×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linux Mint 13 (Maya) Has Arrived

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the fresh-mint dept.

Linux 216

New submitter OceanMan7 writes "Linux Mint 13 (Maya) has just been released. DVDs come in four flavors — MATE (with and without codecs) and Cinnamon (with and without codecs) — in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. The codec-free versions comply with U.S. and Japanese IP regulations. MATE 1.2 is Linux Mint's community-powered extension of Gnome 2. Cinnamon 1.4 is built upon Gnome 3, but has a more traditional look and feel. As with Ubuntu 12.04, upon which Linux Mint draws, all editions come with Long-term support (LTS) until April, 2017. The release notes provide a list of changes.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

216 comments

Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice? (-1, Troll)

mustafap (452510) | about 2 years ago | (#40093453)

Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice?

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093469)

Yes I use it all the time.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (5, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40094637)

There is no linux for a novice.

There is only linux for people who want to learn the nuts and bolts of linux at a slower rate than others.

I've spent the past few months giving several different distros a week or so each on my laptop (a standard Dell lattitude e6400, circa 2009. nothing exotic at all) to make an impression on me.

I'll admit I haven't played with Maya yet, but I spent a week with Lisa & cinnamon, which is easily as broken on install as any other linux distro I've ever used. Cinnamon was like a slightly prettyed up version of gnome 2, which makes me wonder why they even bothered to switch to gnome 3. Of course, it was just as broken as unity, if not moreso. the taskbar was "refreshingly" retro, circa windows 2000. in all the worst ways. i ditched the stock application manager applet and downloaded one that would stack open windows under a single taskbar icon, like a modern GUI... and it worked at least 2/3 of the time. Sorry, but a 2/3 success rate on -clicking on a taskbar icon- is a little much to swallow, so I ditched that and got the stock one back, except now if I opened more than 7 windows, they would scroll the "start" button (sorry, don't know the linux name for it) off the left side of the screen. what the hell? I couldn't make this up! Oh, did I mention that after I changed the default icon and name of the "start" button, it would never display the entire name again, putting "..." at the end instead? google told me that had been a bug since the -previous- version of Mint. That's crazy. Nobody thought to fix that? it's a simple pixel offset based on the size of the icon!

Tip of the iceberg here.

by the way, LM:Debian Edition was so broken as to not even be worth discussing.

by comparison, ubuntu 12.04 was, of course as I expected by this point, broken upon instalation, but after several hours of googling, some time in irc, and a lot of console commands later, I've got a mostly working install. some stuff is still screwed up (like the apps that -are- running but don't show up on the launcher bar), but I've learned to just deal with it for now. I've had it going for 3 weeks now and it's useable. putting it to sleep is a gamble, but this thing isn't mission critical so I just roll the dice every time.

I'm curious how long I can stick it out before I give up and go back to windows 7, which I'll freely admit does everything I need an OS to do, and has no major or even minor bugs that impact me on any sort of regular basis.

I'm no fanboy, of any OS, or any distro. I call it like I see it, and Linux (really I should blame it on the GUI, as the linux kernal itself is stable as a rock for the most part) is for people who like to work the nuts and bolts of their OS, because you pretty much have to. even the most "beginner-friendly" distros like Mint and ubuntu seem to require time spent at the terminal just to do stuff other operating systems consider basic functions, like say disabling a touchpad (no, touchpad-indicator applet does NOT work, as you should well know if you've actually used it).

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094691)

tl:dr

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40094815)

then why did you downmod it?
put your fanboyism away.
I'm describing the modern linux experience the way it actually is, not the way you want to pretend it is.
Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095489)

Not the GP, but if you're having that kind of trouble with all the other distros you've tried, perhaps it's you that is the problem. I haven't had any meaningful problems with Linux distros I've tried in years.

As opposed to Windows where there are constant headaches that one is supposed to just get used to and accept.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095769)

What are these constant headaches with Windows?

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (4, Informative)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40095895)

you'd think so, but it's pretty hard to dismiss the problem as somehow being cause by me when:
A. I list the exact workflow, and at no time am I doing anything out of the ordinary
B. The bugs are confirmed in offical tracker logs.

That's the thing that gets me. I'm listing known and documented problems with the operating systems, and I'm getting downmodded like I'm making shit up.

Also, I'm curious to know which headaches you're running into with Windows 7, because I can't think of any offhand. XP? sure. Vista? Of course. 7? nothing comes to mind.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096253)

I never understood sports fans. I watch a baseball for football game, this team wins, that team loses. I don't give a fuck, but some people REALLY take it serious. I find Linux zealots/fanboys/nutballs to be sadder still.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Requiem18th (742389) | about 2 years ago | (#40096595)

Windows 7 and any Windows can be a problem if you insist on making it do exactly what you want and in that respect fiddly with Windows implies much friction. That OS fights back modifications. Because I end up heavyly configuring all my systems I rarely bother with Windows 7. I admit my perceptions are skewed, but my experience with "basic" users is that they will always struggle with computers and will always request my help, hence my low understimating of any Windows "magic ease".

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (4, Interesting)

kermidge (2221646) | about 2 years ago | (#40096007)

Sorry to read of all the difficulties you've been having. I've had my own small share of annoyances or breakage here and there; some combos of hardware seem to be idiotsycratic viz. a particular OS.

Yet I think it might be more fair to say that you're describing the modern Linux experience that _you_ have; it may not be valid to extend your experience to that of all users.

I suppose much boils down to what you need and how you want it. I've been lucky, the several desktops and laptops have been vanilla hardware; Ubuntu's been working well enough to be my host OS for going on five years.

I like and admire what the Mint folks offer; they've put a lot of work into providing choice. I've found no compelling reason to switch but I could just be getting old and more lazy.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40096131)

Don't get me wrong.

I like Mint. Just like I like Ubuntu, I like Debian, and a lot of other distros. I just find that major releases of them often have some pretty substiantial problems, and like any fanboy war, linux distro fanboys all tend to defend their distro of choice while ravaging others, and the only thing that makes them band together is somebody wandering into the room and saying "why don't you all just switch to OSX and be done with it" or something like that. Often even that doesn't do it.

I'd like to think that maybe I've just been unlucky, but I've installed a ton of different releases of different distros and they've -all- had something wrong with them. The best out-of-the-box experience I've ever had is ubuntu 12.04 and I've even documented the issues I ran into with it elsewhere in these comments. If any distro of linux had ever "just worked" for me, I'd be using it this second. I know people want to blame -me- for it, but as I've pointed out, the problems I'm having usually have documented tracker entries when I google them. It's -not- just me. The only linux distro I've ever had do exactly what it says on the tin with no tinkering, finagling, and headache-based-acceptance was Tails, and that's a fairly limited and focused distro.

I really wanted to like Mint. the stated design goals, an ubuntu-based OS (with all the benefits of a large-ish installed base of users) that focused on stability and user experience? sign me up! I just didn't find the experience to be anything like the advertising. It didn't even stand up directly out of the box before I started trying to customize it.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

kermidge (2221646) | about 2 years ago | (#40096373)

Not to make light of it, but reminds me of the line from a song on "Hee Haw": "If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all..."

Sorry I don't know enough to be of help. Curious if same or similar problems on only the laptop or on any other systems you have.

Since I don't follow best practices on my personal machine, a given install can stray a bit as I change things more to my liking, and I also turn on backports. Since upgrading to 12.04 I get several "Ubuntu has encountered a problem..." or some such per day; it reports, the box keeps running, I ignore. I suppose I should turn on some more logs and find out what the problem is but if stuff works I'm too lazy to care. Also, my needs are very simple - surf, read, play Civ V, watch some TV and listen to music, crunch for worldcommunitygrid.

To paraphrase a wise man, "All operating systems suck, each in their own way."

Tails looks interesting, btw. I've been liking Zorin for those coming directly from Windows who want or need the comfort of look and feel.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (3, Interesting)

poet (8021) | about 2 years ago | (#40095715)

Wow...

I am not even sure where to start here except:

Linux Mint just works for me.

Ubuntu just works for me.

I have never had any problems with either, even running things like java applets, my web cam, music or... Yahoo Games when I want to play Cribbage with my sweety.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096015)

WIndows is sold with computers. The computer maker ensures drivers and everything else work 100%. I have a dell too and even with its crappy i915 graphics things are flying in mint 13. Cinamon was lacking but Mate is perfectly fine. I tried kubuntu 11.10 wasn't too bad... though I did manage to uninstall their stupid akondai and broke KDE. Also learned there is "classic menu"... yay like the old days where you would crash pieces of the OS and sometimes had to reinstall.

You're right... you have to love to tinker with the OS because you have to play tester & OEM. Now try installing OSX on a PC and see macs become hard.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#40096279)

Where in his post did GP complain about drivers? All bugs that he specifically mentions sounds like they're general code defects in Gnome and/or Cinnamon.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40096407)

I did make the mistake once of complaining about my experiences with ubuntu 9.04 (which I used for a year and a half) and my nvidia card. I then proceeded to have several back-and-forth posts with a brick wall of a linux fanboy who insisted that each and every single problem I encountered was nvidia's fault and not linux's, despite my repeated attempts to explain that I didn't -care- whose fault it was that the flagship (at least by # of users) distro couldn't work properly with the #1 (at the time) video card line on the market, because as an end user that shouldn't be something I had to worry about... having to reinstall driver from command prompt every time my kernal updated (note I didn't point out that was the problem, he did. he knew what my problem was without me even mentioning it, it was -that- common). He didn't seem to think that mattered. He was arguing from some philosophical point of view where I was trying to point out that as an actual user, who knew what he was doing and -could- fix the problem (or at least work around it), I just didn't want the hassle of having to do so when I had other options that weren't such a pain in the ass.

his end recommendation, and I'm not kidding, was to avoid using my $300 video card and use onboard intel graphics instead.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (3, Insightful)

greenbird (859670) | about 2 years ago | (#40096101)

There is no linux for a novice.

You have to work for Microsoft.

Hmmm...more like there is no Linux for morons. I've installed Linux on my mother's and an ex-girlfriend's computer and both love it. The ex-girlfriend even installed on someone else's computer when it was so infested with viruses as to be unusable. Just had to explain to her how to burn an ISO and she did the rest on her own. Because, you know, it just works. Unlike windows where you have to spend hours finding drivers and anti-virus and digging up all your CDs and keys so you can re-installing applications...

Both are very much novices. But neither is a moron.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (3, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40096359)

you're not allowed to have a negative opinion of something unless you work for the competition?

you must work for red hat? see how silly that sounds?

I'm not sure what kind of OS you are trying to classify as an operating system for a moron, because I've had to support users who can't use any operating system, no matter how simple. they break everything they use. you wouldn't think they'd be able to screw up something like iOS, etc, but they do. you can't design an idiot-proof OS because the world will make a better idiot.

If all you want out of Linux is an OS that will launch firefox and thunderbird, maybe print or open a flash drive, then there are dozens (maybe hundreds) of distros that can do that without a problem. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actual computer enthusiasts. People whom I assume you count yourself among, those who are spending several hours in front of their computer per day by choice, and not spending it all on facebook. People who are installing emulators, installing programs that aren't in the default repositories, customizing the interface to any degree beyond changing the wallpaper. adding a piece of hardware that doesn't have an apple logo on it. These things are very often broken in linux distros, and while you can often get them working, at least well enough to get by, it requires knowing the operating system very well already, or meticuliously following instructions that found on google and hoping that it is the correct fix for your problem, and not knowing why it worked if it did or didn't work if it didn't.

That's why there is no linux for novices. Eventually if you do anything other than web browsing, you're going to find yourself at a terminal prompt typing in sudo and hoping the line you're cutting and pasting after it won't hose your system.

Also your description of windows sounds suspiciously like XP, not 7.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (-1, Troll)

Nursie (632944) | about 2 years ago | (#40096523)

If it takes you several hours of googling to get ubuntu up and running, and three weeks later it's still not working as you like, then you are incompetent and have no business posting on a tech site.

Seriously. OS politics aside, if you're finding it that difficult then you probably should't be working in the tech sector.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40096561)

Since anybody with unresolved problems is incompetent by your book, please explain why haven't you fixed the bug with ubuntu where running programs don't always show up on the unity launcher or in alt-tab?

Because it happens.

It's documented.

get off your high horse and admit that your golden OS has flaws.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1, Informative)

CSMoran (1577071) | about 2 years ago | (#40093475)

Yes.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093589)

To clarify, it more-or-less is Ubuntu.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093501)

It is a good alternative to Ubuntu for anybody who is sane.

(Only people that it isn't suitable for is people with enterprise server software explicitly certified for Ubuntu)

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

Bigby (659157) | about 2 years ago | (#40093541)

What about those using MythTV? Is there an equivalent of MythBuntu? Or is Mint just for basic desktop/server installs?

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (-1)

binarylarry (1338699) | about 2 years ago | (#40093691)

Probably not. Mint is basically Ubuntu with a different default DE and theme (in turn, Ubuntu is just Debian with a different default DE and theme).

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (3, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#40093745)

apt-get install mythtv

MythTV through a package manager really is not that daunting. Even building it from scratch is not that hard since you can use the package manager to sort out dependencies.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (2)

Bigby (659157) | about 2 years ago | (#40093915)

I have used Linux for 13 years now. I don't want to build stuff myself like when I was running Gentoo. I don't want to "./configure && make". I have contributed to mythtv code myself and like to have nightly/binightly builds so I can contribute to the testing for the developers.

MythBuntu provides more than the mythtv/mythbackend/mythfrontend packages. It provides a decent configuration UI and other minor integrations/apps that I don't want to deal with. Some of it is useless to me, since I have been running the same basic MythTV configuration for 6/7 years now.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094477)

I don't want to build stuff myself like when I was running Gentoo. I don't want to "./configure && make".

So you were running Gentoo before Portage or something?

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#40096467)

A good makefile is hardly a burden.

Perhaps Gentoo is just more painful than it really needs to be.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (4, Interesting)

butchersong (1222796) | about 2 years ago | (#40093959)

I tried Mint as a distro for a few of my relatives. I never really 'got' Mint but other than some codecs that are installed by default I don't think the newbie experience would be much better or worse than Ubuntu or one of the Ubuntu flavors. I believe that if you try to play something in Ubuntu it will issue a message that you don't have installed and do you want to install it yes/no... Really it comes down to if you prefer Mint's custom Gnome 3 desktop environment (I don't) or would prefer Ubuntu's Unity (I don't), Xubuntu (I do) or Kubuntu desktop environments. In short they're basically all the same with the same Debian style package management so burn a few livecds and see which graphical environment you like. If you want an everything works distro go with any of either of em. If you want to learn about Linux.. install Arch.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095635)

The point of Mint is that it's stable. Ubuntu hasn't been stable for a while now and Canonical doesn't seem to give a crap about the user experience adding alpha quality software in their releases. The difference should get to be more and more marked in the future as Mint maintains the working bits of the interface through MATE and IIRC Cinammon.

Right now, Ubuntu is a buggy piece of shit by zealots that don't care how stable the product is when they release it.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (2)

arkhan_jg (618674) | about 2 years ago | (#40094289)

It's ubuntu, which is basically polished debian, without the seriously buggy 'I'm suited for touch screens, honest guv' new Unity interface. I tried out 12.04 the other day - I used to use SuSE/KDE then gentoo then debian as my primary desktop for a number of years; gave up after the KDE4 migration disaster and went to windows, and fairly recently to OSX; I tried it on a clean drive on my hackintosh (I have a real mac in the office, a somewhat elderly mac mini, and my own copy of Lion) which is a fairly bog-standard core i3 gigabyte system.

I got as far as getting dual screen working with X.org tweaks via the closed nvidia driver (have a geforce 210 in that rig) though it wouldn't stick past a reboot, which takes me back, then fixed sound as per usual. Then I discovered that clicking on a side-launcher button doesn't raise an active window up to the top; it just spawns a new one. In fact, I couldn't find anyway to bring a window to the top of the stack without manually shifting everything else off the top of it and gave up, it just wasn't worth the effort. So based on my admittedly short trial, Ubuntu isn't ready for the novice user any more. It's as hard as hacking OSX to work on my PC, and while the UI is pretty, it's just not very, well, functional.

So Mint is basically Ubuntu where they don't hate the user, and have stuck with gnome but with a decent amount of polish. I used to really like ubuntu, and still use their server platform as the LTS approach is a bit more modern than good old debian (so I get updated supported packages like node.js and nginx and php-fpm) while still offering a known long timeframe for support. But the new unity UI makes windows 8 look good, and that's saying something. You basically have a choice of the stable aka old gnome 2 MATE version, or the new shiny but not necessarily rock-solid gnome 3 Cinnamon version.

give it a try, and see how it copes with your hardware...

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40096695)

From what I understand, Ubuntu does offer GNOME 3 as an option, w/ or w/o fallback mode. What Mint does is somewhat different. Mint offers the GNOME 2 fork called MATE, and it offers Mint GNOME Shell Extensions (MGSE) under GTK3, which is what's called Cinnamon. Essentially, Cinnamon is GNOME 2 implemented under GTK3, while MATE is the old GNOME 2 implemented under GTK2.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

dyingtolive (1393037) | about 2 years ago | (#40094301)

I ran Mint for a while, but eventually went back to Fedora with KDE installed. Never thought I'd see the day when I considered modern KDE a 'sane' GUI. The latter comment is just me getting off on a tangent though, really Mint didn't have any major issues; my big driving factor for going back is that I do so much work through the day with RHEL/CentOS that I got sick of seeing "yum: command not found" messages every time I try to install packages. Muscle memory on that stuff is actually kind of tedious sometimes. I create batch scripts for 'ls' on any Windows box I have to spend an extensive amount of time with also.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

fiver22 (637111) | about 2 years ago | (#40094927)

Short: Yes, it really is a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice. Slightly longer: Yes, it is based on Ubuntu and has many similar features and functionality. As far as 'ease of use' I would rate it in the same category as Ubuntu. If you are feeling slightly more adventurous and/or want to try a non Ubuntu based distro, I'd suggest trying Crunchbang (the xfce version).

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095105)

Well, /why/ does this novice need an alternative to Ubuntu?

If [1] to play. Sure, then. Few distros would actually bite you. Get curious and try lots. Nearly everything has a LiveCD. And they're all Linux underneath.

If [2] because Ubuntu is broken, somehow, then maybe you'd better stick with fixing that. If you have trouble with Ubuntu, you'll have trouble with Mint.

[3] Is this just about Unity again? Sure, go with Mint if you want but Canonical has Lubuntu. It'll be totally familiar if you're just pining for old-style Ubuntu.

[4] Bonus: Work on learning to ask specific questions before you go any further.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (2)

Feltope (927486) | about 2 years ago | (#40095357)

Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice?

I would say yes.

I recently got a new computer and didn't want to spend the extra money for windows (the computer was a gift and the extra windows money would have made it hard to get a decent graphics card, a must for me.) I am a long time windows user and dabbled in Linux here and there throughout the years (as far back as early slackware) but no real experience and never for any reasonable length of time. I do have some experience from unix systems from way back though.

I installed Debian because I wanted a super stable system and it has a rep. for being just that. I however found that some things are a real pain in the ass because the Debian people are (damn near) zealots when it comes to open source (this is not a knock against them or that). After I spent a couple days trying to work them out and some I could not I looked up what other current distro's there are. I am not really a fan of Ubuntu so I was looking for something else. I noticed that Mint was "rated" pretty high from a usability standpoint and decided to try it.

Installing was easy (most Linux installs are easy now days though). Getting the device drivers all working most notably the proprietary Nvidia gfx drivers was actually painless. Getting Steam up and running was painless (mostly because of the great WineHQ pages on it) The software management tool is easy to use and I haven't had any problems with it. I use vim for programming so that was a non-issue anyhow.

Not having some of the more familiar and polished windows programs that I am used to using on a daily or weekly basis is a pain but I am working my way around that through time and experience with Linux. (I have resisted the urge to install a bunch of programs through wine beyond a few games I enjoy).

I have been using it for a few weeks now and so far my experience from a Linux newbie prospective has been very favorable in Mint.

Re:Is it a good alternative to Ubuntu for a novice (1)

dead_cthulhu (1928542) | about 2 years ago | (#40095387)

I have never used Mint for any long period of time, so I may not be as experienced as many others here.. The most I've done with it is run it under VMWare just to play around. I quite liked it, and didn't experience a single problem. Whereas it seems as though Canonical has lost the plot, I think that the Mint folk really care about user experience. Out of any Linux distro I have tried, Mint could do the most "out of the box," and with the fewest hiccups. I don't want to use it myself, but that has nothing to do with the quality of the product, merely personal preference.

I'm probably nitpicking (3, Insightful)

dyingtolive (1393037) | about 2 years ago | (#40093479)

but isn't that 8 flavors? (2+2)*2? Or does processor architecture not count as a flavor?

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (0)

ichthus (72442) | about 2 years ago | (#40093487)

No. It counts as a flavour.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (5, Funny)

dyingtolive (1393037) | about 2 years ago | (#40093535)

So then the four flavors come in two flavours? How many normal flavors are there in a flavour? I always get the metric conversion wrong.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095565)

I bet you were chuckling to yourself as you typed out the bold tags for that monumentally amusing post!

Well done. Well done.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#40093531)

2 desktops * 2 bit sizes * with/without codecs = 8. However there are also 2 OEM version so 10 total.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093571)

32 bit and 64 bit aren't flavors but sizes. So we have mint ice cream in 4 flavors and you can order them in one scoop or two.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#40093647)

I wouldn't consider "with codecs" and "without codecs" flavors, exactly, since they don't really change the install at all. More like "legally covering our asses." They don't even have direct links to the downloads in TFA.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (0)

XiaoMing (1574363) | about 2 years ago | (#40093697)

but isn't that 8 flavors? (2+2)*2? Or does processor architecture not count as a flavor?

And here we see one of the biggest examples of how "consumer" Linux likes to shoot itself in the foot: noting differences for the sake of noting differences (could also be interpreted as being too proud of how nerdy it is).

Linux Mint is arguably as mainstream and consumer oriented as Ubuntu (also with fewer polarizing design "features" than Unitybuntu). Yet if one compares the summary, or the quoted post to something like Windows 7, and what do you see?

The six flavours of Windows 7 [gizmodo.com] in this article already seem annoying, and you notice that there is _zero_ mention of any technical details (32 vs 64 bit? processor architecture zomg hax?!) that are really inconsequential to an average consumer, only mention of what features they can or cannot access.

I think if the Linux community really wants to share the "joy" of Linux with the masses, they need to stop trying to force their own personal "joy" of being too nerdy on the masses as well.

Know your audience, and save your urges for a Gentoo summary or something, please.

Re:I'm probably nitpicking (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#40095775)

Mint isn't targeting the masses. Mint seems to be targeting the disgruntled Ubuntu users, so people with a 1/2 dozen years of Unix experience who like the features. They all know whether they have a 32 or 64 bit system.

Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40093557)

Why would I want to use GNUlinux Mint instead of the standard Ubuntu? Or Lubuntu (lightweight variant that fits in my laptop).

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (3, Insightful)

TigerTime (626140) | about 2 years ago | (#40093585)

Mint == Ubuntu minus Unity Garbage

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (2)

cgt (1976654) | about 2 years ago | (#40093733)

You know that you can replace Unity with whatever you want right?

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093803)

Yeah, but they've already done it and passed the savings on to you!!

(Besides, you could say that about Slackware or LTS.)

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (-1)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40095033)

oh yeah. i distinctly remember paying less for Mint than i did for Ubuntu.

jackass.

i've got more desktop environments than i can be bothered using, and most times i stay in unity for one reason or another. could be the small lappy screen.

now, if this Mint fixes the xrandr bounds issue, i'm switching in a second. but last time i tried mint, the hardware support wasn't quite right (strangely as it should be no different from ubuntu), and the file management was actually more annoying. i'm an explorer boy, and actually really like win7's window docking to the sides so i can drag from two places at once (it's swifter than the f3 mode in nautilus, and shits all over the other file managers in all those other distros and desktops).

but yeah, i'm just looking out for a fix to xrandr --scale, cause this tiny screen is killing me, but i stand by my right to use a crappy underpowered eeepc beyond it's design spec until it dies. it's served me well.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40095043)

oh yeah. i distinctly remember paying less for Mint than i did for Ubuntu.

jackass.

i've got more desktop environments than i can be bothered using, and most times i stay in unity for one reason or another. could be the small lappy screen.

now, if this Mint fixes the xrandr bounds issue, i'm switching in a second. but last time i tried mint, the hardware support wasn't quite right (strangely as it should be no different from ubuntu), and the file management was actually more annoying. i'm an explorer boy, and actually really like win7's window docking to the sides so i can drag from two places at once (it's swifter than the f3 mode in nautilus, and shits all over the other file managers in all those other distros and desktops).

but yeah, i'm just looking out for a fix to xrandr --scale, cause this tiny screen is killing me, but i stand by my right to use a crappy underpowered eeepc beyond it's design spec until it dies. it's served me well.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094031)

you can also install debian and add whatever ubuntu has, right?
but many people who would potentially become new users of either ubuntu or mint don't know how/don't want to tinker. they want to install it and use it. and that's where mint is outstanding.
i have a friend who ran lubuntu for almost a year and now he's switched to mint. something to do with configuring wine that's working ootb for him in mint, no idea
what exactly, i don't even run wine. but the point is, it's that kind of stuff that's a clear advantage of mint.
cinnamon really looks like it's incorporated old "paradigms" with new technology. personally i'm about to start using gnome shell full time but i see how forking the shell the way mint has done makes a lot of sense. many people want that.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#40095535)

not easily, the .g* files will leave cruft that fucks up several other desktops like XFCE4. There is a set of instructions to do it properly, and it's not trivial.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 2 years ago | (#40095843)

Yes, with Cinnamon and Mate - 2 alternative desktops that Ubuntu doesn't bundle. Even mentioned in the summary.

Poor attempt at trolling.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about 2 years ago | (#40093923)

Been using Lisa for about 2 months now and I'm pretty happy with it.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094799)

Have you ever stopped to think how Lisa might feel about being used, you inconsiderate jerk!

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40094763)

I can't figure out why people hate unity so much. Sure it's broken, but then again so is cinnamon. Neither one is anything even close to what I'd consider "release candidate" quality, let alone long term support levels. Both still contain bugs that Apple or Microsoft would have squashed months before release.

I'll say this about Unity. It's ambitious. Unity is the first linux GUI I've used which doesn't feel 5-10 years behind the competition. Gnome and KDE are functional. That's about it. They're not what I'd call forward-thinking. Unity is. Unity looks and acts like somebody put a lot of polish into the look and feel. Too bad they didn't put as much polish into the actual functionality, but as I've said, that seems endemic of linux GUIs. If canonical keeps polishing this thing in the ways that matter, they may have a GUI that more than 1%-2% of the computing populace cares about.

I'm not sure why people think Unity is a touchscreen-style interface on a desktop. That's Metro. Unity feels more like windows 7 than windows 8 does. Unity is basically windows 7 with the standard taskbar at the top by default, and some hybrid widget bar and osx-style launcher on the left. I actually like it, it makes the use of the extra side space on the overly-wide aspect ratio of modern monitors.

Disclaimer: I'm writing this from a laptop running ubtuntu 12.04, which previously had a half dozen other distros installed, including Mint Lisa. I'm no microsoft fanboy, and the only time I use OSX is for shits and giggles in a VM.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095113)

Unity is one of the most resource intensive desktop environments shipped with a major distribution. It adds almost no useful features and takes many away. I think the people who use Linux so lightly that they actually find this thin layer of shinny fluff useful should stop kidding themselves and just use Windows or Mac.

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 2 years ago | (#40095195)

I'm honest enough with myself to admit that you're telling the truth. I -should- be using windows 7. But I kind of like to tinker, and have enough computers to do so. It's boring running windows 7 on every single one.

Although, how do you guys ever plan to have "the year of linux on the desktop" if you are directly trying to chase away even other computer nerds, let alone the average user?

Re:Mint == Ubuntu plus ____? (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#40093767)

Mint's UI philosophies tend to be more traditional. Out of the box you have a different take on KDE4, Mint-centric improvements to GNOME3 (formerly Mint GNOME Shell Extensions; now Cinnamon) as well as easy access to MATE.

Mint = Ubuntu++ (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094329)

Mint replaces bloat (like Unity) and adds needed features (like non-free codecs) missing in Ubuntu in an attempt to make a better desktop OS. There is also a focus on making it usable by those new to GNU/Linux without sacrificing any high level usability.

IMO it's the best to step into from Windows or Mac. One of the main reasons for that is you won't get to a point where the OS seems dumbed down. I don't think that's true for Ubuntu.

Maybe stick to the rolling Debian releases? (1)

stiebing.ja (836551) | about 2 years ago | (#40093635)

From TFA:

--
Important info:
Boot hangs on systems with b43 wireless cards
64-bit only for Mint4win
Windows popping behind the installer in MATE edition
Desktop icons in Cinnamon

Make sure to read the &ldquo;<a href="http://linuxmint.com/rel_maya.php">Release Notes</a>&rdquo; to be aware of important info or known issues related to this release.
--
Maybe one should stick to <a href="http://www.linuxmint.com/download_lmde.php">Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE)</a> (a rolling distribution based on Debian Testing, available in both 32 and 64-bit as a live DVD featuring a Gnome and an Xfce edition), if Mint is an option?

Still not impressed (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40093701)

Mint, to me, is still a buggier and less supported version of Unbuntu.
Not to say I'm that pleased with Ubuntu but every time I've tried Mint I've come away with two hard realizations

1. If you have problems, they are harder to fix and it's harder to get support for them.
2. I have more showstopping bugs than Ubuntu.
3. You end up doing a /lot/ of reinstalling when it comes time to move to a new release.

I'm not a moron and I've deployed mint on Good hardware that run both windows and other distros just fine. Mint just has a very vocal fanbase that I don't happen to agree with.

That said, Ubuntu's not very useful to me either. It's UI has taken a trip to lala land and isnt very useful anymore. I'd accuse them of copying microft's new UI efforts.. Except that Ubuntu's breaking of the UI predates both win phone 7 and windows 8. Go fig.

I suggest that everyone go check out Fedora. No, it's not very romantic or cutting edge. But it does work. Very well. It's also very well supported.
Check out the "spins" where you can download an iso customized to the UI of your choice. I'm a fan of xfce, which makes even gnome3 look bloated and slow.

Re:Still not impressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094127)

interesting take on fedora. not cutting edge? it seems to me the distro is plagued by people perceiving it at being exactly that and deciding not to run it.
anyway i'll be finding out for myself in a week or so, i've actually decided to give fedora a try.. but i would say it's a shame not to try running gnome shell on fedora, it's the default distro for it, so to speak.
as for mint, i think their fan base is vocal because the distro really works for them in ways they never imagined linux would. that's all.

Re:Still not impressed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094411)

Downsides to Fedora:
- very short support lifecycle (~1 year)
- no upgrade process other than manually running scripts

It's fine for unix nerds, hobbyist dabblers, etc, but RedHat has gimped it to the point where you shouldn't use it in production.

Re:Still not impressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096167)

I suggest that everyone go check out Fedora. No, it's not very romantic or cutting edge. But it does work. Very well. It's also very well supported.

Agreed. Fedora and openSUSE are the best bets for non-brokenness right now.

LXDE? (1)

KlaymenDK (713149) | about 2 years ago | (#40093853)

I'm currently on Linux Mint LXDE 11, or Linux Mint 11 LXDE, or whatever it's called. I love that it's so extremely fast to start stuff up, much more so than my previous some-other-distro with KDE4.

Is there, or will there, be an LXDE release for Mint 13? I can't figure it out from the site. (Yes, I'm bad at reading, apparently.)

Re:LXDE? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096535)

Openbox & Fluxbox are both faster and lighter than your LXDE.

Great! (1)

Saija (1114681) | about 2 years ago | (#40093881)

I just finished downloading and installing Lisa(version 12) last week...

Re:Great! (1)

arkhan_jg (618674) | about 2 years ago | (#40094605)

Mint has a fairly good 'data and software package list backup, then do a fresh install from livecd' approach for upgrades.

More here [linuxmint.com] .

Broken in VirtualBox (2)

Dwedit (232252) | about 2 years ago | (#40093925)

I just tested out 32-bit linux mint cinnamon in VirtualBox.
Most of the text is missing!

http://i.imgur.com/F0af2.jpg [imgur.com]

Re:Broken in VirtualBox (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094663)

It wants more video ram...

Re:Broken in VirtualBox (4, Funny)

Chemisor (97276) | about 2 years ago | (#40094773)

Well, duh! You're using the 32-bit version, missing out on half the bits. If you want all the bits to work, install the 64-bit version, like any sane person would.

Re:Broken in VirtualBox (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 years ago | (#40096229)

I just tested out 32-bit linux mint cinnamon in VirtualBox. Most of the text is missing!

http://i.imgur.com/F0af2.jpg [imgur.com]

This is a good example case of some weird broken stuff you come across every now and then when using desktop Linux.

Can someone explain what happens there? Someone suggested it's about video memory. Then why does it not check if there's enough available?

Whatever the reason is, there's not enough robustness in the GUI.

360 degrees of obsolescence (5, Informative)

ourlovecanlastforeve (795111) | about 2 years ago | (#40094121)

Mint has now come full circle: It was originally rolled up when Ubuntu stopped distributing codecs, now it has a codec free version. In other words, it's a distro based on a distro based on a distro that no longer has a purpose. Contribute upstream.

Re:360 degrees of obsolescence (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094311)

ourlovecanlastforeve has now come full circle: he fucks himself in his own ass.

Re:360 degrees of obsolescence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096235)

he fucks himself in his own ass.

Keep your fantasies...

Re:360 degrees of obsolescence (1)

butchersong (1222796) | about 2 years ago | (#40094443)

Yeah I did a double-take when I read about the codec free version as well. After a while I guess a community forms and it becomes it's own distro instead of an Ubuntu with a different gtk theme. I think the impetus for installing Mint has grown to include a desktop environment that isn't Unity. I never really understood the rational for having a new distro to provide codecs that are a package install away in Ubuntu but I can understand having a new distro with support for a polished Gnome 2 or 3 out of the box... though I'm not sure why you wouldn't just do a Gubuntu or something instead of Mint.

Re:360 degrees of obsolescence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096331)

The difference hasn't only been "one package install". There where also a couple of UI tweaks and mint apps (of which mint menu is a great launcher). After every Ubuntu install I found myself manually installing the codecs/flash, removing the second top bar (especially annoying on wide-screen displays) and rearranging the bottom gnome bar with widgets to my liking. Unity has solved the screen estate issue somewhat, but for me it looks butt-ugly, is a usability nightmare and is not very configurable. So I guess I will stick with Mint.

Re:360 degrees of obsolescence (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#40096313)

The original purpose of Mint may have been to include codecs, but today Mint is more like a stable version of Ubuntu with sane software choices out of the box.

My experience with final RC (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 2 years ago | (#40094193)

My laptop was dual-boot Win7 and Mint 12 (Ubuntu-based). What I noticed during installation / use:

1) Installed left me with an unbootable system. GRUB had the right menu items, but none worked. I needed to boot from the live Mint 13 installation CD, install a package for repairing the boot loader, and run the program that came with it. Worked pretty well, but not sure if it's fixed yet. And even now, I have two GRUB entries for Win7. Only the first one works.

2) Screen locking doesn't work, at least for me.

3) Sometimes when I log in, wifi is disabled. I have to manually enable it from the icon, then it works fine.

4) As with the previous release, the built-in installed for the proprietary ATI graphics driver didn't work. I had to manually download ATI's script for building the approPriate .deb packages, and install those. Not the end of the world, but a bit of a hassle. Prior to doing this, my desktop graphics worked okay, just slow as you'd expect from the open-source driver. I've got a Dell M6500 laptop, and the chip is a ATI FirePro m7740.

Anyway, maybe these things are fixed in the final release.

Re:My experience with final RC (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095971)

To get screen locking to work you have to install the screen saver package. Cinnamon is definitely a bit rough around the edges still.

Linuxmint 13 Maya released. (2)

Clived (106409) | about 2 years ago | (#40094327)

Hmmn

Under important info: Boot hangs on systems with b43 wireless cards.
Guess it won't be going on my laptop anytime soon..

Linux Mint 13 (Maya) Has Arrived (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40094513)

Looks like neckbeards and faggots will have a busy afternoon.

Not for me (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#40095233)

Yea ok I used to like mint when ubuntu went "pants on head retarded", but I havent been lately

10 and anything before it works fine

11 constantly fucks up something on the desktop with a "your taskabar (or clock or whatever) has stopped working, would you like to delete it?" trap

12 ships with gnome 3 AND their clunky menu system, really how many start menus do I need ... MS apparently says zero so it could be worse

12 with gnome 2 suffers the random thing is going to break and you should delete it syndrome as 11

LXDE versions of them all plain suck, I view LXDE as a half finished pain in the ass version of XFCE that requires me to do dumb shit like open a file explorer to empty trash, or fart out a regular expression just to set the fucking clock format

so now that 13 is out, I say "not for me", too much trouble, xubuntu is doing great, thanks, and they just released a new LTS

Windows and OS X are MUCH better operating systems (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40095879)

Seriously I don't understand why linux types even bother trying any more? Everyone who is anyone has dumped Linux and moved on with better things, aka Windows and OS X. What is wrong with you people that keep using it, do you not have anything better to do with your lives than installing yet another useless linux distribution?

Sensible defaults (5, Insightful)

humanrev (2606607) | about 2 years ago | (#40096217)

I think most people are aware that Linux Mint is just a customized version of Ubuntu. Nothing special in that regard. However, the reason Mint is so popular is because it has something very important that a lot of people desire - sensible defaults.

Sure, you can take a stock Ubuntu installation and replace Unity with MATE/Cinnamon, install additional codecs, move the window buttons to the left so that you don't have to readjust your muscle memory and so on, but Linux Mint has this performed for you out of the box. It also has other changes like an absence of purple in the GRUB, Plymouth and login/desktop screens, which might seem petty but the Mint color scheme whilst grey and somewhat boring, feels far more professional and less garish. Once again, chances you can make if you know how with Ubuntu, but Mint is already preset with them for you.

Mint feels like a distro where the developers aren't interested in futzing around with challenging traditional UI perceptions, and would instead rather provide a distro based on a (reasonably) solid foundation which anyone can use which still looks nice and doesn't force you to relearn how to perform efficiently in a foreign UI. The motivation for Canonical is to be on as many devices as possible - the motivation for the Mint team is to make a usable Linux distro for computers with as few hindrances as possible.

Why not Crunch Bang? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40096521)

It uses Openbox which is lighter than LXDE and XFCE, not to mention Gnome, KDE...

Hybryde (3, Informative)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40096651)

For those wondering about Cinnamon vs Mate vs Unity vs KDE vs LXDE vs XFCE vs whatever, there is a new distro out called Hybryde. From the distrowatch announcement

Olivier Larrieu has announced the release of Hybryde Linux 1, a desktop Linux distribution with one unique feature - the ability to switch rapidly and fluidly between a number of desktop environments and window managers without logging out and without having to close open applications first. The list includes Enlightenment 17, GNOME Shell, GNOME 3 "Fallback" mode, KDE, LXDE, Openbox, Unity, Xfce and FVWM. The switching between desktops is achieved via a customisable Hy-menu which also allows launching applications and configuring the system. The project's website is in French and by default the distribution only supports the French language, but extra language packs can be installed from standard Ubuntu 12.04 repositories.

Okay, MATE and Cinnamon weren't among the listed options, so it might have been good had they forked off Mint, as opposed to Ubuntu, so that they could have included that as well. I'm guessing that they probably only offer liberated software, which is why complete GNOME 3 is not offered, since it requires 3D accelaration to work, for which liberated drivers are not available. Unless they're trying to get the FSF seal of approval, they might as well offer a full GNOME3, w/ an advisory that it's not a fully liberated DE.

Oh, and then there are all the other Ubuntu derivative Linuxes, such as Comice, dyne:bolic, ExTiX, gNewSense, LuninuX, Trisquel and Zorin.

Click to Replace Ubuntu? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 2 years ago | (#40096685)

If I download and burn the installer DVD, can I just boot the DVD and click something to upgrade the machine's original Ubuntu (v11.10) to Mint, with little or no further intervention? Which will let me reboot and launch Evolution and Firefox with all my configs and data intact?

And if I don't like it, can I boot from an Ubuntu installer CD to revert? Or maybe something even easier?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...