I agree. Fair is fair. And so is recognizing what Artyom has done. Yes.
That is indeed a scary prospect. I mean, I'm not a Linux "oracle" like @Aravisian, but I am learning and have learned much over the past year or so. Still, let's not think of such scenarios. Best to just see things for what they are, and move forward however we each wish is appropriate (either forward or ... out). Yep.
Well, Aravisian will be going dark when Zorin OS Lite is set into the trashcan (Announced).
2 Likes
What os would you pick if that happens ?
2 Likes
You have. In no way was I calling you out; if anything, I was pointing out that you weren't being unfair. I apologize if it came off otherwise.
No, it's fine. You're fine. I was just speaking plainly and matter-of-fact. Thanks.
I have listed many, including ASMI and Linux Lite. Or I could do asd I did before and use a base like Debian and make my own distro. Each time I did, I really liked it. Not because it was made by me but made for me. Tailored and custom fit to all my preferences.
2 Likes
Well if the day comes, zorin will lose a good troubleshooter.
The forum would not be the same without you. Sure there are others, but your the only one that knows everything around here (and most active).
1 Like
I'm honestly surprised I haven't run into a lot of guides for "assemble your own distro." That sounds like the sort of clickbaity thing YouTubers would love to turn into a multi-part series. I shudder at the thought of getting what I want into base Debian at my current level of skill.
And how.
2 Likes
The only element of "if" is if the ZorinGroup recants on denying support for other Desktop environments.
This is similar to the Firefox thread.
Certainly, I can install any browser I want. I can install any D.E. I want (and I do).
But defaults are powerful things and the statement that Zorin OS and ZorinGroup makes in choosing defaults and choosing what to deny support to matter more than my own self-interest and ability to install what I want as an individual.
I can only install another D.E. or software as long as they get enough public support to remain alive.
GnuLinux is not being improved by "recent and modern" developments as much as it is being Windowsified.
Removing functionality.
Removing features.
Removing diversity.
All called Modern and Polished and Improved.
What they are doing is systematically cutting the End User out of development.
As it is today - as it currently stands: Windows OS has move configurations and more features than Gnome does. By far.
We can laugh at the registry editor, but you can do much more in regedit than you can with gsettings.
It is easy to change lock screen wallpaper and icons on Windows - on Gnome, it is a nightmare. Want to change the Shell defaults? Good luck. Want to change your GDM lockscreen? Too bad.
2 Likes
This one really grinds my gears. In Plasma 6 if I want to do this, System Settings > search for "lock" > Screen Locking > Configure Appearance. It feels like there are only three explanations for GNOME's situation: a hardcoded piece of tech debt, a failure to understand design principles (avoid hard coding what someone may want to change), or "users shouldn't care, shut up."
In XFCE, as well. Just use the GUI settings app.
With all due respect, I think there's a bit of disinformation being spread here.
When I looked through AZorin's recent posts on his profile page, the only one I could find about a kernel update was on 2 January in which he said "I want to mention that the Linux kernel in Zorin OS 17 is expected to be updated to version 6.11 next month or in March...".
Here's the link: NVram Locked (Zorin not found in efibootmgr) - #14 by AZorin
When I see the word "expected", I understand that as "it's likely to happen, but isn't 100% going to happen". It's not a solid promise to upgrade the krenel, which is what I see it being discussed here as.
Maybe I'm missing something or there's another post I didn't see. Feel free to let me know if I'm wrong.
Just my 2 cents.
That is the post and I think your reading of it is accurate.
I think it is equally accurate for a user to take away the expectation of the kernel upgrade.
Particularly in sight of the history of (ARM build for Zorin 16, Upgrader by Zorin 15, Zoringrid) announcements that set an expectation; which left that expectation unmet.
As an isolated incident (Kernel 6.11), I think very few people would fault the ZorinGroup. As a non-isolated one, I think it is not disinformation to relay a Zorin OS Users Expecations; how they are missed - and how ZorinGroup can professionally address these misses.
With respect, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.
If someone writes something that's objectively not iron-clad (“expected to be updated” instead of “I 100% promise to update”), I think it's the reader's responsibility to understand it correctly. It doesn't seem fair to blame the writer if the reader made a mistake in misinterpreting it and subjectively setting their expectations for something that wasn't promised to begin with, regardless of what they feel should be the case or some historical context. The written word is the written word, we can’t invent another meaning behind what someone else writes and expect it to be true.
As a big fan of Zorin, I'd also like the devs to share their roadmap more with the community. But if the rare time they do share that something might happen in an upcoming version and users immediately get up in arms if things don't materialise as hoped, I don't see why they should bother to share their roadmap more actively in the future. I know I wouldn't, it's a lose-lose!
Every announcement that the ZorinGroup makes has a "backdoor" to it.
A way out, in case things do not pan out. And the majority of the announcements make use of that backdoor, often with a sound of silence afterward by the Zoringroup.
"We hope to include..."
"We hope to release... by..."
That they use this backdoor so often makes your argument that the reader is responsible less palatable.
I have already given clear examples that it is not rare.
Zorin Grid - Still has not arrived after years of waiting.
Zorin OS on ARM builds - not yet arrived though Zorin said they hoped to release it with Zorin OS 16.
Zorin OS Upgrader - stated to be ready for Zorin OS 15. You say we must be accurate: Then be accurate. It is not rare.
It is common.
That is not how this works.
The way it works is that a developer shares a roadmap or announces plans that they can reasonably believe are expectations that can be met.
Both users and developers understand and can abide by the concept of "reasonable expectations."
As you pointed out: Artyom Zorin said "We Expect."
This sets a reasonable expectation for both parties - developer and user.
This expectation was not met. I now remind you of the above by quoting myself:
Therefor, the onus is on the ZorinGroup to make reasonable announcements that they have assured themselves that they can meet.
Canonical dropped the ball on the 6.11 kernel, not the ZorinGroup.
At first, when we found out that 6.11 wouldn't come with 17.3 after all, I was like, "thank you very much for the update," and left it at that. But the whole situation took on a different meaning for me when I saw the performance improvements that a newer kernel brought to Zorin. I revisited what was said earlier. I'd come to believe that the 6.11 kernel would be released. I had a reasonable belief that 6.11 would come based on what was said. The assurance that it would come was implied in the sense that one would think anyone who's announcing what to expect would've done their due diligence before saying anything at all, and not after, which was evidently the case (this was made clear when the Zorin Group said they had talked to Ubuntu, and was told that 6.11 wouldn't be available for 22.04 after they'd already made their announcement to expect 6.11 for 17.3). So it then become a question, too, of whether or not Zorin was willing to allow users to deal with intermittent lag (which has been reported by others on this forum) in their OSes with 6.8 until June 2027. That added insult to injury.
One hundred percent correct.
I did say "thank you very much" when it was announced that 6.11 wouldn't be in 17.3 after all. I initially saw it as an isolated thing. But after I upgraded my kernel to 6.12 and saw the performance improvements, I looked at it cumulatively and critically. I began to view it as a broken promise; one that was implied by the announcement made in January about 6.11 being expected to be in 17.3 (especially in light of the performance improvements I realized a newer kernel would bring Zorin OS users). No effort was put forth in making amends. That didn't help.
Exactly right.
This is true. But the Zorin Group equally dropped the ball by not checking with Ubuntu ahead of time prior to making the pronouncement that we all could expect 6.11 to come with 17.3. They had a responsibility to themselves and to us as users to verify next steps and put a foundation in place to be able to back up whatever implicit guarantee and/or reasonable expectation as set by their own words and perceived responsibility to their user base. Look at System76. They're coming out with the 6.12 kernel version for 22.04 (Pop!_OS). They made good on their commitment to their users. What about Zorin? They created the expectation that 6.11 would come. Now it's not coming. What will they do, if anything?
I'm starting to become weary of this whole thing. Gonna leave it "as-is."
I need to correct myself on this one due to my having been in error:
I was under the incorrect impression that Canonical intended to release kernels higher than 6.8 for LTS - Ubuntu 22.04.
I have learned that at no time was this the plan.
My error was in regards to the 6.11 kernel On Ubuntu 24.04, not Ubuntu 22.04.
My apologies.
Canonical did not drop the ball on this one. I stand corrected.
1 Like
In AZorin's later post in that thread, he did mention that the kernel will be updated in Zorin 18 later this year, so it will still happen when it's ready.
Out of curiosity, I tried to install the 6.12 kernel today from the tuxinvader PPA. Unfortunately, my computer wouldn't start again after rebooting. I had to reinstall Zorin 17 and stay with the standard 6.8 kernel, which worked fine for me.
From my experience distro-hopping between rolling release distros, I found that major kernel updates tend to break some systems even if other users had a good experience with the update. Beware of a sample size of 1!
I would assume the Zorin devs are trying to play it safe with stability for existing users and not rock the boat too much with bleeding edge updates too soon. I'd rather wait a bit longer for them to adapt their system to the new kernel than have an entirely unusable computer. For a distro that's trying to appeal to normies, nothing would make them run for the hills faster than updates that break their computer, like on Windows!
Besides, when it comes to the kernel versions in Ubuntu LTS versions, I recall seeing somewhere that the Ubuntu devs maintain their Linux kernel packages with updates and security fixes until the EOL date of that Ubuntu LTS version. Even after the Linux krenel devs stopped supporting that version themselves. Since it seems that Zorin uses the Ubuntu kernel packages (just like Linux Mint), it would in theory also be covered with updates and support from the Ubuntu devs until the EOL of Zorin 17.
Therefore, it should still be fine to keep using the trusty kernel that works for a good while to come.
1 Like
That is correct. The 6.11 Kernel was given for the .2 Release of Ubuntu 24.04. But in the Past the Kernel lands in Ubuntu 22.04 too - like the 6.8 Kernel for Example. So, that it will happen with the 6.11 Kernel wasn't too far-fetched (hopefully the right Word, hahaha!). But Ubuntu didn't do it. So, Zorin is affected by this.
And I wouldn't say, that they broke a Promise. It was more like a Plan - and that Plan didn't worked. And that a Plan doesn't work happens unfortunately.
Ubuntu supports Kernel's by themself, even when a Kernel has the EOL-Status; that is right. You can see it at the 6.8 Kernel. It is EOL but Ubuntu brings still Updates for it.
1 Like