Ubuntu 9.10: The Karmic Koala Benchmarked And Reviewed

[Guest]

I love Ubuntu. I have been using Ubuntu for a couple of years now and love it. I upgraded Ubuntu from 9.04 and the upgrade crashed my grub bootloader. I later found after upgraded my other OS Windows XP, Solaris 10 (10/09), OpenSUSE 11.2, and Fedora 12; I found that grub 2 was able to find and boot all my partitions except for Sun Solaris 10 (10/09) which is ZFS. I was able to manually configure grub and all is good. I have also found that Ubuntu is the only OS other then Windows XP which costs money where everything just simply works (wireless, mp3, flash, streaming video, server software installation). There is also an under stated feature of the new Ubuntu one; you can submit bug reports and I have found that they are fixed quickly (a couple of days) not even Microsoft can do that. Ubuntu is by far the best OS out there. I just wish I could get it preinstalled on a new HP notebook for less money then Windows 7 since it is free. Microsoft does not deserve the business on new CPU sales. Ubuntu is a better OS since it comes with a GUI for installing all the free opensource software that is out there. I personally don't plan on spending money on software ever again and I am an IT professional. Go Opensource.

 

[Brainstorms]

Adam, I'm surprised you had so much trouble installing 9.10... So far I've installed, configured, updated 9.10 on the following platforms:

64-bit systems--
ASUS M4N82d (AMD 955 BE, 4GB, 9800GTx2, SATA2, 750W)
ASrock K10N78 (AMD 64 X2 6000+, 4GB, 8800GT, SATA2, 500W)
ASUS M2V-MX (AMD 64 3800+, 2GB, 7300GS, SATA2, 380W)
Dell Precision 670 (Dual Xeon 3.8 HT, 6GB, 8600GSO, SATA1, 900W)
SuperMicro (Dual Opteron 250, 20GB, ATI RageProXL, SCSI-320, ?W)

32-bit systems--
Dell GX-280 (P4 3.6 HT, 3GB, 9500GT, SATA1, 450W)
ASUS P4SD-LA (HP Pavilion a375c) (P4 3.0 HT, 4GB, 6800, SATA1, 380W)
Abit IC7-G (P4 2.4 HT, 4GB, 7600GT, SATA1, 650W)
ASUS P4S533 (Sony VAIO, SiS-based) (P4 2.67, 1.5GB, 6600, IDE, 270W)
Dell Dimension 4500S (P4 2.53, 1GB, on-board vga, IDE, 180W)
Intel D850GB (P4 1.5, 768MB RIMMs, ATI ? (ancient), PCI SATA card, 380W)
MSI MS-6368 (VIA-based) (P3 1.4, 1GB, on-board Trident, IDE, 250W)
Abit BX6-r2 (P3 Celeron 1.4, 1GB, MX420, SCSI-40 & -160, 400W)

and had troubles in only the last case, a 10+ year-old 440BX-based Slot-1 motherboard running a Tualatin Celeron and a collection of 9 GB SCSI hard drives (on two Adaptec adaptors). Couldn't get it stable enough to start downloading updates. (However, it did run 9.04 without any troubles!)

All but one were clean installs (with /home preserved on secondary HDDs), using ext4. All had at least 2 HDDs, several had 4 (with RAID1 and LVM being used), and many were dual- or triple-booted with XP & Win7. Most also are running VirtualBox, too.

This is a VERY wide range of processors, motherboards, and peripherals... (No, no wifi cards, and yes, all but two vgas are Nvidia by intent, and the Nvidia driver is the only driver download used.) I don't think I've just been lucky...

Ubuntu 9.10 seems pretty solid to me... Perhaps the follow-on updates have fixed several things that troubled you? (For the record, I tried Ubuntu with 6.10, then again with 8.04, and have gone with each new Ubuntu version since then.)

 

[jobs012]

This release is very good! I intalled it on a 5 year old pc (s478 Cel 2.16 + ddr1 256mb and it runs great!

 

[Elderlybloke]

I upgraded last night, with the job getting finished this morning.
It appeared at first to have gone well, but then after the restart I had no internet connection.

Caused me great confusion . I have 8.10 still on the computer , so used that and all is well again.

Looks a bit less snazzy than 9.10 but it works properly .

Very sad as I was full of hope etc. Maybe in a couple of months I will try again (As for my getting onto 9.04 , that took two tries , got it finally in September.

Still can't complain as it hasn't cost an arm and a leg like another OS does.

 

[Guest]

I had similar issued as the author, the kernel failure did appear first on beta, and several people, including me, reported it. however it persisted for a week or two, before being fixed. it did not cause any serious trouble with me though. I am using Ubuntu for three years now as a secondary system, and never seen a kernel failure before. I didnt use the software centre at all, since I red somewhere it is a "early version", so I stuck with synaptic
Jaromir

 

[Guest]

I too tried Ubuntu 9.10 and MythBuntu 9.10 on a variety of different machines that also had 9.04 Installations that ran fine. I had tons of problems with 9.10. Install problems, lots of sound problems.

I tried Kubuntu 9.10 and just love it. So much that I now have all 5 of my Linux machines running it. The MediaCenters I installed MythTV on Kubuntu and am very pleased with them versus the disaster of MythBuntu 9.10.

I had forgot how much I prefer KDE which I used to run under OpenSuse. I think Kubuntu 9.10 is the best Linux distribution that I have ever run (Although I still like OpenSuse YAST better for configuring). It also has the performance and eye candy to take on Windows 7 although I don't see it getting huge market share, but it is capable of it.

I also have windows 7 as a dual boot on all but one of the Linux Machines and it also performs ok.

I don't understand why Ubuntu sticks with GNOME as a desktop?

 

[Guest]

> I spent four days preparing for, installing, and subsequently un-installing Karmic, then re-installing Jaunty.

I spent ~30 min (1 hours if there are many updates to download) installing Ubuntu (no matter the version) and 1 sec. un-installing it.

I may not disagree with the underlining of the the article (requesting more reliability, questioning 9.10 stability vs. 9.04), but please save us the drama. You sound like a winning Windoze fan boy.

 

[kedar_apte]

Hi,
I tend to agree with the author a bit, but perseverance pays. I tried 32 bit Karmic one day after the release on my home desktop which is an AMD Sempron with GE Force & 2 GB RAM and it failed miserably beyond repair. I dont want to recollect and write my agony here and I vowed not to check Ubuntu release again within 1 month of release.

However, with a new laptop coming in at home, I was tempted to try the 64 bit Karmic on my Dell Vostro 1220 2 days back (22nd December) and woaahh....it worked like a breeze. I dont know what the guys at Ubuntu did, but after the update which was like 120 MB, the system was fast like the Haleys Comet, stable like the rocks of Gibraltar and stylish like Maveric in Topgun.

I just broke my vow and reloaded the 32 bit version on my home desktop PC, updated it and I am hooked on to the version. Guys, just try it once more and you will not regret. Trust me on this. I have also been a big fan of jaunty and still retain it on my Toshiba Netbook, but this version is lot sleeker than jaunty and now working with all the goodies is like cutting a slice of butter.

Update the system blindly before using the system.

best, Kedar

 

[hp79]

I tried netbook remix 9.10 just because the reviewer said it's worth it. My thinkpad x61t had problems with clicking the menu items. Sometimes I can click something with one click, sometimes I have to click it several times to make it launch a program. Sometimes I have to hover over another menu then come back to the icon I want and click to launch the program. It is so inconsistent that made me not able to use it. Maybe because I have a intel SSD? Something is wrong.

 

[Guest]

Works great on my amd 64 panel pc. The mint version nice too but a few sound problems. Using the somewhat "bloated" ultimate version but except for a slower install I've run into no other problems. It's got lot's of eye candy which is a nice shot of bling for those who want to stay with gnome. Not so sure if I like the new grub as it has some trouble picking up or labeling some of the testing distro's I have installed. I still use Mepis 8 when I get in trouble as a backup to install to a small partition so I can get it working again. The new grub a bit difficult to modify for noobers like me. Keep up the great work Canon boys!!!!

 

[catswold]

Some folks around here don't read very well.

The problems Adam cited were associated with a fresh install, not an upgrade, so all of those who question his experience and who did an upgrade are missing the point.

The worst problems were associated with the 64 bit version so if you did a 32 bit installation then your criticisms are again misplaced.

For a new release (not beta) to have such a high degree of poor installation experiences one must conclude that the Koala is not ready for prime time. 50/50 is not a good recommendation.

Think I will wait for the 10.04 releas and see if they get their act together. Adam is right, this could seriously damage the effort Ubuntu is making to be seen as a genuine alternative to Windows and OSX...especially with Win 7 garnering so many accolades.

 

[Guest]

I have used Ubuntu since 2006 and upgraded 9.04 to 9.10 and have been plagued with random locking on a machine that has worked with every other Ubuntu version. I blew the OS away and did a fresh install and still have random freeze which can't be duplicated by going online and doing the exact same screens. It seems to freeze while mainly scrolling on web sites in fact it froze on this site and I had to do a hard re-boot, nothing works other than useless mouse movement. Ubuntu 9.10 really sucks with my Dell GX260, I see others with similar problem and no solution or response from Ubuntu, I am looking for another OS as this one has turned to crap.

 

[Guest]

after several problems with 9.10 and about 10 reinstalls i went back to 9.04 and no more problems

 

[Guest]

The review reflects quiet well my own experience with ubuntu 9.10, altough I hadn't any problem with the install process (and I tried both 32 and 64 bit) but I noticed that it is buggier than 9.04, some hardware which was working by default now does not work, random screen freeze (specially with Firefox), the start up process was giving me some trouble at the start, but I think it got an update to fix it, the usb hard drives are not accessible at startup for programms like deluge so you first have to click on it, then restart deluge to make them accessible.

All this things where working with 9.04 so I probably will wait for the next LTS release and stick to it.

 

[dshyne]

It seems to me, and I may be wrong that the Ubuntu devs try new things out in the .10 release, and make the .04 release rock solid. To me that is the reason for the 2 releases a year. One release to try new things and play around, and one release to be as stable as possible in order to be used on production machines. IMHO if you are having issues, either stick with the LTS releases, or at least the .04 releases.

 

[Guest]

I upgraded my Dell laptop from 9.04 64 Bit to 9.10 64 without a hitch and noticed immediate improvements in disk performance with the Ext4 file system and by the way I upgraded the file system as well and it worked fine. I also am running 9.10 in a VM on Windows 7 without any problems at all. We have several people running 9.10 at work as well and so far the only reported issue has been with 9.10 breaking one guys install of VMWare. But upgrading to the latest version of VMWare solved that problem. So overall I have to say it has been a success for us anyway.

 

[Guest]

Installed 1/19/2010 brand new AMD 4x II, 4gig DDR4 RAM, No Problems with Install, Everything works great. No drivers in Xsane for Canon led 50 that work yet. Will be dual booting with Windows. Have been helping a friend Install Win 7, on a brand New HP AMD 4X with the free up grade from Vista, Install went great, problems after update from Microsoft and rebooting, brought problems with Roxio 2010 DVD Burning, hard to remove Outlook which is the default mail program, just a lot of minor problems with applications, that were said to be compatible. Ubuntu linux 9.10 was a breeze to install and setup. Have been dual booting Win XP Pro and Ubuntu 8,04, 8.10, 9.04 and now 9.10 on 2 laptops, 2 Desktops. Have not decided on which Windows to use for the dual boot on the new computer.

 

[gethooked7]

I've used Ubuntu 9.10 since the New Year and its been fine. I even Took out my internal hard drive and I'm now running Ubuntu 9.10 on my western dig 1 TB external HD. The free programs you get with speak for them self. There is so much you can do and the community support excellent. I am a noob. You can even run the live cd without a hard drive installed at all and works great.( keep in mind does not save info when using this mode.) Also great for wireless. I do wish the graphic support for NVidia is better and for Steam.

 

[Guest]

Hie all. A special thanks to Adam Overa for providing critical analysis on Ubuntu Karmic compared to Ubuntu Jaunty. Most of us may perceive him differently, I most definitely agree with him as far as Ubuntu Software Centre is concerned. Here is my experience:

As far as Ubuntu Karmic is concerned, The boot time is outstanding! Well done! Straight to the point: I went to Ubuntu Software Centre to install my System tools selection using cool compiled third party repositories for those of us who do not have access to a dedicated broadband connection. To my fascination and astonishment,(and frustration too), I started installing System Tools from 12pm South African Time and almost finished the section at 8:52pm, due to the increased navigation for just a single package! I quickly re-installed Ubuntu Jaunty Jackalope the following day starting at 6:00am South African time and installed my third party repositories, all sections(sound & video, everything!) and I was done in 5 hours flat! (including graphics tweaks & customisations). Compatibility with hardware, multimedia,(with lovely support for wma, wmv & amr with Realplayer 11), I give Ubuntu 9.04 a perfect A! I know the beloved Ubuntu community means well by a very clean, good-looking software installer interface but may I suggest strongly that if there is a way of looking at this software installation issue so that its ease of use as far as speed and efficiency is concerned is as good and flawless as Ubuntu 9.04, I will quickly upgrade without hesitation to Ubuntu Karmic Koala. Otherwise, Forward with Ubuntu 9.04! It's the best! Not that Karmic isn't: just that cumbersome issue of software installation, that's all.

 

[Guest]

I have installed both the 32 bit and the 64 bit versions on several PC's - I have had no problems with either lap-tops or desktop PC's and installation is considerably quicker and easier than the marathon always experienced when installing either the ill fated M$ Vista or its equally bloated love-child Windoze 7. We are getting more and more people moving away from M$ onto Linux, with Ubuntu, Mint and PC-OS seeming to offer flavours for most tastes. A few years ago, we often built bespoke Linux front ends, but with the rapid improvements of "off-the-shelf" distributions, life is now very much easier. I think we all need to thank the guys and gals working away behind the scenes, who are putting Linux well and truly on the map.

 

[Guest]

I've been running 9.10 64-bit since the day it came out and haven't had a single issue since. I too run an AMD 64 6000+. I think 9.10 is the best version yet.

 

[Guest]

Use Windows and spend your lifetime on something else. Simple.