There is some good information here from Loyal and Scott. What I would add is that the LTS versions, which come out every two years in April and will have even year numbers and the .04 designation for April (eg. 15.04 which comes out this April will not be LTS, but 16.04 coming out next year will be LTS), have five years of support. The upgrade path is from LTS to LTS. In other words you do not have, nor should you, install the intervening releases. You can upgrade directly from 12.04 to 14.04 without installing any of the versions ending in dot ten. That reduces risk and work.
Conversely the versions ending in .10 and odd years ending in .04 have only nine months of support and you must upgrade every six months. This gives you a more cutting edge distribution, but with increased risk and workload. The choice is yours. You can switch upgrade paths once you have an LTS version installed.
The risk mentioned is not huge. It just means that at worst you may have to re-install instead of upgrade should complications arise. This is a slight risk in all upgrades in any operating system and it is rare in Ubuntu any more, but it is still a risk. You can mitigate risk by sticking with the main repositories and not installing outside packages or adding sources.
To complicate things further, Linux Mint uses a different version numbering system and in the future will only have LTS releases with Backports enabled to give six month improvements to some packages. That is a good thing, IMO, because upgrading Mint is a messy and complicated thing for newbies, compared to Ubuntu, because it offers no upgrade distribution tool.
Different users have different needs. Some prefer a slower pace and others thrive on a faster pace. Most enterprise users prefer LTS because it gives them longer support with more predictability. Both LTS and other releases are equally tested and stable. There is more change in both the distribution and for the user in the six month releases. I like the latest and greatest so I prefer the six month release upgrade path.
Roy
On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:29 AM, "Loyal Barber loyal_barber@yahoo.com [LINUX_Newbies]" <LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
On 1/20/2015 9:34 AM, 'Neil Smith' neilsmith1357@yahoo.com [LINUX_Newbies] wrote:
<snip>lol that's why I said "looks like" that is a hint of uncertainty make sure you "read that more carefully" lol . anyway the premier download seems to be ver 14.04 lts, below is ver .10 plus only supported for 9 months! I would go with the premier product, like I mentioned before probably a driver issue with .10, you probably will have less issues with 14.04 I know I have not had any issues with it and like I said tested video file and dvd movie no issues.Have an Ubuntu day!NeilFrom: LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tue. Jan 20, 2015 10:03am
To: 'Neil Smith' neilsmith1357@yahoo.com [LINUX_Newbies]
Subject: Re: [LINUX_Newbies] How To Play DVD In Ubuntu 14.04On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 09:24:31AM -0500, 'Neil Smith' neilsmith1357@yahoo.com [LINUX_Newbies] wrote:
> lol dude, the Ubuntu website has 14.04 as latest for desktop and server,
> looks like your running a beta and looking for support lol come on
No, he's running the latest release, not a beta. Read more carefully. :)
Ubuntu's numbering system is year and month. 14.04 is from April, 2014,
and the latest is 14.10 from October of last year. However, 14.04 is
what's called LTS, Long Term Support, meaning it will be supported for a
few years--the ones that aren't LTS are only supported for their more
typical life cycle, not sure how long that is.
The first user created is in the sudo group. It allows you to run all
commands as if you were root.
--
Scott Robbins
To each his own. However, to call 14.10 a beta is wrong and you know that.
To recommend not running that version in favor of the 14.04.1 LTS version is
a fine idea but you said beta for 14.10. BTW, just because an active version
is less in version number than the current release is at best delusional. That
is how Debian Stale works. However, unless I am wrong, Ubuntu 12.04 is
an LTS release that is still supported by Canonical. Does that mean that the
user should use the 12.04 in lieu of 14.10 or 14.04.1? Not at all. If it was a work
computer and I were to use Ubuntu, I would use 14.04 because of the LTS. For
my personal desktop I would use 14.10 without hesitation.
Loyal
__._,_.___
Posted by: Linux Canuck <linuxcanuck@yahoo.ca>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (19) |
To unsubscribe from this list, please email LINUX_Newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com & you will be removed.
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment