Greetings,

I have upgraded from Ubuntu 10.04 to 10.10 all was fine then a week or so later I decided to take the plunge and upgrade again to Ubuntu 11.04. It was at that moment, after everything relating to the upgrade had gone through its rigmarole and doing its voodoo it do so well and all that jazz, went incredibly wrong. I get a brief message saying something about how I did not have the hardware to use Unity and should use the Classic system. I wish I could be more accurate but the message, such as it was, was only up for a few seconds at most. Then it went blank and at no time was I given the opportunity of going 'Classic' I'm not sure what that meant. Now I was unable to do anything at all. I tried to access my Firefox browser. I got a millisecond of the browser before my screen went black again. I attempted to open Thunderbird and had the same flash and again the screen goes black. This is not the first time this happened to me regarding Ubuntu 11.04. It occurred when I tried to install 11.04 from my Windows side. It had the appearance of a success and yet when I attempted to use it, the same thing happened. Each time i tried to access something there would be a flash and then naught but a black screen

That message I got at the start about not having hardware to support Unity. Is that an indication that I will have future trouble with Ubuntu upgrades because my PC a "Gateway Profile 5C" does not have the 'Hardware' for this {Unity}?

I reinstalled my original Ubuntu 10.04 disc and wiped out 11.04 from the system. Since then as stated above I have upgraded with no problem to my present kernel for Ubuntu 10.10. You can bet I am not about to try to upgrade to 11.04 again.

Has anyone heard of an experience like mine?

herakles_14

If Unity is ... Gnome3 in a different jacket, then: yes, been there. It needs a 3D-accellerated card, I dont have that, so I got popped back to "fall-back", a flat non-attractive ... whatever.

Since then, I installed XFCE...maybe (just maybe) an option for you too?

Luck

Thor

Hi,
I chose "Classic over Unity" and could not be happier..Looked like to me at least, that Unity was geared for the smart phones not desktop..IMHO
jolphil

Its a known problem. Canonical dont think it is a problem, but that is canonical, they have some strang views at times. If yuo read the unity "Demystifying Unity's Graphics Hardware Requirements" page it says that ATI/AMD open source drivers can cause 'rendering artifacts'. Thats if your video hardware is even up to the task.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Demystifying...reRequirements

I tried to figure out exactly whatcard you could have in your system, but without the exact model I am just guessing. But it looks like you system may have an old ATI/AMD card.

What you should have done is selected 'classic' at the login screen.

Nah, its not 'gnome 3 in a different jacket'.

Curent unity versions (up to 11.04) use gnome 2.X. With 11.10 unity will be using gnome 3 instead.

Oops, mislead by the screenshots...eh, learned something again!

I wouldnt be suprised if some of the ideas from unity found their way into gnome 3, and vice-versa.

You could be on to something...in one clean word : Panspermia...

Ah, Linux...gotta love the gal...

The resolution is simple (but maybe not that obvious to many). At the login screen you have inteface options at the bottom of the screen. Choose Ubuntu Classic before logging in and you'll be all set.

If you really want to run Unity, once you've upgraded post a message with questions on it. You can most likely run Unity also. Ubuntu 11.04 will default to Unity 3D. You can actually install Unity 2D from the Synaptic program and it'll use that instead of the default Unity 3D and you shouldn't have any problems.

If I were you, I'd take the plunge. Ubuntu 11.04 Classic runs fine on machines that are already running Ubuntu 10.10 without problems.

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames

The big problem with that is that you end up with Unity on your desktop which, as the OP observed, is not a good fit at all for folks that actually use their computer.

Gnome Shell, with extensions, is a bit better. Xfce4 is the solution.

Hi, Widget. Actually it's a matter of opinion. The OP didn't know how to use it. I, after having a lot of experience with using Unity, explained to the user how to use it. I gave the interface a chance and like it. The OP asked:

Then I, as an experienced Unity user, have answered, yes, and explained how to use it.

He might not want to. But at least from an experienced user's relating how to use the interface, he can know it can be done if he chooses to test it again.

If a person tries to drive a standard automobile the same way he'd drive an automatic and have a bad experience, he might never try it again. But if someone with experience with both explained how to use the standard, he might not be so apprehensive about it in the future. He might never want to test a standard again, but he doesn't have to be afraid that it just doesn't work. It doesn't work like the automatic. It's just different.

After having used Untiy for a few months I became frustrated with a few things. I went back to Ubuntu Classic for a couple of days (that was a couple of months ago). I missed Unity and went back to Unity.

I gave it a chance and would miss it if I had to be without it.

I also shared with the user that he can actually upgrade his OS (as his appeared to be a certain underlining desire in his message) and still use the classic interface if he preferred it. He doesn't have to be stuck with the older version just because of the clear message he got concerning "Don't have the correct hardware to use Unity."

Canonical made a bold move by introducing (and to some degree forcing the test of it) the Unity interface. I believe I can see the direction and am impressed.

I resisted a Gui Linux/Unix interface for many years. I resisted Microsoft going to Windows over DOS also. I've always liked the fact that, while the Linux Gui interface is very popular, they have retained the ability to get around the OS with the commandline.

Just like people complain that Unity is for "brain dead" morons, the builtin ease, really isn't so bad for people who want to spend their brain power on other things.

To a large degree it kind of reminds me of a tablet interface. I believe many people will soon be using tablets to interface with their computers.

Again, the user had a bad experience because he thought something was wrong with his computer and he couldn't perform the upgrade. I just shared that, there isn't anything wrong with his computer. It can perform the upgrade. It can actually run Unity if he wants to. Whether he decides to test upgrading again or not, at least he now has the opportunity of knowing. Someone else reading the message who are having the same experience might have the opportunity of testing the interface rather than thinking their only recourse was to do what this user did, trash his OS and start over.

He didn't indicate it in his message. But for me, if I had, had my computer through two OS versions, reformatting and starting over would be a tragedy. I'm sorry the OP didn't know this before he started over.

The OS isn't so buggy that people testing the upgrade will lose everything. "sudo service gdm restart" from a cntrl-alt-F2 window could have quickly brought him to the Login screen to select Ubuntu Classic and he could have been at home with the 11.04 upgrade.

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames

Well we will just have to get used to disagreeing on this.

I have used Unity starting with Ubuntu 10.10-testing. I was pretty excited about it at that time.

The fact that you can use the "classic" desktop in 11.04 is fine. You will not have that choice in 11.10 as it will not exist. Gnome-fallback, the package that comes with GS in case you do not have the hardware is a panel system. It has all that was wrong with the old system with none of the advantages.

Unity 2d is pretty buggy right now and with the history of Ubuntu and bugs I would not hold my breath to see it fixed in the near future, maybe by 12.10.

OpenBox with a panel is better than gnome-fallback (try Zenix).

I quit testing Ubuntu dev releases with 11.04 and quit using Ubuntu because of what they, and gnome for that matter, are doing. The idea that the user needs protected from him/her self is insulting. The "configuration free experience" that Shuttleworth bloviates about is disgusting in a Linux OS.

Gnome going back to deconf for gnome3 is just stupid but it does make configuration harder so I guess it is a great thing.

At least GS is fairly easy to write extensions for so that the users of it will have a plethora of choices from the community to choose from. There are several that are out there now, I use the "friperies" set of extensions on my GS installs under Debian. They, with the inclusion of an actual menu for the literate, a fixed number of workspaces and a windows list and launcheres on the upper panel (no need for the gymnastics of going to and from the overview at all) do make it usable.

On the other hand, Xfce which has never impressed me too much, has improved greatly. Xfce4 has a second panel, which you can put anywhere you want (mine on the right side), configurable to size (length and height) that acts as a dock. Their menu has always been fair and it has been improved too.

My wife uses Ubuntu but has seen Unity in action, wants nothing to do with something with no usable menu. As Ubuntu gave me my start in Linux I am hoping that GS will suit her so that I can keep one box here on Ubuntu. If not I will simply be doing a root partition "conversion" to Debian instead of upgrading her LTS install when the time comes (13.04). That is what has happened to all my Ubuntu installs on here.

They run lighter and faster under Debian anyway. They do not have several senseless dependencies built in to them either.

The meta packages under Debian are not as tightly knit either so that, using aptitude (no longer a default install on Ubuntu) you can easily take them apart. This means that you can use the meta package to install things but are able to get rid of any you do not want. This is faster in most cases than installing all the packages manually (aptitude just relabels the packages as manually installed with one command). This way, for instance, I can use gthumb on my Gnome install in spite of a conflict with one of the recommends (not even installed) for shotwell. Shotwell can be removed with out removing the DE with it.

I want control of my box. Ubuntu objects to that idea. I therefore object to them.

On a lighter note, I still think that MSDos with DosShell was the peak of MS development. Been down hill ever since. Don't allow it in the house.

---------- Post added 08-07-11 at 06:50 PM ----------

Well we will just have to get used to disagreeing on this.

I have used Unity starting with Ubuntu 10.10-testing. I was pretty excited about it at that time.

The fact that you can use the "classic" desktop in 11.04 is fine. You will not have that choice in 11.10 as it will not exist. Gnome-fallback, the package that comes with GS in case you do not have the hardware is a panel system. It has all that was wrong with the old system with none of the advantages.

Unity 2d is pretty buggy right now and with the history of Ubuntu and bugs I would not hold my breath to see it fixed in the near future, maybe by 12.10.

OpenBox with a panel is better than gnome-fallback (try Zenix).

I quit testing Ubuntu dev releases with 11.04 and quit using Ubuntu because of what they, and gnome for that matter, are doing. The idea that the user needs protected from him/her self is insulting. The "configuration free experience" that Shuttleworth bloviates about is disgusting in a Linux OS.

Gnome going back to deconf for gnome3 is just stupid but it does make configuration harder so I guess it is a great thing.

At least GS is fairly easy to write extensions for so that the users of it will have a plethora of choices from the community to choose from. There are several that are out there now, I use the "friperies" set of extensions on my GS installs under Debian. They, with the inclusion of an actual menu for the literate, a fixed number of workspaces and a windows list and launcheres on the upper panel (no need for the gymnastics of going to and from the overview at all) do make it usable.

On the other hand, Xfce which has never impressed me too much, has improved greatly. Xfce4 has a second panel, which you can put anywhere you want (mine on the right side), configurable to size (length and height) that acts as a dock. Their menu has always been fair and it has been improved too.

My wife uses Ubuntu but has seen Unity in action, wants nothing to do with something with no usable menu. As Ubuntu gave me my start in Linux I am hoping that GS will suit her so that I can keep one box here on Ubuntu. If not I will simply be doing a root partition "conversion" to Debian instead of upgrading her LTS install when the time comes (13.04). That is what has happened to all my Ubuntu installs on here.

They run lighter and faster under Debian anyway. They do not have several senseless dependencies built in to them either.

The meta packages under Debian are not as tightly knit either so that, using aptitude (no longer a default install on Ubuntu) you can easily take them apart. This means that you can use the meta package to install things but are able to get rid of any you do not want. This is faster in most cases than installing all the packages manually (aptitude just relabels the packages as manually installed with one command). This way, for instance, I can use gthumb on my Gnome install in spite of a conflict with one of the recommends (not even installed) for shotwell. Shotwell can be removed with out removing the DE with it.

I want control of my box. Ubuntu objects to that idea. I therefore object to them.

On a lighter note, I still think that MSDos with DosShell was the peak of MS development. Been down hill ever since. Don't allow it in the house.

I don't know what happened with the synaptic command prompt but you can do it from the commandline.

I believe it's:

If more details are needed I'm sure Widget will chime in.

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames

I used bpth commandlines and the first one came up with a bunch of info, the second one came up with:bill48@bill48-desktop:~$ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
[sudo] password for bill48:
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

So I decided to go through the upgrade from the Package Manager. I was about to sign in my password to start the upgrade when i recalled what had been said about selecting 'Classical' before logging in. I had mine set to log me in automatically. I went System > Administration > Login Screen with the intent of changing it to manual log in. most of the screen was grayed out except for the unlock button and the close button. I clicked the 'unlock' and it did not unlock. Numerous pointless clicks later I closed out. I am not about to try and upgrade until I can change that screen with the option of log in manually or automatically and be able to make changes whenever I see fit.
I had this problem with the log in screen before on an unrelated subject, I had thought the problem had been resolved? Is there a way to unlock the unlock so I can make the change to manual log in?
herakles_14

Do you get this same behavior when you run gdmsetup from a terminal screen?

Also you might be able to bring up the login screen by going to a console (cntrl-alt-F1) and running "sudo service gdm restart". You might give that a try now to see if it works. That way if you get stuck after your upgrade you'll have this alternative.

-- L. James

--
L. D. James
ljames@apollo3.com
www.apollo3.com/~ljames