Hi to everyone. OK - so, because Artyom (@AZorin) has come out and said that they will not upgrade the Zorin OS kernel to 6.11 after all, I went ahead and installed Ukuu (a kernel switching application for Ubuntu and Ubuntu-based distributions). My question is, which kernel should I switch to for the remainder of the Zorin OS 17 lifecycle before version 18 comes out later this year? 6.11? 6.12? Right now, I am on kernel 6.8.0.52.53. I would prefer to stay on a supported, "safe bet" LTS kernel for the time being. I will not take any action until I hear from enough folks here. Thanks very much.
The 6.12 is LTS.
Thanks for the quick response. I'm looking at Ukuu right now. There are a bunch of point releases for 6.12, specifically. Does it really matter which one I pick and install? Ukuu is advertised as being able to update the kernel automatically, I believe, so ... I would imagine not? Again, thank you, @Aravisian.
EDIT: See picture. This is what I see.
EDIT # 2: What the hey? Gonna go with 6.12.18. Will report back.
All of 6.12 is LTS. If you are looking for a version that has the most up to date security and fixes, the Latest Version should be your go-to.
You only would need to look at an earlier version if there was some regression in the later kernel that prevented your use of it.
1 Like
Thanks. Just rebooted and all is well. Ukuu did its job well. It's a keeper.
My Zorin OS install does seem to be a little snappier and quicker with 6.12 ...
1 Like
Does Ukuu present any advantages over Mainline?
Link: Mainline – Another Tool to Install Latest Kernel in Ubuntu / Linux Mint | UbuntuHandbook
Mainline (Ubuntu Mainline Kernel Installer) is an open-source fork of ukuu, which now is pay for use. It offers a simple interface with updated list of the “mainline” Kernels, allows to one-click install, remove, or purge Kernels in Ubuntu-based distributions.
So I dunno. They both serve the same function. Mainline is free, though ...
1 Like
Follow-up question:
Will using a non-Zorin provided kernel cause issues later with Zorin?
For example, when 17.3 comes out later this month, will I have issues?
I don't think so, since I'm using the same kernel as Ubuntu. So ... yeah.
P.S.: Really wish the Zorin Group would update the kernel, regardless ...
... now that I'm using 6.12, and it does boost system performance ... c'mon.
If System76 can do it for Jammy Jellyfish, so can the Zorin Group! 
Not usually. Using a non-Zorin provided kernel will not run into Zorin OS Specific issues.
However:
Using a third party kernel can cause issues, regardless of the distro you are using.
The reason I recommend the TuxInvader Kernel is due to it's strong stability.
The Liquorix Kernel is good and well developed; yet it can have hiccups and issues. Not due to a failing of the Liquorix team, but due to the cutting edge nature of the kernels.
I have never seen a XanMod kernel issue. And they tend toward LTS. I have never seen a TuxInvader kernel failure. Though they tend to be unsigned kernels, so Dual Windows OS booters with Secure Boot Enabled may want to look for a signed kernel release.
Thank you very much, Aravisian.
To Compare System76 as a Hardware Manufacturer with their POP OS with Zorin isn't a good Comparison in my Opinion. System76 has more Ressources and Capacities and Manpower to offer Support.
On Zorin OS You have the 2 Brothers. And supporting the Kernel isn't simply ''bring Updates''. You have to check it and test it. And that beneath the other Development.
And that the 6.11 Kernel not come isn't a Zorin Thing; it is an Ubuntu Thing.
Because of Ukuu: Did you paid for it or did You took the old free Version? And why not the Mainline Tool?
I discovered Ukuu before Mainline. Then I found out about Mainline shortly after. I went ahead with Ukuu anyway to support the developer and the work he did. Nothing wrong with that. Plus, it came with future updates, so that helped.
I understand. But they came out and said 6.11 would come. We believed them. Boom; they come out again and say, "wait; never mind." At first, I was OK with it (because of the reason they gave). Then after I installed 6.12 (since they basically said no more kernel upgrades for Zorin OS 17), I was pleasantly surprised. Then my thinking was something like this: "If they know a higher kernel version can make such a difference in the user experience for Zorin OS, why settle for allowing existing lag and issues to stand?" (Especially for paid customers who paid for Zorin OS Pro, like me.) It was then that their backtracking started to be scrutinized more closely by myself. First, they came out and said, "6.11 will come" (more or less). Second, they came out again and said, "wait; we just talked to Ubuntu - they said no 6.11 for 22.04, so nope." Why didn't they talk to Ubuntu before proclaiming that 6.11 will come? Why didn't they plan ahead? It's like putting the horse before the cart. The performance enhancement that 6.12 brought to my PC in Zorin was what made everything "click" for me. I am disappointed. If they'd come out and said, "we made a mistake; Ubuntu told us 6.11 won't come out, BUT we will make things right and release 6.xx anyway for Zorin OS because our users are important to us!," then I would've been freaking impressed. That would've been the right thing to do. A promise is a promise. First rule of service: Don't break promises.
And that is unfortunately what happened here.
It isn't wrong, yes. I only ask for interest.
The Thing is: the Kernel before came, too. So, I think, that the Expectation that the Kernel would come too wasn't directly wrong. Maybe Ubuntu planed in Origin to bring it but decided later to not doing it. Could be possible. And when Zorin would put the Kernel by themself in the System, they would have to Care about it.
To change that whole System in a short Term isn't makeable, but they would be Options ... I would have spontaneously 2 Ideas:
-
They change the Base from Ubuntu to Debian. A big fundamental Step which needs a lot of Work. But on Debian You have the Debian Backports Repo. And over this you can install a newer Kernel Version that is more up-to-date than the default Debian LTS Kernel. But You would have to handle this over the Terminal.
-
There are Ukuu and Mainline. Zorin could take these as a Blueprint and develop their own Kernel Management Program and integrate it as a System Tool. Let's call it Zorin Kernel Management - ZKM. So, a User would be able to install a newer Kernel if needed or wished (or maybe an older one). But the Kernel isn't offered by Zorin, it would come from Ubuntu. So, Zorin would only offer the Tool to install the Kernel but the whole Maintenance and Update Stuff would stay on Ubuntu like now. But I see there Issues, too:
There is what I wrote before. Zorin offers the Tool, not the Kernel. That maybe could irritating People, especially new Users. When they install a newer Kernel but get Issues up to a broke System, they could complain why Zorin offers Kernel's that doesn't work. Then You would have to explain, that Zorin doesn't offer the Kernel and that they only have the Tool. And that it is up to the User and that they take the Risk for the Usage.
No problem.
A promise is a promise. At the very least, they should've planned ahead. They did not, evidently. That adds to the disappointment. It begs the question: "Can I trust them?" Where is their effort to make things right? I am still using the new kernel. It really does legitimately help my PC move quicker; I can see a slight but perceptible difference. It's definite. Not having that with 6.8 (which others have reported issues with) when we were promised 6.11 is an insult to us as their customer base, who also pays their bills and salary by purchasing the "Pro" version and advocating for user adoption elsewhere online for Zorin OS. Surely others can understand my view here, especially those who have been through thick and thin with the Zorin Group (you know who you are) over the years. I am sure there are those who think I am being "melodramatic" here, but I respectfully disagree. 6.12 has made the lag and hiccups go away on my PC. Doesn't the Zorin Group believe in supporting their customers by ensuring a positive, enjoyable computing experience? Going back on stated deliverables does not help. Gonna stop here. Thanks.
Yes.
So, I have this personal rule (actually, I have many learned from the school of hard knocks, but will list only this one on topic):
- Do not make a promise until you know you can keep it. When you make a promise; Keep it.
It is simply a part of life that people will make promises (often, parents to children) that later, life had other plans and interrupts. This explains the first part: Check things, examine your options and mitigate flaws - so that you know you can keep a promise.
When you have done these things, it gets a lot easier to keep the promise. So when you make one; Do everything you can to ensure you keep it.
It presents a catch-22 for the ZorinGroup. It has been vocalized to have a roadmap, to convey future plans...
And when they do, if this type of delay happens; it is vocalized as a complaint, too.
But this is not an isolated incident. From ARM Build (Stated to be ready by 16) to the Upgrader tool (Stated to be ready by 15) to Zorin Grid...
There is sometimes a stated reason why. And other times, only silence.
The given reason for Zorin OS Pro is that unlike many other developers; this is what they do Full Time.
And that raises the hard questions.
No, @Omnimaxus, you are not being melodramatic.
You are observing and correlating the relevant visible data - a long history of that data.
The best way to improve, develop, learn and grow is to be held accountable.
To be held to answering the hard questions.
To not be enabled.
It is not up to the volunteers of this forum to hold the ZorinGroup's hand.
Zorin OS is a fine product and a stable OS. Like any, there is room for improvement and achieving that is best achieved by shining a spotlight, not by sweeping under the rug. Searching for or creating solutions is more effective than making excuses.
This. As easy as it was to update the kernel, I'm not personally upset about it, but as a matter of managing expectations, "We expect to update to 6.11 for Zorin 17.3" is safer. It might not satisfy some people, but I suspect it'd be less bothersome than "6.11 in 17.3" followed by "Er, about that..."
I am somewhat concerned about making the brothers feel like, "Screw it, we just won't say anything," which I've seen companies do in the past, but given the history cited, it's not unfair to respectfully voice displeasure with the unmet expectation they created.
Well aren't they doing that already ? they are not much active either here...
If 2 mods would go dark, the entire troubleshooting is gone here.
To be fair, Artyom has been fielding questions on the open forum recently.
I do think that they would not be able to manage the forum and perform development at the same time.
Managing a forum and using it as a means to communicate with users and members are two different things.
Exactly right. This is my personal (and professional) rule, too. Yes.
This is 100% correct. It was the pretext for my previous post, too, actually. If they were doing this part-time and voluntarily, of course I'd be willing to cut them some slack. Of course. But this is their full-time, paid, professional job. So backtracking on a stated deliverable that could otherwise improve the very thing they work on, professionally, for the same people who support them and their livelihood makes it all the more frustrating and insulting.
Yes. Their own (apparent) unwillingness to "own" their broken promise or lack of action towards making things right is not effective. Again, as I said earlier, if they'd come and said, "we made a mistake, but this is what we will do to correct things going forward, and as a consolation, we will provide version-specific support for 6.xx for Zorin OS 17 until the end of its lifecycle," that ... would've been just perfect and pretty darn impressive. But nothing. Nothing.
The gains I saw with 6.12 on my PC is what made everything "click," and has led us to be here talking about all this. If the Zorin Group knows this was going to help resolve the lags and performance issues reported by others, then why not do something to fix it? Why not forge ahead with 6.xx? Why back out? Right now, as a Zorin user, I am disappointed. Is Zorin OS itself a "fine" OS? Sure. But equally just as important is the management and direction behind it. This is why Linux Mint has been so very successful, as have other OSes, like Debian.
I have been making my case very respectfully and objectively.