Ubuntu 21.10 brings a wide variety of improvements, most notably on the desktop side switching to GNOME Shell 40 and offering many improvements there including some theme refinements. There are also many underlying improvements to enjoy with Ubuntu 21.10, like what gets us excited about kernel and compiler upgrades along with other notable package version bumps.
Adding Wayland support for NVIDIA drivers is a big improvement, as is the addition of PipeWire. There’s also a big regression in that Ubuntu has moved its Firefox package from deb to a Snap package, something I’d sure manually fix if I were an Ubuntu user.
Ubuntu used to be such a no-brainier. If you wanted to use GNU/Linux on desktop or wanted to recommend a GNU/Linux distribution to somebody else. You just said Ubuntu. Sure some people nitpicked but this was the truth. Nowadays the situation is rather moot. Gnome 2 and Unity were reasonable choices and recommendations. Gnome Shell on the other hand is just whacked and most people don’t want to have much with it. Moving Firefox from .deb to snap would i guess be OK if people that prefer .deb could opt-out and still use the (official) .deb option. I read you can’t install Gnome Shell extensions by using a snap based Firefox. Is this little things. Like bad default shell experience, solutions that offer less then they did before. No real innovation anymore by Ubuntu desktop people. After the next LTS release something should in my opinion change. For example switching to KDE by default. That would reintroduce a sane desktop experience and if Ubuntu desktop team would polish it further. Then this would again become a no-brainier. Something most people could use and recommend again without much issues involved. Hopefully something like that will happen in the near future.
I shouldn’t bite, but why not? Gnome Shell is fine. Snap Firefox, less so.. Ubuntu really wants to try to separate themselves from being a typical GNU/Linux distribution, and in doing so is alienating their users.
They seem to not care anywhere as much about the desktop as they now do about servers and openstack. Desktop users don’t make them money. I haven’t recommended Ubuntu to people I know for a long time, and would rather just set up Debian for them and then tell them how to do updates, and forget about it. Far less support. Had a friend’s laptop act like the drive died because of Ubuntu. No issues on the drive whatsoever after I threw Debian on there.
Gnome Shell is not fine. If it would be fine i would use it and would recommend it to other people. As for what you said for Ubuntu. The same can be said for Gnome Shell. That is maybe aliens are using it. That would explain much.
You not liking it doesn’t mean it isn’t fine lol. Ubuntu has tailored it with their extensions and it works very much like Ubuntu has for a good long while. Predictability and stability aren’t bad things.
Full disclosure, I haven’t used Ubuntu in a fair bit as I prefer Fedora, but I recognize the place Ubuntu has in things.
Like leech, I also don’t care for the Snaps and prefer Flatpaks if I’m not going to use the repositories for a particular program
If it would only be about me then i would be fine with it. No Gnome Shell is not fine. Ever since the introduction of GNOME 3 the negative sentiment started to build up. We need better for GNU/Linux desktop. We shouldn’t settle with the current Gnome Shell offering. This for sure isn’t the future of Linux on desktop.
Oh yeah Debian…aaand ended up installing Firefox from Flatpak as it only ships with the old esr version 🙂 These snap and flatpak versions work as good, and dont need to wait for week(s) for packaging after update released. Its fine
This is the thing indeed. I personally tend to avoid it for now but the truth is classical approach to software packaging on Linux comes down to latest versions of software not being available for “regular” users. This hence did got resolved with this new packaging formats and will only improve with further adoption. We more technical users don’t like it all that much for now but for “regular” users it is rather practical. Still one of the advantages of Ubuntu was you got to get an up-to-date version of Firefox in the form of a .deb package. Now that is gone. And as said you need to install another browser for being able to install Gnome Shell extensions. As it doesn’t work with the snap package of Firefox. Gnome Shell being the default shell. From practical point of view hence this is a step backwards.
Yeah its not all rosy, also lose keepassxc integration for example. I do prefer traditional packages, but for some proprietary/3rdparty software (ie spotify,discord) that may require additional repos and clutter system with their libraries, I find these sandboxes good solution. Also if you really need more recent version of application or application that does not exists in repos, these fill the gaps nicely. Oh and some just for convenience – like openttd i have installed from flatpak, so i always have all its data if i re-install or completely another system available at ~/.var/app, plug and play.
jarkkot,
Yeah, the common refrain is that ESR more stable and some think it’s better for normal users. Ironically I think one of the reasons distros use ESR is because the regular version became a walled garden…ugh. I used to use firefox on my phone but the restrictions became burdensome so I switched.
Yeah, I actually prefer the ESR version of Firefox, doesn’t have the crappy new theme!
What kind of restriction? I use Firefox on Adnroid since at least 5 years and I`ve no problems with it, i works smooth and fast. Didn`t found any restriction.
Marshal Jim Raynor,
I used to be able to sideload my own extensions for FF on my own computer, however mozilla no longer allows users of the normal version of FF to do this. This is what I meant by walled garden.
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/02/17/firefox-to-get-a-walled-garden-for-browser-extensions-mozilla-to-be-sole-arbiter/
A lot of users like you won’t notice, but to others to me it’s frustrating to see mozilla go down the path of walled gardens.
At least the enterprise version used by many linux distros doesn’t have this particular restriction, however it also lags behind the normal version. Some of the APIs have become more restrictive as well, but like I said I’ve abandoned the normal version in favor of less restrictive versions and forks.
leech,
I noticed that too, and I don’t like what they did with tabs at all.
This is the problem with UI designers, they feel the urge to impose changes nobody is asking for. We’re in a post-UI optimization era where things are being changed purely for change’s sake. Normally I’d think “whatever, go have your fun as long as I can opt out of it myself”, but all too often that’s not the case. Whether it’s office applications, OS interfaces, browser UIs, etc I still prefer traditional menus, tabs, and toolbars.
I’m not affected yet, but the FF devs have stated these changes are coming to ESR, so far it’s merely lagged behind. And furthermore they are removing the ability to have an option to revert to the old styles.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1709425
It still is. It’s a big name with broad support. Gnome is absolutely fine, especially as Ubuntu ships it with a few sane extensions to provide a familiar dock experience that mimics what they had with Unity. I’d agree with you maybe if they shipped absolute stock Gnome which would require more of a learning curve, but they have tailored the experience. For a regular user Ubuntu still makes a ton of sense.
As for innovation, I’m all for it, but I don’t want change being mistaken for innovation. I like KDE. I think it has amazing flexibility and tons of options, but I still think it is too complex and unwieldy to give to your basic Linux convert. It can serve many audiences, but I still think it is best for the power user.
I fell that by now it is safe to say KDE is a more suitable option for GNU/Linux on desktop and KDE should get a shot. Hopefully popular GNU/Linux distributions that target the desktop will start to recognize it. GNU/Linux on desktop deserves a desktop oriented environment. Not something that tries to be something else and at the same time claims it is fixing desktop on GNU/Linux. They don’t even get the basics anymore.
There’s a KDE-based spin of Ubuntu.
The Gnome one is still more popular. You can also install basically any other desktop you want, including KDE and the old Unity.
Most deployments of ubuntu on the desktop are either on corporate/technical workstations or for personal enthusiasts who can manage installing their own OS. Most of those deployments I’ve seen most people use Gnome just fine.
The default gnome desktop on ubuntu is fairly sane and tracks a lot of the functionality of the old unity which was basically the icon bar at the right.
There indeed are options like Kubuntu or Ubuntu GNOME. Still i want to be able to say Ubuntu and to get a sane and polished desktop experience.
So use the KDE spin of Ubuntu and go on your merry way.
It just seems people like to find stuff to complain about.
There is GNOME spin of Ubuntu too. Point being Ubuntu should use the most appropriate option for GNU/Linux on desktop. Not the second or third most appropriate one.
Again, you can feel that, but the powers that be at Canonical clearly looked at all options and felt Gnome was the way to go for their flagship offering. Again, KDE does nice work. I respect the hell out of them, but I also think that KDE is far more complex than Gnome or even the Cinnamon desktop in many ways. KDE is a power distro for power users. It still isn’t as dead simple at the simple things as Gnome is, which is important when dealing with new users or people just trying to do basic things.
It’s fine if you don’t like Gnome. I get that the philosophy can rub people the wrong way, but it is excellent at what it is aiming to do and can be adapted easily to suit different use cases as Ubuntu showed by morphing it into what they ship.
I don’t have issues with Gnome. It’s the Gnome Shell that is not a desktop oriented product. It’s a product that wants to sit on two chairs. The reality being it is a product that doesn’t work good neither on desktop or on mobile. GNU/Linux on desktop deserves a better product then Gnome Shell. KDE currently does a better job and as such they deserve a shot. Canonical did switch from Gnome 2 to Unity (shell) and back to Gnome Shell. Hence traditionally it is true they are more Gnome focused. But Ubuntu is in my opinion not tied to Gnome in a way KDE couldn’t get a fair shot.
I wish Ubuntu went back to its roots and re-prioritized user experience and “works out of the box” strategy again. I switched to one of the early versions of Ubuntu from Fedora and it was a revelation. Everything just worked (at least by standards of these early days). Proprietary drivers and software easily available, sensible defaults, permissions, good software repository, simple and consistent desktop that was usable for non-technical people.
Things have started breaking down with an introduction of Unity. The focus has shifted towards branding and being unique.
Unfortunately, I don’t think this trend is reversible. Mark was openly taking about building value in preparation for investment or sale. Being different and locked down is a part of the deal.
I agree that things after Ubuntu 22.04 should change. From the GNU/Linux on desktop point of view Ubuntu should switch to KDE. People that want to use Gnome Shell will still have Ubuntu GNOME or Fedora and other more Gnome Shell oriented distributions. And lets see after if Gnome Shell is really working in the best interest of GNU/Linux on desktop. Or if others are doing a better job and should get a fair shot at improving the situation for GNU/Linux on desktop.
Putting applications into containers (whether they be snaps, flatpak, or OCI (aka Docker) images) isn’t a bad thing. It lets the app have exactly what it needs, doesn’t drop stuff on your system, and takes the load off distro maintainers. Sure, package managers have gotten pretty good at taking care of all that, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for new ideas. In the end, the better solution will win out, whether that means traditional packages or images. Either way, we’ll look back on this in 20 years as the bad old days.
MattPie,
It depends, the problem is there can be a lot of duplication of resources in every package. Maybe not such a huge problem if your at home running one application at a time, but for a multiuser system with everyone using their own copies of everything it can easily bump things to swap and kill performance. Removing redundant code was the reason we invented shared dependencies in the first place.
I think we can do better than either of these two, but the big problem is getting everyone on board. In the end, the party with the most influence generally wins out as long as it’s “good enough”. Alas this is not always the best solution.
I’ve been critical of posix, internet IP standards and other legacy standards for some time due evolutionary baggage. Sometimes I think we could do better by starting over, but I know this isn’t realistic. Even if it’s possible to build something better (and it usually is with the benefit of hindsight), it’s often not possible to overcome the network effects that keep us anchored to the past.
Hopefully that’s true. There’s still a lot of uncertainly though. Technology keeps improving, but it’s really hard to say that this creates a corresponding improvement in our lives. Is it enough to offset all the tough challenges that our world faces? Depending on what happens, some people may wish to go back.
Have they fixed this problem with snaps where the default save directory is some inner directory of the virtual filesystem?
I’m still on 18.04, too lazy to upgrade (though, newer kernel and graphics code). Here is my experience with snap:
– opening (deb) GIMP 2.10 takes 1-2 seconds
– opening (snap) default calculator just to quickly check something takes ~15 seconds
I replaced calculator with MATE version that starts instantly (and also installed whole MATE, as I do not like Gnome shell way of working) and removed all snap stuff. I really do not care for security and any other reasons for snap packages. If the starting of application is slow, no thanks.
Question for those who tried newer versions of Ubuntu: Has this situation improved at all?
I use Ubuntu Unity Remix and its amazing, you should try it!