remains stuck at 3.2 in April 2009, I'll begin to seriously wonder about things. Does July 2002 to June 2005 ring any bells with Ubuntu management?
I've read other threads which suggest that Fedora enjoys a small monopoly on the developers who are proficient at packaging Java applications.
[[Had some problems posting from a public terminal. Sorry if my repost ends up becoming a dup.]]
My Experience (Score:5, Informative)
So I installed intrepid and in the beginning there were constant application crashes, nvidia issues, then my wireless card stopped working and I couldn't even compile serialmonkey's drivers!
But now I am siting pretty, new vlc, new gnome, new gimp, open office 3.0 (from a ppa repo), new deluge
So in conclusion, if you want the latest and greatest free software then I highly recommend that you try Ubuntu 8.10, it works fabulously for me. If you want a super stable free software OS then use 8.04.1.
Re:kubuntu? (Score:5, Informative)
KDE4. No more KDE3, if you want that stick with hardy. So if you have already made the jump with KDE4 packages on hardy I'd guess "not that much", if you haven't well better read up on all the news in KDE4.
Parent
Re:kubuntu? (Score:5, Informative)
kubuntu 8.10 is coming along too, i've got the beta running, because the 8.04.1 update hosed my system. broke the x.org server, sigh.
8.10 kubuntu although still in beta has been pretty stable, there was one program that crashed on me, but didn't affect me, and there is an annoying bug with trying to configure the ethernet manually using the 'tray icon' (it won't ask for a password, and the ethernet can't be configured without a password) although, it seems like that icon is mysteriously gone today (there were some 27 updates today) plasmoids are really cool, they let you put useful widgets anywhere on the desktop, on the system bar, etc. but there aren't very many plasmoids right now.
Parent
I think it was a troll for the moderators. (Score:5, Insightful)
#1. As you mentioned, you need to unmount a partition to modify it.
#2. "...the garbage the LiveCD left on your drive."
But the LiveCD does not leave anything on your drive.
#3. "...because the liveCD requires the NTFS partition to be mounted..."
But the LiveCD does not require that any partitions be mounted.
I think that it was just a troll and one of the moderators did not know any better and mod'ed it up.
Parent
Re:I love the antivirus tag, so funny! (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless there is a rootkit in an ubuntu or debian package you're not making a lot of sense.
Even if there were you got the name and email address of the people who made the package and also the people who were responsible for checking the package.
You can even take that package and compare it to the original upstream version using diff.
You are just talking bullshit. Hence why you're probably posting anonymous, because you know you're talking nonsense.
Parent
Re:PowerPC Ubuntu Help (Score:5, Informative)
Not be be a fanboy, but you can use Debian for a PPC supported distro.
Parent
Re:What I noted about upgrading from 8.04 to 8.10 (Score:5, Interesting)
I never upgrade Windows OR Linux - I reinstall both on a clean partition.
I have two partitions, for the current and previous install respectively. When it's time to upgrade, I copy my user data from previous to current; reformat previous and install the new OS there; and flip partitions in the boot loader.
That way, if the new install isn't all I'd hoped, I can easily boot into the previous partition from the grub menu. And I don't have to worry about a Windows or Linux upgrade almost working (yes, I've had problems with both).
Parent