[Coastie]

It's replacing Ubuntu Software Center? I can't find a reference to this anywhere on the Ubuntu site.

I think this is the one I read on a news feed or saw on a You Tube video. I am sure the Ubuntu Software Center was being replaced but not sure now if the is the right replacement.  :-\

[valtam]

From what I have read, Gnome Software will be the default in Ubuntu 16.04. I will certainly test it next year, I like the look of it so far. Simple, clean...

[Coastie]

From what I have read, Gnome Software will be the default in Ubuntu 16.04. I will certainly test it next year, I like the look of it so far. Simple, clean...

Great!  8)

[Zead]

From what I have read, Gnome Software will be the default in Ubuntu 16.04. I will certainly test it next year, I like the look of it so far. Simple, clean...

Really?

GNOME Software supports "fwupd", even though you can use command line, but still good thing.

http://www.fwupd.org/users.html

It's installed in fedora by default. So if Ubuntu 16.04 ships with GNOME software, I suppose Ubuntu will have fwupd installed by default too. Maybe some other Software applications do too support it.

I think it's a good thing to have, but it's probably just for new computers with UEFI.

Of course that's just if Linux Lite would use GNOME Software for system updating.

[valtam]

There's also a chance it will pull in a whole lot of unwanted gnome packages. We'll just have to wait and see what dependencies ubuntu declares.

[Coastie]

Just read review of Linux Lite 2.6 http://www.everydaylinuxuser.com/2015/11...inux.html# by Everyday Linux User. Review was positive but he wrote, "Linux Lite does not yet have a version that works easily with UEFI based computers which in 2015 is a little bit disappointing, especially as it is based on Ubuntu which does have UEFI support."

As I previously posted, I don't really understand about UEFI but installed Linux Lite 2.6 on my recently purchased computer. http://www.term.dpdns.org/forums/on-top.../#msg17173

I did have to call ASUS to get help changing BIOS to boot from DVD first. Never had that problem on my old computers then it LL 2.6 installed with no problems. The BIOS looks different so it must be UEFI. If I could not have installed LL, I would have wanted to return the computer. I do not want to change distros. Other users may give up and go to another distro.  :'(

Can someone explain this UEFI stuff in plain English and why it is a problem for Linux Lite to have UEFI support when Ubuntu does?

Can it be put in 2.8 and new downloads of 2.6 isos?

[valtam]

Reviewers review what they see, they are more often than not, unaware of the ethical decisions a distribution makes.

[Coastie]

Reviewers review what they see, they are more often than not, unaware of the ethical decisions a distribution makes.

??? Do not understand what ethics has to do with UEFI. Would you please explain?

[Wirezfree]

@Coastie
Intel's original concept was basically aimed at improvements over current BIOS & security,
but the concepts have been hijacked, and to all intents and purpose locked users into certain hardware/software choices
Here's a summary on the criticism hence the ethics, but you can read all about UEFI also.

[Coastie]

@Wirezfree

I read the article about UEFI before but still do not understand it that well. I do understand the criticism. Since apparently most new computers will have UEFI. why is it a problem for LL to works easily with UEFI based computers? If I hadn't called ASUS, I would have had a lot of problems installing LL.