September 04, 2012, 2:25 PM — With Ubuntu 12.04 LTS as its underpinnings, Linux Mint 13 (Maya) was recently released in three versions, KDE (new), Xfce, and Gnome-Cinnamon. We tested each version separately and while we still like Mint, we're accumulating a nagging list of bugs -- some of which are the fault of Ubuntu, and some are the twists that Linux Mint takes on its own.
Like other versions of OSs, the initial payload of Linux Mint no longer fits on a single CD, unless fat components (like Libre Office) are removed. As the delivery system is an Internet download or a flash/external storage medium, we didn't find this to be a problem. It did, however, put one more nail in the coffin of the lowly CD.
We easily installed the three Linux Mint versions onto a test notebook (Lenovo T520 ThinkPad with Core i5 Intel chipset, 8GB of memory, and internal 500GB Hitachi conventional drive). Others have complained about driver detection problems with older Dell models, but we had no difficulties. We were heartened to see an enormous variety of supported text languages.
The upgrade conundrum
Upgrading from a prior version to Linux Mint 13 can be problematic. Linux Mint's website suggests that upgrades are likely unnecessary, as the built-in updating functionality keeps most things reasonably up to date.
One argument says that if you're current with updates, which are usually two clicks away (or less), you're using a nice stable operating system. If you're using Linux Mint 9, with updates, you're OK. You probably have the latest Linux Kernel, and the Debian/Ubuntu underpinnings are probably up to date, too. So, the argument goes, the idea of a separate upgrade is unnecessary.
But there are many legitimate reasons for an upgrade. Upgrades might be needed when an end user fiddles around with internal configurations and accidentally messes something up, or when applications are damaged. In the case of a bad hard drive, it's best to get off the drive through various backup processes available.
But changing from one edition to another, we found, is rough. The Linux Mint backup app under Gnome-Cinnamon will stymie many users. It's unclear, and uses selections and terminology which might not lead to a successful backup. We have decades of experience with some highly sophisticated backup and archiving schemes, but we got grey hair from this one. Civilians will hurt themselves, and potentially, their data. Linux Mint uses a different backup methodology than its core, Debian and Ubuntu Cloud. You'll get no help there.
Part of this comes from the philosophy of how Linux is put together, and how updates work. Rolling updates aren't used in the underpinning operating system: Debian. Ubuntu, and therefore Linux Mint use the stable branch of Debian, which is updated in a slow, deliberative fashion. The problem with rolling updates is that they can result in a destabilized platform in cases where there are dependency issues and updates fall out of revision sync with other updates and changes to application settings.
But if you want to upgrade, it's best to use a tried-and-true method, which is to backup key data files, try to remember your customizations (or your .conf files if you know where they are) and then use the siege howitzer of the traditional Unix/Linux/Solaris/BSD/GNU file cannon: the tar -xvf command.
It's then possible to move categorically from Gnome-Cinnamon to Xfce to KDE UIs. It's tougher than it needs to be, and vastly less clean than upgrading empirically from MacOS or Windows to the next version. Oddly, there's an included application APToCD that will take a downloaded or other built/included application repository and burn it to CD/DVD. Real backup should be so easy.
The Xfce version of LinuxMint is based on the "lightweight" version window manager, Xfce. The usable components nonetheless still weigh in at 830+GB at the "normal" download payload. The window manager in Xfce is small; it's the other applications in the payload that bulk up the distribution. Xfce, despite its comparative small size, is visually appealing, if bereft of the quantity of applications based on the resident window manager in the KDE and Gnome-Cinnamon versions.
This is the one we'd use for older notebooks and desktops, as it's simple and has as a common foundation with the Gnome versions, the GTK2+ platform that enables various graphics apps and UI behaviors to work together.
There are two Gnome versions available, Mate 1.2 and Gnome-Cinnamon. On the surface, they both look like Gnome 2.2, a hallowed version of the famous UI. Underneath, we found there are decided differences. Mate 1.2 is based on a fork of Gnome 2.x, although it looks and feels identical to the Gnome 2.2 UI/window manager. This is where long-time Linux users of Gnome will feel happy, comfy, and will not gnash their teeth and wail about the differences in Gnome 3, which for some long-time Gnome users (and Ubuntu users who dislike Canonical's Unity UI) is the very center of hell itself.
Mate 1.2 has a very long list of compatible applications, and is both fast and responsive -- except in file management activities, where Linux Mint seemed to uniformly bog down for us. Long time Linux hacks would be right at home here, unless they enjoyed KDE or just a command-line.
Cinnamon, however, is actually Gnome 3 in Gnome 2 clothing. It's very much like a Gnome 2.2 "skin" for Gnome 3, and can do a few dazzling 3D effects if an application, and most importantly, the machine's graphics chipset and memory support it. We found that Cinnamon is somewhat dicey to use, as it's graphics driver-specific, and may not install without work on some systems.
Our T520s were compatible, and what we noted was that Cinnamon looked beautiful, but was also very sluggish and sometimes unpredictable in practical use. Cinnamon is new, but a failing of Linux distributions is to allow hardware detection to immediately disqualify and offer an alternate, even automatic, substitution of something that works the first time. It gives the experimental feeling that other OS users don't have.