What a silly question. Nobody makes mistakes on purpose, and assuming that Karmic Koala’s bugs weren’t placed in the code by a Microsoft secret agent it’s just bad luck and the short development cycle. openSUSE’s longer one might help in the latter regard, of course. But on my own evidence so far, I can’t see what all the noise is about: 9.10 is the best Ubuntu release for me since 8.04. But openSUSE 11.2 RC2 already looks terrific and I expect it to be better.
I don’t think openSUSE 11.2 will repeat the mistakes of Ubuntu 9.10, but that’s not really a fair question.
oS 11.2 comes out so close to Ubuntu 9.10 that many of the upstream components are the same.
Given how close the release dates are it is not as if there’s any time for the oS devs to ‘learn’ from what went wrong with Ubuntu in time to change anything in 11.2.
A bulk of the complaints against Ubuntu 9.10 have to do with distro upgrading from prior releases. This feature is being supported in openSUSE for the first time with 11.2, which is both a curse - we’re likely to have growing pains - and a blessing because we don’t have this huge percentage of our userbase relying on ‘dup’ to carry the day for them.
Still we are not grave-bug-but-shipping-anyway free: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548993
This bug shows that in some cases openSUSE 11.2 does not recognize other distros that are already installed on your system. It will configure GRUB to show Windows partitions (and other openSUSE 11.2 partitions as I have seen in my own testing) but not other distros. This is pretty bad, and I’m already shaking my head at all the people who will claim this was somehow “planned” given the Novell-MS interoperability deal.
I doubt that openSUSE will share the same set of issues and be a bad release for the simple fact that openSUSE has a much longer development cycle in addition to it have a different core base and structure of the system. In my opinion, openSUSE has almost always had better releases then Ubuntu when they release simultaneously. That being said, because Ubuntu has a shorter release cycle, they tend to “catch up” in quality.
Also, I’ve found Ubuntu’s LTS releases to be much better quality, even though they did have to do a redo of the 8.04 release (8.04.1) because of some bugs. We probably will see an 9.10.1 if they are smart, just to fix the amount of bugs that were in this release. Plus, it would make them look a lot better because it would show that they are positively acknowledging their critics and making an effort to improve things.
I have a feeling that openSUSE 11.2 is going to blow Ubuntu 9.10 out of the water.
Not for me, 6.06 and 6.10 were both fine, however 7.04 refused to boot on my machine.
7.10 worked, 8.04 worked, 8.10 didnt work too well, 9.04 didnt work too well, 9.10 worked.
But I think most of it is because of my hardware.
Yes, looking at my own experience of kubuntu upgrades (tends to follow any ubuntu pattern):
6.10 (Edgy, but an ok release) to 7.04: very good
7.04 > (7.10): total failure., so ignored 7.10 also by its early reputation.
8.04 > (8.10): missed out as 8.04 very good and nothing to gain by 8.10’s reputation.
8.04 > 9.04: best upgrade ever experienced.
9.04 > 9.10: excellent upgrade process, but KDE desktop failed with updated video driver, but now sorted. No further problems with 9.10, so ok overall experience.
It was planned, but yes I consider it a redo because they should have waited just a little bit longer to release instead of forcing it though “on schedule”. People really put too much importance on deadlines and not enough emphasis on what really matters: quality.