 ?
 long time since I've used that package manager.
 Watch him running Ubuntu on ChromeOS.
 @ahoneybun, No, I was running it on my phone
 So confused
 Note 9 + Dex
 interesting.  Seems like an older version?
 Y U NO Ubuntu Software Center?
 @AdamOutler, It is the older LTS.
 @AdamOutler, Always been a Cli/Synaptic person
 @KMyers, Lol
 apt-get all the way
 https://fossbytes.com/raspberry-pi-3-model-a-launched-with-802-11ac-wi-fi-built-in-bluetooth/
 You can now run esxi on a pi
 makes sense, you can just cluster some hardware for power and space
[19:47] <maxolasersquad> Canonical Extends Ubuntu 18.04 LTS Linux Support to 10 Years https://www.serverwatch.com/server-news/canonical-extends-ubuntu-18.04-lts-linux-support-to-10-years.html
 Owow!
 Nooooo
 Why Nooooo?
 You just upgraded.
 That's way too long.
 I'm the one stuck on that old crusty 2016 version.
 Yeah, and now you don't have to upgrade for a decade.
 ^
 All those problems you had with upgrade and stuff not working?  Solved...  Don't upgrade.
 especially servers
 Not for 10 years.
 Yeah.  I've got a 16.04 server.
 10 years of security updates!  Who cares about not getting the latest features on a server?  Does it run what it needs to run?
 it's linux, if you want the feature, just manually install it
 I mean, usually when you see an uptime of 1200 days, it means the server needs to be reinstalled.   With this, you can see more than 3,000 and it's still questionable
[20:01] <maxolasersquad> I agree that 10 years is too long, enabling companies to continue bad practices. On the other hand, I'm sure this comes from market pressures, and you can't blame Canonical for meeting the desires of its customers to win and keep business.
 What bad practices?
 Not tearing down and rebuilding servers every 4 years?  Seems like the alternative is way worse.
[20:16] <maxolasersquad> Letting your infrastructure become whoefully outdated.
[20:22] <maxolasersquad> If your devops practices are good then moving your applications between servers isn't so bad.
 It's a bad idea.
 why?
 that's about the lifetime of a server anyway
 if you've had a server for 10 years, you're probably getting a new one sometime soon
 It's going to make people on the desktop say on an LTS forever.
 *stay
 I also am opposed to this. It encourages people to stay on out-of-date software/hardware. Even if the OS is kept op to date for 10 years, what are the chances that package maintainers will be also updating the packages. This is exactly why people are still running PHP4 scripts
 I see it now working for a software company
 When do you stop supporting legacy software
 People who mean business have good dev ops and move off legacy software
 I see it with the cases I work
 @govatent, As soon as it becomes economically impractical
 seeing how different IT firms work at a data center, it's a way to get stay secure because execs hate downtime
 I feel like today, down time for upgrades is mostly a thing of the past when done right
 since executives have pretty much no idea what they do, they see any downtime as a failure of the IT dept, even for an upgrade
 this mitigates that
[20:36] <maxolasersquad> From Canonical's perspective, they probably have prospects passing on Ubuntu because they can get 10 years of support on RHEL. That's most certainly what is driving this.
 hm... didn't think about that
 they're probably betting on people just switching to the new LTS every year and is mainly focused on servers
 i wouldn't be surprised if they saw the data from installations and came to that conclusion