Right now I am musing on what is preferable for me and possibly other Mate DE users. Namely, is it optimal to stick with Ubuntu Mate flavour or to migrate to mainstream Ubuntu + Mate DE.
Well, here are some pros and cons in no particular order:
Hands down (?), mainstream Ubuntu is rock-solid foundation for end-user’s DE.
Ubuntu Mate flavour is just somehow repackaged mainstream distribution.
One can enjoy 5 or more (mind ‘pro’) years of mainstream LTS version vs 3 years of downstream flavour’s LTS version.
Installation and configuration of Ubuntu + Mate DE can take some extra effort. Namely: installation of desired applications and tweaks.
Downstream flavour maintainers could tweak and configure distro around not that obvious rough edges which could pose significant difficulties for daring user of Ubuntu + Mate DE.
Well with the issues Ubuntu MATE is currently facing I’m still hoping for the best as there does seem to be a glimmer of things happening behind the scenes.
I’ve thought about a few options:
• Stick with UM 24.04 w/Pro and wait and see what happens in the future.
• Install Ubuntu 26.04 and add the Mate DE or Ubuntu MATE DE and then drop Gnome.
• Install Ubuntu Server and do the same as above (no Gnome involved being Server).
• Go with another distro that supports the Mate DE. Mint would seem to be the obvious choice here.
Either way the middle two options will require work on my part and help from others no doubt but in my case no matter what the desktop will be some form of Mate.
Agree, we have one year to decide, until UM 24.04 LTS becomes obsolete.
I gave it a try. apt purge ubuntu-desktop does not completely remove Gnome. Nevertheless, it clears system to an extent.
I have some doubts regarding server. Some time ago server did not have Wi-Fi autodetection & configuration as well as USB auto-mount features. Not sure that these features of underlying system are parts of DE installation.
To me, Ubuntu promises better stability and confidence compared with possible alternatives.
While being a long time user of Linux I am a causal user. I doubt I have the skills to do Ubuntu + Mate, and I have no desire to try. I will stay on Ubuntu Mate as long as it exists and if it would cease to exist I would move to Mint Mate, probably Ubuntu based but maybe Mint DE if it offers the Mate desktop.
I have used/tried Ubuntu Mate, Mint Mate, Parrot (Mate) Sparky Mate, Pearl Mate, Spiral Mate dormant since 2025 and the long defunct Point Linux Mate (I have two older Dell laptops for experimenting). I was a gnome 2 devotee and abhor gnome 3, which I have tried. So it’s Mate for me as long as Mate exists.
I’ll give my own 2c view, and highlight it’s my own view, though of course it’ll be likely influenced by the fact that I’m a Ubuntu member, still currently a Ubuntu MATE DIscourse moderator & have Ubuntu MATE team involvement, let alone other Ubuntu [team] involvements.
to me a Ubuntu MATE install was a Ubuntu install anyway; the MATE only reflecting the desktop/WM choice ; it doesn’t matter to me if what install media I use; in fact often choose the media by installer choice; then switch packages post-install to get what I want
Debian & Ubuntu MATE package in upstream Debian usually anyway (https://tracker.debian.org/teams/debianubuntu-mate-team/) so I tend to note updated packages on my Debian testing box before they seen on my Ubuntu development release install anyway, and thus noted the upload issues upstream (Debian) when they occurred (in the the problem was resolved by a Debian/Ubuntu GNOME developer; but it highlighted issues with lack of MATE packagers as I saw it).. thus the issues will likely impact any deb based system or anything downstream of Debian, and not just Ubuntu [MATE]
Martin [Wimpress] put out a call for maintainers on him standing down on Ubuntu’s Discourse, and that has gotten responses, which I’ve seen numerous discussions & posts about, and I wrote about that here - No FUD on what's next: Ubuntu Mate => Ubuntu + Mate - #12 by guiverc - Thoughts & Feedback - Ubuntu MATE Community which to me is GREAT and positive news, not just for Ubuntu MATE, but Debian and other deb based systems downstream from Debian, as I expect the prior uploads via sid to continue (why duplicate work?? by doing something else… GNOME, Xfce & other DEs are handled the same way; alas not all DEs do)
there are security impacts for the flavor desktops, particularly beyond the first 3 years, more so after the first 5 years - so I’d really consider the default GNOME desktop on Ubuntu if I wanted to continue using EOSS, unless I was willing to keep track of flaws/problems which is a somewhat time consuming task (forgetting/skipping details is where this worries me most; it’s easy to do & this needs to be done for a very long time). Whilst Ubuntu’s PRO has some benefits; its benefits are less useful for the flavor desktops in my opinion; but I’m no security expert! and we can take advantage of without needing to pay $s anyway; so its a good deal.
myself, whilst I’m mostly using Ubuntu on my desktop systems as I find it easier (and another desktop like MATE or LXQt doesn’t change my view of the system to Ubuntu-MATE or Lubuntu! as its still Ubuntu to me), I’m not just using Ubuntu as still tend to prefer Debian for my servers, and I’d be happy if I was using Fedora, OpenSuSE & some other full distributions too on my desktops (I have in the past!). I personally prefer to avoid systems using runtime adjustments etc as I’d prefer to use the upstream & make whatever changes I want myself & thus avoid an additional software layer running on my own system(s) (and thus not have an additional attack vector present on the install; even if tiny)
I’ve not experimented with switchined DE/WM’s on a resolute install… What did you get left with? as to me a plymouth ‘wallpaper’ being left behind is NOT a problem if that’s what you’re talking about; there’s a reason for minor stuff like that being left behind, or is it packages you’re seeing? if so I’d be interested in what packages.
Server installs use Netplan.io and not NetworkManager, though when you install the desktop packages that switch is normally made; but depending on what metapackages you install you may not make a Server install identical to a Desktop install; ie. [meta] packages used & the release can make a difference.