Some on Here Would Rejoice

[WWDERW]

I came across this review here.

I know some members on here were not liking the misconception of Plasma being thought of as "bloated", so it was nice to see that that fact was reflected in this review about that being a common misconception.

In this review, it came in second. Main Ubuntu came in last, which I'm not surprised. I've tried running it in a VM and it was slow, slow, slow.

[chimak111]

Thanks for sharing! Lubuntu in its LXQt avatar is nice but the software defaults are a bit of a puzzle. Installing some packages from kubuntu-desktop helps.

I could be wrong but there's no dark theme as yet.

Plus it's been their stated intention to dump Openbox eventually (20.04?) for some Waylander stuff. Let's see.

...

Looking at the htop images, I wonder if Ubuntu had some sort of update running at the time.

[woodsmoke]

Hi
thanks for the linky!
And yes, as most of the "old groaners" know, I have ranted many times about how the Plasma desktop "could be validly called "bloated" back in the day of the purists which 286 machines", but certainly could not be considered "bloated" when one got into the era of the Pentium chip.

I really do consider "the bloated thing" to be a perfect example of what happens in the U.S. news media today. ONE PERSON a long time ago and far, far away, "WROTE" that PLasma makes an OS "bloated" and all the rest of the talking/blogging/writing heads just followed on because it was EDGY to have at least one mainstream OS that they could trash and say, in effect, "LOOOK AT ME ...I...tell TRUTH TO POWER" ... baaah and humbug.

woodagainthanksforthelinkysmoke

[jlittle]

Lubuntu has let me down in the past.

Where Lubuntu let me down was the 14.04 to 16.04 transition. In hindsight, 16.04 needed a clean install, but Lubuntu updated itself unasked on a couple of installs that I supported remotely, and the result was not good, very slow. By the time I was aware of the problem, and how to fix it, the PCs had been retired by their users.

I suppose Kubuntu has not been good for me at times, too. But if I'd stayed on 14.04, then clean installed 16.04, I would have been good. The bright light of hindsight.

[WWDERW]

In hindsight, 16.04 needed a clean install...

I don't know if it was my Windows upbringing or what, but I've always done clean installs. Not just when swapping out distros, but when upgrading from one distro to the next. I also saw it as an opportunity to do some digital spring cleaning if you will.

Sounds like it something that may just be in general the best way to do something.

[jglen490]

Actually, the instructions for 16.04 actually called out the fact that a direct upgrade to 16.04 from 14.04 was problematic and should only be done by a clean install of 16.04.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/XenialXerus/...eNotes/Kubuntu

In my opinion this is wise for any direct LTS to LTS upgrade. But what do I know ...

[jlittle]

Actually, the instructions for 16.04 actually called out the fact that a direct upgrade to 16.04 from 14.04 was problematic and should only be done by a clean install of 16.04.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/XenialXerus/...eNotes/Kubuntu

A great thing about wikis is that you can see the change history. The first date that that page has the warning about the "problematic" upgrade was 2016-11-03. I don't remember when the problems became widely understood, but the message didn't get to the Lubuntu packagers in time. I imagine they'd set it up to wait for the .1 release in the July, three and a half months before the warning in the wiki. But it's history now.

[woodsmoke]

A great thing about wikis is that you can see the change history.

YOU WILL NEVER BELIEVE THIS...REALLY YOU WILL NOT.;...YOU WILL NOT...

BUT... at a MAJOR UNIVERSITY IN NEW YORK CITY...

I was visiting with "the librarian"..

ANd...the person had NEVER BEEN SHOWN OR HAD DISCUSED IN

A FREAKING LIBERARY MASTERS DEGREE CLASS THE "DISCUSSION TAB" FOR WIKIPEDIA.

WOOD... FOLKS ON HERE REALLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON IN ...HIGH ACADEMIA.. SMOKE