Hey Sup Forums,
I'm installing Xubuntu today and i wonder what's the best choice between:
>Latest LTS release: 16.04, Xenial Xerus
And
>Latest regular release: 17.04, Zesty Zapus
16.04 is pretty old, 17.04 is only supported for 9 months... i'm puzzled
Other urls found in this thread:
kernel.ubuntu.com
launchpad.net
twitter.com
why do they even care putting out versions that are only supported for 9 months?
ok then
Xubuntu Core 17.04, user-kun
Xubuntu only supported for 3 years, but as i know you can update from lts to 17.04.
17.04. Then you can upgrade to 17.10 when its out and ready.
16.04 is LTS (long-term support), it's mostly meant for businesses and those who want stability. 17.04 is more cutting edge obviously.
ok then, i'll go for the 17.04 then upgrade it when 17.10 is out and fixed.
firing unetbootin...
>I was halfway down the hallway when the taco bell began to take hold
it's modern art, it's titled "social networks"
If you need to ask that question, only use LTS. It is up to date where it matters.
For community to test and/or preview changes. If you're willing to upgrade every six months it's OK. I prefer not having large changes to my working system, but the Ubuntu upgrade system works very well.
17.10 daily, because you're going to distrohop very soon anyway.
i use 16 cause idk
Kubuntu nigga
Protip: you can install xubuntu desktop environment alongside the vanilla ubuntu desktop, and any other desktop for that matter and switch between them at login.
This. Works nicely.
16.04.3
This. It's LTS or go home. Don't fall for the 9 month support releases.
If it's a workstation or main machine then use the LTS. For a laptop that you don't depend on, use the latest.
LTS releases are comfy af. Updating between them is equally comfy. I've been on LTS since 12.04 and never had problems. Just enable the hardware enablement stack so you get the same newer kernels.
>LTSfaggotry
You'll never know the sweet feeling of living life in the upstream and getting the sexy new features first.
>Using ubuntu
>muh new versions
If you want new, use Arch, if you want Ubuntu, use LTS.
I rolled on the six month releases for a while, but ultimately found LTS releases to be more stable and comfy. Don't fall for muh latest software meme.
How new is your hardware, Op?
I already fell for the Arch meme and my comfiness is maximum, I'm trying to show some ubuntu brainlets the light.
Ubuntu and Arch are for different purposes. Ubuntu is for people who like stability and use their computers for everyday things. Arch is for people who are autistic about version numbers and who like fixing their shit after updates messed things up again.
OP, use 16.04. It's a lot more stable and is still just as fast. 17.04 has a newer kernel, but the features probably won't benefit you.
Use 16.04 LTS as your daily driver and upgrade to 18.04 LTS when it comes out. Rock solid stability, fast performance and tons of application support.
if you want the latest features, kernel, and everything, use 17.04 and then 17.10 when it comes out next month. then when you get that installed, go to kernel.ubuntu.com
...
>16.04
I installed the 16.04 because it offered more compatibility with drivers and software.
Some things didn't work with the 17.04
>launchpad.net
Isn't it valid only for older cards?
it worked with my rx 470, i saw noticable gains in performance over amdgpu. the 500 cards are the same as the 400s so theyll work just as well. vega's a can of worms with the kernel so if thats the newer card youre thinking of then you need to look into getting the kernel branch with amd's open source dc support on top of having latest mesa. if you do want vega support without the bullshit then you will need LTS ubuntu and amdgpu-pro
Will upgrading be easy from 17.04 to 17.10? I thought maybe of waiting few more weeks till 17.10 release. Yay or nay?
LTS m8, always.
xubuntu has fewer quirks than installing xfce on ubuntu.
base ubuntu 17.10 is gonna be very different from 17.04 and 16.04, because it's DE is going to be gnome instead of unity. i cant say with certainty whether or not itll be clean, im not sure what will happen with unity, but if you're sticking to xubuntu then its trivial. its just an issue of version numbering in the package manager, essentially. if a ppa says it supports 16.04 but not 17.10, it wont work unless you jump through hoops with apt. otherwise, you wont be able to tell the difference between 17.04 and 17.10.
Im using Ubuntu minimal with Xubuntu minimal.
LTS
Always.
If you install the 17.04 today, you use it for a few days, realize 17.10 is about to come out and you have to switch again.
the numbers mean year.month and they make a new release every 6 months.
Non LTS is a bad deal, there are better distros than ubuntu in that case.
>DE hasn't been updated for over 2 years
How is it bad exactly?
ymmv dude, i didnt know there was a minimal version of ubuntu. i doubt anything will break, but be prepared for small behavioral changes and little quirks that might be a result of your configuration. what id do in your position is make a partition or take an entire hard drive (or flash drive or disk or whatever) and use it as a backup for stuff you want to keep, like configs, scripts, .debs and files. then you can freely fuck with and reinstall ubuntu or any linux distro at any time, as long as you dont fuck up that partition. i used to do that with windows, so i could clean install everytime i fucked something up, but i wiped the drive and put fedora on it by accident. dont be dumb like me, put that drive in a safe place and only use it when things go south lol
It's very convenient and much recommended.
A ton of things break when you update from version to version.
Ubuntu circumvents this by only updating once every 6 months (or 2 years).
Having stuff break once every 2 years is a lot better than having something break every 6 months.
With the LTS, you can postpone updating to the next LTS as the support overlap very well (I think it is 4 or 5 years).
With the non LTS, they shut down the servers, so you can't "apt update" after a couple of months.
This means you have to break your system when they make a new release even if it fits really poorly with your time schedule.
Fedora and arch are much better at these upgrades if you want the newest stuff.