Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Linux Software

Hardy Heron Alpha 4 Released 272

LarryBoy writes "Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy Heron) alpha 4 was released Friday and Ars Technica has a look at what's new in the latest builds of Hardy Heron. 'Although many of the significant architectural features like PulseAudio and GIO are still in transitional stages and aren't fully functional yet, Ubuntu 8.04 alpha 4 is still very impressive. I'm a big fan of D-Bus and I'm very pleased to see it being adopted throughout the entire desktop stack in core components.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hardy Heron Alpha 4 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by snarfies ( 115214 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @06:36PM (#22276672) Homepage
    Call me back when you have at least a beta. Even then I wouldn't think that front-page worthy. Save that for the final release.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02, 2008 @06:37PM (#22276682)
    This was on slashdot for a while: Hardy Heron Alpha4: A Glimpse into the Future of Ubuntu [techthrob.com]; it gives a better look into the new applications included with HH, and mentions some other changes not included in the Ars Technica rewview.
  • Re:Who cares? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02, 2008 @06:54PM (#22276848)
    Why would we? What makes you think we give a damn if you know or not?
  • by eddy ( 18759 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @07:07PM (#22276936) Homepage Journal

    In particular, Nautilus will now queue up long file transfer operations and display them in a single window rather than spawning a separate window for each file transfer operation.

    Please tell me this means that file operations will actually queue to be run in sequence, saving us from disk and cache trashing slowing things down? With "run", "pause", "cancel" on each individual transfer? Pretty please?

  • by pipatron ( 966506 ) <pipatron@gmail.com> on Saturday February 02, 2008 @07:09PM (#22276954) Homepage

    So what you're saying is that Debian fucking sucks because they take like, Linus' kernel and GNU compilers and Theo's ssh server instead of developing their own things?

    I think you need to take a deep breath and read the GPL and BSD license again. ;)

    Sharing is caring.

  • by alexborges ( 313924 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @07:10PM (#22276962)
    Who ARE you? Bill Gates? Man, i thought I had heard everything when I looked at his old "Open Letter to Hobbyists", but you come even in this day and age.

    If you dont want your software to be freely used and redistributed, DO NOT OPEN IT. Period. Canonical is doing what they can with what is available and has no obligation, either moral, ethical or legal, to do anything for or against the producers of the FOSS they use. About they not opening software of their own, in that very speciffic case, im right besides you: release, cannonical bastards, SLES did it for yast (although thankfully that didnt take off for the rest of the distros), redhat did it for the Netscape Directory and gfs (and that cost them a bundle) so yeah, play fair and dont use proprietary software.... or is this right?

    For example, redhats RHN proxy/satellite stuff uses oracle as backing and is quite proprietary as far as i know. Novell hasnt released the code for their support portal either, is that ethically right or wrong?.... im not sure where you want to stand on this issues, but its getting more complicated to pass judgment on this stuff the more I think about it.

    Now... im waiting to see if lightning strikes me. Your slashdot id gets you quite close to the very begining. I mean, you gotta be old in this game. I was about to cite the Open Source Definition but then again, maybe you're one of the authors or something and will retaliate to this strongly.... aw, hell, here it goes:

    Dont you think your position goes against the spirit of the OS definition and the GPL?
  • by ricegf ( 1059658 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @07:42PM (#22277240) Journal

    Kde 4.0 supposed to be a rapid improvement and Kubuntu is supposed to be alot more polished and integrated

    Actually, KDE 4.0 is more of a beta quality [kde.org] release (like Mac OS/X 10.0 or pre-SP1 Vista) - it's 4.1 or so that'll really be ready for daily use by normal users. Unfortunately, Hardy falls at an awkward time with respect to 4.0 (or vice versa) - 4.0 isn't ready for long term support, but 3.5 isn't likely to be relevant for 3 long years. As a result, while Ubuntu 8.04 will be a Long Term Support (LTS) release, Kubuntu 8.04 will not be [kubuntu.org].

    I agree with your opinion of Gnome (I use it myself), and with your assessment of KDE 4 (I look forward to trying it out - looks great so far!). And I'm very suspicious that Mono contains Microsoft-patented technology, and believe free software developers should avoid it until the title is clear. But that's just my $0.02 worth (and it seems to be worth less every day...) I don't believe any critical part of Gnome is dependent on Mono, however.

  • by Matt Perry ( 793115 ) <perry.matt54@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Saturday February 02, 2008 @07:46PM (#22277280)

    The GPs objection to Ubuntu is that while they build on what other people have done, they don't release their own contributions back tot he community.
    Ubuntu is closed-source? That's news to everyone. Source?
  • by leenks ( 906881 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @08:06PM (#22277522)
    Launchpad. Show me the source!
  • by Zarniwoot ( 979457 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @09:03PM (#22277968)
    Launchpad. Show me the source!

    Is Launchpad even released to the public? It doesn't make much sense to discuss the license if it isn't distributed. Do you require Google to release source for its search engine?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02, 2008 @09:54PM (#22278386)
    Sure Canonical may not have added a lot to the pool of code available. Still I wouldn't say that they're piggybacking or taking undue credit for anything, as their contribution, in my eyes, lie more in the way they have brought linux to the masses. My first flavor of linux was Ubuntu, and a surprisingly lot of my less than technical friends have often taken me aback asking if they should switch, not to linux, but to Ubuntu specifically.

    All I can say is, as long as Ubuntu stays true to its name, I wont have any qualms about using it.
  • by thtrgremlin ( 1158085 ) on Saturday February 02, 2008 @10:19PM (#22278590) Homepage Journal
    Ubuntu seems to have been great at attracting non-computer people to linux. All but 1 mac in my classroom (of 9 computers) is running ubuntu, and students love it. Ubuntu isn't even an open source project, but a repository and a list of preffered applications that are meant to work together. Beyond that, the only thing that makes it different from other distros is Shuttleworth's $30 million dollar backing in the case that a necessary component doesn't get made (so far none of which has been spent) and the advertising / publicity. It is like what Amazon has said about its own patent trolling, it is sick but just the way our crappy system works. Cannonical keeps linux in the news, no matter how irrelevant the news is which is necessary to get people to the community. Getting people to develop with Ubuntu in mind is really just developing with X/glibc/gtk/gnome/kernel2.6/whatever in mind versus a million other options that usually work every other distro. Remember, vendors (and other sheeple) like one one bad choice over many good choices most days because it is simple. M$ has proved this over and over again. Ubuntu is trying to set a standard for one good choice that will be portable to other distros. Also, I am certain Shuttlesworth would be happier to see 5 new fedora developers than 1 new ubuntu developer / user / whatever to promote linux, FSF, FreeCulture movement. I really think it is stupid anyone can actually argue over the distribution of 8/10th%.

    I am equally delighted any time I see someone open their eyes to GNU/Linux for ANY reason, or ANY distribution. I think the old community is going to need to worry more about the influx of noobs to the community as market share rises, and try to remember why we are all here in the first place.
  • by clarkn0va ( 807617 ) <apt@get.gmail@com> on Saturday February 02, 2008 @11:51PM (#22279242) Homepage

    I need to be productive and I need a working system. End of story.
    Many people will sympathise with your frustration of hardware not working properly/having full support in non-Windows systems. Many of us, however, balk at your solution, which in my view, represents a compromise on so many levels.

    You see, if I'm looking at purchasing a laptop with Broadcom wireless and I happen to know that Broadcom Don't Work That Great(TM) in linux, then rather than switch to an OS that is in my eyes inferior, insulting, buggy and patronising, not to mention the fruit of a hostile predatory monopolist, I'll just find another laptop, one that has good open hardware. They abound, at least in this market.

    Now you may accuse me of being political, bigotted, or evangelist, but I've used every significant version of Windows since 3.11 for Workgroups frankly they all grate my nerves.

    And I'm done screwing away hours just to get this soundcard or that wireless or video hardware to work. Yeah, most people here will agree with you, but choosing Vista over Ubuntu when there are perfectly good hardware options out there is, in my view, shooting yourself in the foot, putting the cart before the horse, and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.


  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02, 2008 @11:57PM (#22279276)
    Because the Ubuntu community aren't a load of whining little bitches who want to steal launchpad. Does that answer you're question?

    You've obviously never been an OSS developer, only users ever whine about this kind of stuff.
  • by thePsychologist ( 1062886 ) on Sunday February 03, 2008 @12:19AM (#22279412) Journal
    "Well, yeah, I agree that it's marketing. My objection is that it's verging on the dishonest and that seems to permeate much of the enthusiasm behind Ubuntu. For instance their parent company Canonical still has not released the sourcecode to Launchpad! How absolutely hypocritical is that?"

    How is that hypocritical? It's not because Canonical is helping the spread of open source. It's helping the popularity of Linux. Perhaps one of the best things any company can give to the open source community is more users, and Canonical is doing that. Of course they didn't make most of the components themselves - they put them together and advertised it right.

    Launchpad is their product; what's wrong with their doing with it what they think is best for it? Whether or not it's best for the community is not the issue; it's their business. Besides, they have already open sourced one component of Launchpad, namely, Storm.
  • by kripkenstein ( 913150 ) on Sunday February 03, 2008 @03:02AM (#22280162) Homepage

    Launchpad. Show me the source!
    It would be nice to have the source to Launchpad. However,
    • Lauchpad is not part of Ubuntu. So this does not make Ubuntu non-free in any way
    • Does Red Hat release the source code to RHN and everything else they run on their servers? Does Novell? I don't think so. I'm not saying this is the right thing to do, just that Canonical aren't special. The issue is that server code isn't in the same category as code that runs on your PC. That code should be FOSS, most of us here will agree. Code that I merely access from a server, that's another issue altogether, and worthy of discussion, which the FOSS community is just now starting to get around to (see the Affero GPL).
  • Re:ndiswrapper (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Daengbo ( 523424 ) <daengbo AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday February 03, 2008 @05:56AM (#22280864) Homepage Journal
    Microsoft Windows or Apple OSX achieve what GP poster is saying.

    MS achieves virtually nothing. The hardware vendors to elaborate testing and fiddling to make sure the pre-installed OS works when you get it.

    Apple does a bit more: it checks for its own (limited) hardware compatability.

    But pre-installed Ubuntu from Dell ... and it all works. Buy a EeePC and ... it all works.

    Try installing XP or Vista on a computer you built yourself sometime. It rarely all just works out of the box. It requires hours of installing drivers, made easier because the part manufacturers supply those drivers for you.

    Compare like to like, please.
  • by JohnFluxx ( 413620 ) on Sunday February 03, 2008 @06:30AM (#22281012)
    If you buy a machine with Ubuntu pre-installed, then presumably the wireless should 'just work' on that too.
  • Re:ndiswrapper (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Knuckles ( 8964 ) <knuckles@d a n t i an.org> on Sunday February 03, 2008 @02:57PM (#22283764)
    Dude, this software was a gift to you. Use it if you have a need for it, or leave it if you don't, but stop insulting the givers. It's not optimal that some chipsets are not supported, but only the manufacturers can change that (by releasing specifications or drivers), so go complain to them. Meanwhile, behave rationally and research your hardware before buying, thus supporting those vendors that cater to you. It's not as if the choice was limited: as mentioned, Intel and Atheros (whose chipsets are in many good brand cards, like D-Link) work just dandy.
  • Re:ndiswrapper (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thePowerOfGrayskull ( 905905 ) <.marc.paradise. .at. .gmail.com.> on Sunday February 03, 2008 @05:49PM (#22285184) Homepage Journal

    What is it with Linux users and bad suggestions? I've struggled through getting one distro to work, a distro that is know for its ease of use, and now you want me to try a different one? Why the fuck do you think I would want to put myself through all that again?
    What is it with people who shit in the faces of those who try to offer what help they are able? Clearly one distro is not working for you. It will take you download time + 5 minutes to boot to a livecd, to see if pclinuxos works better for you. But I suppose it takes much less effort to simply be a prick. Good on ya.

%DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears