Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?

[az2020]

4.2 can be upgraded to 4.8 in the usual manner.

Install 4.2, run updates once done/reboot if needed, then use Lite Upgrade - you'll be on LL 4.8 before you know it..
Installing any 4.x will upgrade to the latest in the series.
No different than those who had 4.2 and upgraded along the way or waited till now.

I just did it in a Virtual Box; worked great! I'll try it on my new laptop tomorrow.

I don't want to sound like I'm beating the same topic too much. (I don't know to what extent my perception as a newbie might be foreign to how you guys see things, whether I should try to make myself understood. Or, if I'm sounding repetitive.). But, I would say that this all looks great. But, it would be easier to orient to LL if something (the download page?) made it clearer (before the 4.8 download buttons) how this all fits together. Make it clear that the latest release isn't for UEFI machines, but the test 4.2 is, and we (vile) UEFI owners can get to 4.8 by immediately upgrading from the menu).

I like what you guys are doing. I can understand how things have gotten where they are, and emphasis(es) being what they've been. But, this experience (from my perspective) has been like an  "by invitation only" experience. It seems like most people would assume the same things I did about the latest release, and not know what they're getting themselves into. And then figure out what to do from Page 9. And that Page 9 is the entry way to 4.8 on a UEFI machine. It seems like LL could be succinctly described for what it is is, up front, how it's different, and what most people would need to do (without the journey I took)?

The OS is the same - you'll get the updates from 4.2 thru 4.8 when upgrading.. No worries.
The only difference is the BIOS installer portion...

That makes sense. I might be quibbling, but isn't there a risk that some people with newer hardware could be unable to boot/install 4.2 because its kernel/drivers aren't new enough. 4.8 might work for them. But, they can't get there without going through 4.2 first?

I experienced that with MX & Sparky Linux stable. They both emphasize stability, and don't include new stuff immediately. My new laptop won't boot those. (But, an ISO built from their unstable branches works great. Presumably the next stable release or two will have the right stuff moved up from unstable.). It seems like this LL situation might impact people that way(?).

I'll post an update after I install 4.2 UEFI on real hardware, and upgrade.

[az2020]

I'll try it on my new laptop tomorrow.

FYI: I installed it to the laptop (I installed 4.2 UEFI, then upgraded to 4.8 ). It's working fine. I really like this distro. It good to see that it installed because this laptop[1] is an "Amazon Choice," "Best Seller." I think it sells *a lot*. It's a Ryzen 3 3200u, Radeon Vega 3 gfx, for $320 USD. Seems like a lot of power, new technology for not much more expense than budget laptop. It would not surprise me if people google whether Linux Lite runs on that laptop. (Hopefully they'll find this post confirming that it does!).

I mentioned in my first pst that I did some "speed dating" with distros last April. (I collected memory-usage info. LL wouldn't boot then, and I didn't pursue it.). When I got this new laptop a couple weeks ago, I thought I'd collect the memory-usage comparisons again. I wanted to see how compatable this laptop is with Linux, how many distros woul install. (I think it's fun to speed-date distros too. You get initial impressions without getting bogged down in details.). You guys might be interested in seeing the info I collected:

For details, footnotes, see the PDF or original spreadsheet at: https://jmp.sh/kNTBnT4

It's self-explanatory. The real hardware environments use more memory because there are real hardware drivers loaded, etc. (Although, Bodhi is an exception. I.e., real & virtual environments have almost the same usage. I don't understand how it does that.).

I think the virtual environments are probably more comparable. But, in real usage, the hardware numbers are more realistic. It's hard to equate those two together. For example, Lubuntu is fairly heavy when actually installed on the laptop. But, it's more lean than other distros in the virtual box. Maybe it supports this laptop's hardware better, loaded more drivers (and therefore grew heavier than others of similar virtual size).

Anyway, it's fun to look at. (I think Neon KDE is surprising. I always thought KDE was synonymous with *large*. But, that's not too bad.).

[1] The laptop is: Acer Aspire 5 A515-43-R19L

[TheDead]

Nice work!
Fun to see that contrary to those "other" paid OSes. Updating an OS update can LOWER your memory usage.

[Valtam]

Nice job

[az2020]

FYI: I installed the 4.2 test uefi onto a Ryzen 5 3500u / Radeon Vega 8 laptop.[1] and then the obligatory Favoites->System Update.

I am really impressed with Linux Lite. I didn't expect 4.8 (let alone an unofficial 4.2) to work with this hardware. The current version (19.1) of MX Linux (which I love!) won't install on this Ryzen 5. But, a backleveled 4.2 "test" will? That's amazing to me.

[1] Acer Aspire 5 (A515-43-R5RE)

[Valtam]

We're just full of surprises

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

[Moltke]

I mentioned in my first pst that I did some "speed dating" with distros last April. (I collected memory-usage info. LL wouldn't boot then, and I didn't pursue it.). When I got this new laptop a couple weeks ago, I thought I'd collect the memory-usage comparisons again. I wanted to see how compatable this laptop is with Linux, how many distros woul install.

One question, besides a terminal, were those systems running any other programs? or just booted and idle? If the latter they seem quite high.

[az2020]

One question, besides a terminal, were those systems running any other programs? or just booted and idle? If the latter they seem quite high.

Just booted and idle. If you look at the PDF or spreadsheet, it describes the "process" I tried to follow in order to measure the same thing with each distro. It's not a perfect science because on some distros the memory used can fluctuate. Usually it would stabilize after a few minutes. I should probably have a fixed 15-minute wait & measure. The way I waited until I saw stability might be arbitrary.

I think the numbers for the virtual machines should be reproducible. But, they don't reflect being installed on real hardware which should have higher memory use because of real drivers working with real hardware. A vm is a simplified environment, and should be the same on any machine. But, when a distro is installed on real hardware, I don't think those numbers are comparable across machines. I think my numbers on the Ryzen 3 3200u are higher than someone would have on 5-year old budget Toshiba. My laptop has more/newer things. More drivers, larger drivers. I assume.

So, the vm comparisons should be representative of how the distros compare in an ideal environment (but not real-world). And then, the real-hardware comparisons are representative of what happened on *my* machine (but, not representative of your machine).

I think it's fun to do those speed-dating installs. I don't know why. It's just fun to visit with a distro for 2-4 hours, move on to the next one. You get initial impressions without delving deeper into it. It's like travelling abroad. I feel enriched somehow. I'll probably do it again this summer after the 20.04 distros are out.