Not surprisinhg. We get new Linux distributions almost every month, sometimes even every week.
This one is based on Debian. Again, not surprising. Debian has long been the mother of countless Linux distros.
But the interesting part isn’t the base. It’s the reason this distro exists.
It was created as a symbol of resistance.
That’s also not new in the Linux world. Many distros have been born out of disagreement or protest. For example, Void Linux emerged during the heated systemd controversy, offering a system that avoided systemd entirely.
The new distro, called Ageless Linux, follows a similar idea. It’s essentially Debian Linux but without age verification.
It started with California, and states like Colorado, New York, and Illinois have proposed similar legislation. Reports also suggest that Brazil may be moving in the same direction.
What makes this development even more interesting is that Meta, the company behind Facebook, reportedlylobbied heavily for these laws.
Until now, governments mainly pressured social media platforms to verify users’ ages to prevent young children and teenagers from accessing certain services.
Meta’s proposal shifts that responsibility. Instead of every app or website verifying a user’s age individually, the operating system would verify it once.
Then, through an API exposed by the OS or its app store, applications could simply ask the system for the user’s age or age category.
In other words, your operating system becomes the age gatekeeper for every app you install.
And that idea has sparked a lot of debate in the tech community especially among Linux and open-source developers.
Why age verification is 'incompatible' with Linux ecosystem?
At first glance, age verification sounds reasonable. Governments argue that it helps protect children from harmful online content. But many developers and privacy advocates see serious problems with pushing this responsibility to the operating system.
The biggest concern is privacy. Linux distributions traditionally collect little to no personal information about users. Unlike Apple and Microsoft, you are not forced to create an online account before using an operating system. Introducing age verification could mean that operating systems must store or process sensitive identity data, something many Linux projects have deliberately avoided for decades.
Some critics suspect the push is less about child safety and more about control, warning that once operating systems begin verifying identity or age, it becomes easier to expand such systems to regulate broader online activity.
Another issue is security risk. If operating systems start storing age or identity information, it creates a new type of data that could potentially be misused, leaked, or exploited. Even if only age categories are shared with apps, it still introduces a form of system-level user profiling.
There is also a philosophical concern. Many of us in the open-source world believe an operating system should remain a neutral tool, not a platform that enforces identity verification or government regulations.
Because of these concerns, some developers and users see OS-level age verification as a step toward turning operating systems into identity gatekeepers, which runs against the long-standing Linux ethos of user freedom and minimal to no data collection.
The project positions itself as a statement against OS-level age verification. Instead of building systems that identify and categorize users by age, Ageless Linux sticks to a much simpler idea: an operating system should run software, not act as a digital identity checker.
Ageless Linux is a registered operating system under the definitions established by the California Digital Age Assurance Act (AB 1043, Chapter 675, Statutes of 2025). We are in full, knowing, and intentional noncompliance with the age verification requirements of Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.501(a).
In practical terms, Ageless Linux is basically Debian with the age-verification pieces removed or avoided. The goal isn’t to reinvent Linux, but to ensure that users who oppose these laws still have a distribution that does not participate in age-verification frameworks.
More than just another Linux distro actually
I am glad that Ageless Linux did not stop at "Debian without age verification". Browsing the website, it seems they are more of a project that stands against age verification.
So it’s not just a distro; it’s becoming a full-fledged portal documenting and opposing age-verification laws.
In addition to that, they also have an ambitious hardware project that is "designed to satisfy every element of the California Digital Age Assurance Act's regulatory scope while deliberately refusing to comply with its requirements."
This hardware is basically a $12 RISC-V ARM board. They have named it "Ageless Device" and the aim is to give it to children in schools.
And I’m glad they are not restricting themselves to just a distro, but are moving toward becoming a non-profit organization that educates people about the potential dangers of age verification turning into surveillance infrastructure.
Kagi is best known for its privacy-focused search engine, but the company has been quietly building out a broader ecosystem of tools for people who would rather pay for software than be the product.
One of those tools is Orion, a web browser built on WebKit, the same engine that powers Safari, with a strong focus on privacy and customization.
Unlike most browsers you will come across on Linux, Orion is not a Chromium derivative or a Firefox fork. It is a fresh build that has earned a reputation for being fast, lightweight, and flexible, with support for extensions from Chrome, Firefox, and Safari.
For a long time, that experience was exclusive to macOS and iOS users. But that has changed as Kagi has been working on bringing Orion to Linux. After an alpha phase limited to Orion+ subscribers, the team has opened things up with an early beta build for everyone to try out.
🚧
Orion is not open source software; we covered the application because it's available for Linux.
Orion for Linux: What to Expect?
The Beta build has basic browsing functionality in place, with additional bits like password management, browsing history, Dark Mode, and Focus Mode included.
The developers have also addressed a handful of stability issues, including crashes when closing pinned tabs, freezes in Website Settings, and a bug that prevented new tabs from being created on fresh installations.
That said, Kagi Sync and WebKit Extensions are still in development and not available in this beta, so do not go in expecting the full macOS feature set just yet.
A Quick Look
The user interface feels modern and fits in well with GNOME, though the toolbar is a bit cluttered at the top. Kagi Search is set as the default search engine, and you will need to log in to your Kagi account to use it or switch to one of the other search engines via the Settings menu.
Basic web browsing works for the most part, but every so often, Orion throws an "Orion can't open this page" error without much explanation. More bizarre is what happens when you open a page heavy with ads—Orion randomly launches the file manager.
Media controls work reasonably well on GNOME, though there were multiple duplicate entries for WebKit in the media panel. The one actually tied to whatever is playing was the last one, labeled "Playback Stream."
Many other features are either broken or inconsistent at this stage. The sidebar toggle on the top left, Focus Mode, the Share option, Page Tweaks, Website Settings, and Privacy Reports all fall into that bucket. Some of them do nothing and act as placeholders; others behave unpredictably.
The History page, while functional, refuses to open any of the listed webpages when an entry is double-clicked or even launched via the right-click context menu. It also failed to properly list quite a few of the webpages I visited during testing.
The in-built Password Manager works well, letting me add new entries with details like the website URL, username, and password. Searching through them is straightforward via the search bar on top, and importing/exporting passwords looks doable (I didn't test it tho).
If you have multiple windows and tabs open, Orion will prompt you with a warning to take note of the open content and that it will restore those the next time you launch the browser. This is a handy feature that worked decently during my use.
Download Orion Browser Beta
Kagi provides a direct download for the Flatpak package of this beta build, which should work on most popular Linux distributions that have Flatpak configured.
If you run into any issues, there is a dedicated category on Orion's Public Issue Tracker for bug reports and troubleshooting. Additionally, the project's GitHub repository hosts some open-sourced components.
As for the stable release, there is no official timeline yet, but with an early beta already out, in a few months time feels like a reasonable estimate.
Support independent Linux journalism! If you think we are doing a good job at helping people use Linux on their personal computers, support us by opting for Plus membership.
Here's what you get with It's FOSS Plus membership:
✅ 5 Free eBooks on Linux, Docker and Bash ✅ Ad-free reading experience ✅ Badges in the comment section and forum ✅ Support creation of educational Linux materials
Amidst all the chaos in the world, some significant moves are being orchestrated that could potentially have detrimental effects on people's privacy and right to choose. Google's Developer Verification program falls under the latter.
Starting September 2026 (in certain regions), any app installed on a certified Android device will need to come from a developer who has gone through Google's new verification process. This applies regardless of where the app comes from: the Play Store, a third-party storefront, or a direct APK download.
To get verified, developers must register through a dedicated Android Developer Console and provide their legal name, address, email address, and phone number. In some cases, they will also need to upload a government-issued ID.
Organizations are additionally required to provide a D-U-N-S Number, a business identifier issued by Dun & Bradstreet that can take up to 30 business days to obtain.
There are two account tiers on offer: a Full Distribution account with a one-time $25 fee and a free Limited Distribution account for students and hobbyists that skips the government ID requirement. Installs via ADB and apps deployed through enterprise managed device systems are exempt from the requirements.
The requirement goes live in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand first in September, followed by a global rollout from 2027 onward. We covered the initial announcement back in August 2025, when the first alarm bells started ringing.
But is there any convincing justification behind this? Let's find out.
Does it make sense?
The Developer Verification webpage.
Kinda, Google's official position is that this is a security measure. The company points to its own research showing that apps from internet sideloading sources are over 50 times more likely to contain malware compared to those distributed through the Play Store.
The core idea is accountability. Right now, a developer caught distributing malware can be removed from the Play Store and come straight back under a different identity. Developer verification is meant to make that harder by tying app distribution to a verified real-world identity.
In theory, repeat offenders would have a harder time cycling through new accounts to keep spreading harmful content, so there's a reasonable argument here.
Anonymous distribution channels have historically been where a lot of malware activity takes place. Raising the barrier for bad actors to operate at scale is not, on its face, an unreasonable goal.
And for the average Android user who installs apps without thinking much about where they come from, more accountability in the ecosystem is not a bad thing.
Why it doesn't
Take F-Droid, the long-running free and open source Android app repository that has been around for more than 15 years now. It does not build apps in the traditional sense but rather takes publicly available source code, reviews it for compliance with open source principles, compiles it, and distributes it signed with its own cryptographic key.
Under the new rules, F-Droid has no workable path forward. Compelling volunteer contributors to register their identities with Google runs against what the platform stands for.
But claiming those app identifiers on developers' behalf is equally impossible, since that would give F-Droid a kind of exclusive ownership over apps it has no right to own.
F-Droid has been clear that if Google goes through this, it effectively ends the project as it currently exists. IzzyOnDroid, another third-party storefront that distributes developer-signed APKs also faces the same fate.
It is a community campaign built around stopping Developer Verification. It's open letter to Google so far has 56 signatories from 19 countries, including the EFF, FSF, Tor Project, Proton, KDE, LineageOS, CryptPad, Nextcloud, Vivaldi, and the Software Freedom Conservancy.
The letter argues that Google is overreaching into distribution channels outside its own store, that mandatory registration creates barriers for independent developers and researchers, and that centralizing developer data with Google raises serious surveillance and government access concerns.
The initiative is also urging developers to refuse participation in Google's early access program entirely and not to perform identity verification or accept an invitation to the new Android Developer Console, arguing that without developer buy-in, the verification program simply cannot succeed.
What this means for you
If a significant number of open source developers and smaller projects choose not to register with Google, or cannot do so because of privacy concerns, where they live, or the structural incompatibility of how their apps are distributed, their apps will simply stop working on certified Android devices.
The expected outcome for you is a narrower selection of apps and fewer alternatives to what is available on the Play Store.
There is also a broader principle at stake here. Centralizing all app distribution under Google's registration system hands one corporation the ability to cut off any app on any certified Android device globally.
That kind of consolidated authority over a platform used by billions of people is unsettling.
I think bad actors will always find new ways to distribute malicious apps. They did before developer verification, and they will after. Then there's nation-state spyware, which operates on a different level entirely, and the developer registration requirement was never going to touch that (makes you think, huh).
What Google could have leaned into instead is user education with clearer warnings, better guidance, and more effective communication about what a risky install actually looks like.
In the end, not everyone can be spoon-fed through this. At some point, it is on the person operating the smartphone to exercise a little judgment.
We all know Linux gives us a world of freedoms we couldn't possibly have on Windows, but have you ever stopped to think about that freedom in real, qualitative terms? After all, when most people say they can't switch to Linux, it's usually because of something they just can't do without Windows or macOS or Android (which itself is Linux, even if most don't consider it such).
So, let's take a closer look at some of the things you can do on/with a Linux system that you just can't typically do on Windows.
1. Live USB/Live session
Running Ubuntu 24.04 in a live session
It goes without saying that this one deserves the #1 spot on this list. After all, for most of us, our first experience with Linux was at the welcome screen of a live session from a USB, SD card, or, in the past, CD or DVD. If you go even further back, some of us (myself included) first got to know Linux through the likes of Damn Small Linux running a live session inside Windows itself.
The crazy thing? Live CDs have been a part of the Linux experience since the early 90s, when we still regularly used floppy drives! And yes, live floppies were a thing, too. In fact, they still are.
Not only is there no official way to run Windows as a live session out the box, but Microsoft's own live session solution, Windows To Go, was an enterprise-only solution and has been discontinued. Non-standard solutions exist, but these are on shaky ground in that they rely on creating a Windows install on portable media, which is something Microsoft hasn't sanctioned.
2. Login screen customization
The GDM login screen comes by default on GNOME-based systems
No lie, this one blew me away when I first switched to Linux from Windows. I'd always loved the idea of customising my system's visuals, and the fact I couldn't do this easily on Windows was a source of frustration. So to come from a world where I needed to risk malware or pay a fee just to put a wallpaper on the login screen to the full-scale flexibility of Linux has never stopped being amazing.
Not only can you change your wallpaper, but you can change the layout, even swap out the login manager altogether. Don't like the layout and style of GDM? Try SDDM or LightDM for greater flexibility, or even Ly, if you prefer something terminal-based. As a matter of fact, you can completely ditch the login manager altogether and boot straight to a TTY or desktop environment if you desire.
While you can change your wallpaper on recent releases of Windows, customising your login screen beyond this or changing your login manager altogether is simply not possible. After all, Microsoft wants you to log in with your Microsoft account going forward, so a third-party solution would somehow need to account for this.
3. Changing your desktop environment
COSM Desktop running on Ubuntu 24.04
Maybe I shouldn't even say "desktop environment" here, because let's be honest — Linux has way more than just desktop environments for us to play with. We've got a broad selection of window managers (compositors, with the rise of Wayland), desktop environments, desktop-independent panels, docks, you name it. Whether you want to do minimal bling with Wayfire or Hyprland, or sink your teeth into something beefy with Plasma or GNOME, the choice is yours.
You can customise your layout, app selection, software store, launchers, or whatever you like, and you won't be penalised for it, nor do you have to pay a dime or risk giving your data to a company that could go defunct and leave you hanging.
Can you change your desktop environment or window manager on Windows? Nope. Sure, you can use third-party tools to achieve some degree of customisation, but these methods are not officially supported and may even violate the operating system's terms of use. Many of these customisations break standard features in Explorer or other parts of the system and can easily fail when Microsoft releases routine updates.
4. Use the system without a GUI
Fedora CoreOS is designed to run with no GUI
Whether it's booting to the recovery session, running with the login manager disabled, or using a headless install through SSH, there are many ways you can use Linux on real hardware without ever using a graphical interface of any sort. While this option may not appeal to the majority of "average" users, it's still a pretty important distinction. You can use Linux as minimally as you need, even if it's as a temporary solution to bring up your graphical system just as you'd prefer.
For instance, this is the standard way to install Arch, by the way, and you can customise just about any distro to function in the same way even after installation. What makes this possible is the fact that what we know as "Linux" is actually a collection of software: the kernel, GNU utilities, init systems, and more. By choosing exactly what combination of software you're using, you can set up a minimal system that requires no graphical components whatsoever and still directly or remotely execute software from the system. It's even possible to set up such a system to display graphics over the network.
In the case of Windows (for consumers), this pathway isn't supported whatsoever. If something goes wrong, recovery is typically a graphical affair. Even Safe Mode is primarily designed around this. Running Windows as a text-based operating system just isn't something the average consumer can do.
Linux on a fridge? A toaster? A toothbrush? Yes. And it probably can run Doom, too. The reality is, Linux is so flexible and portable, it can run on just about any device with a processor, even a tiny microcontroller. From the world's most powerful supercomputers to some of the smallest single-board computers and Internet of Things (IoT) devices, Linux has grown to basically power the majority of the digital world. There are even custom distributions for many non-standard devices, from game consoles to smartwatches, and the list just keeps growing.
On the contrary, while Windows has spread to some other devices over the years, it's not anywhere near the level of portability we have with Linux. You can't just grab a Windows ARM ISO and install it on a Raspberry Pi. You can't put Windows on a smart fridge either, unless the manufacturer happens to have an existing agreement and collaboration with Microsoft. Plus, since Windows is objectively not open-source, the community can't port it on their own.
Linux on the other hand, we can take wherever we want, not only because it's open-source but also because it was built with portability in mind. It can easily be stripped down and streamlined to fit just about any hardware. That's a freedom we just don't have with Windows.
You might not have ever considered this, but really think about it. Let's say your current laptop or workstation goes down, maybe because the CPU burnt out or the motherboard got damaged, but the SSD is still working just fine. With Windows, it's time to get a new licence. You can certainly recover your files, provided your drive wasn't encrypted, but it's unlikely you're sticking that SSD in another system, booting it up, and continuing on like nothing happened. The bad news is, this is getting even harder with the introduction of mandatory Microsoft accounts attached to your system's TPM chip.
With Linux on the other hand, that's actually a pretty common workflow. I know this first-hand, because I've done it with multiple systems in the past. Sure, if you've got proprietary drivers installed, you may need to ensure that you remove them if your hardware differs too strongly, especially in the case of graphics cards.
Yet, Linux won't just automatically give up and quit if your drivers don't match your hardware. Instead, it'll choose a fallback method or fail to a command-line interface until you get that sorted out. It's a fascinating experience once you actually try it (or are forced to do it).
7. Customize or even swap your kernel
A simulated boot screen – perhaps someone wants to make this theme?
Imagine one day you wake up and decide you need to swap your kernel for a more optimised workflow. It could go something like this:
"Hmm, let's see here, should I run the Liquorix kernel today or the real-time kernel? How about the mainline kernel? Choices, choices..."
This is one thing long-time Linux users may take for granted, but it's actually a pretty big deal that we can do this in the first place. Again, this is made possible not only by the open-source nature of the kernel but also by the modular nature of most of the distributions we use. As a result of this modular nature, we can swap kernels any time we need to, especially so long as the distribution we're using provides a method for doing this.
🗒️
Immutable systems may have different restrictions or methods for changing the kernel.
Why might you need a different kernel? Well, it can be for any number of reasons, but typically, it's down to two main needs: better driver support and better performance. Newer kernels typically have broader support for new hardware, but sometimes an older kernel may also be needed for a specific device or quirk. Likewise, performance can vary with different kernel versions and build-time configurations.
Needless to say, this isn't something a normal user can do on Windows beyond applying standard updates. Yet on Linux, it's something so normal as to not even feel remarkable.
8. Choose different filesystems during installation
Choosing disk options in the Ubuntu 24.04 installer. The ZFS file system is available as an option.
Windows supports a few filesystems for reading/writing files, including the typical FAT and EXFAT filesystems, NTFS, and more recently, ReFS, which is more used for server environments. However, when it comes time to actually install the system your options are pretty limited. You can install your main system on an NTFS filesystem, and with the exception of the FAT32 EFI partition, that's about it. No other filesystems are supported out the box, and while Windows setup supports loading third-party drivers, this doesn't cleanly open the door to installing Windows on any non-standard filesystems.
On the other hand, Linux supports many filesystems by default, and most distros give you the option to install on a much broader selection of them. Most offer at least the option of using ext4 or Btrfs, with some, such as Fedora, offering additional options, like XFS. In theory, you can even move your Linux install from one filesystem to another, provided you have the knowhow. For instance, btrfs-convert lets you convert an existing ext2, ext3, or ext4 installation to Btrfs.
9. Revive older hardware
Damn Small Linux 2024 is designed specifically to run on older hardware
Windows is notorious for its tendency to introduce seemingly unnecessary, forced hardware requirements that stop users from being able to keep using their older hardware, even when testing proves that Windows would run on it just fine. With Windows 11, things have never been worse. Perfectly powerful systems from as recently as 2017 or 2018 are somehow not supported all because of Microsoft's tighter hardware requirements, including requiring a TPM 2.0 chip, Secure Boot, and other platform features that can sometimes just barely edge a system out.
It gets worse when you consider the bloat that's been steadily creeping (or pouring) into Windows over the decades. Since users don't have any right to control what's in Windows by default or create their own official "Windows distribution", there's no way around this.
Not so with Linux, as many are discovering, and as you may have seen earlier with Linux running live off a floppy disk. In fact, there are Linux distributions especially built for this very reason, such as Puppy Linux and antiX, which the modern DSL 2024 is based on. Furthermore, Linux can be compiled specifically for older systems, even those with 32bit processors, unlike Windows, which typically drops older hardware with no way back.
10. Swap parts of your stack, as you wish
We've already talked about how you can swap your desktop environment, login manager, and kernel, but to end off this list, I think we should dig a little deeper. Unlike Windows which basically dictates what your operating system stack is from the ground up and provides few options for change, Linux gives you freedom change pretty much everything. For instance, let's say you're running Ubuntu and you really don't like snaps. Solution? Remove snapd.
You're probably thinking "But won't snapd just reinstall itself on the next update?", and the answer is no, but even if that were the case, you could block the update by locking the package. You can also change your init system, audio system, display system (betwen X11 and Wayland, and now the various forks of X11 that have popped up since it was all-but-abandoned).
Put simply, whatever you don't like about Linux, technically, you can change it. You just have to know how to do it and what to do if something goes wrong along the way. In some cases, there are even scripts that can automate the process for you, or distributions that do exactly what it is you're looking for already. For example, there's Devuan for Debian users who don't want systemd.
While unofficial "builds" of Windows exist, such as Tiny 11, most of these taking risk by distributing modified ISOs of Microsoft's intellectual property. It's legally gray at best, but it's pretty much the only option for many users.
Final thoughts: The narrative needs to flip
That's it. That's the message.
I could've kept this list going even longer, but I think the point is clear. While there are legitimate grievances like software that hasn't been ported yet, or challenges with hardware that vendors haven't provided drivers for, the reality is that Linux has a lot going for it if you stop to give it a fair shake.
If you've not yet tried Linux, maybe now's a good time to see what all the hype's about (and I don't just mean Hyprland, all though that's pretty sweet too). There's a lot you can do just fine on Linux that you can't actually do on Windows, or if you can, it's definitely not a walk in the park, whereas for us Linux denizens, it's just another part of daily life.
If you ask my advice, I say go for it: see what you've been missing, and you might just get hooked over this side too.
Firefox's Proton design has been around since 2021, and it is starting to show its age. The interface is flat, uses a lot of gray, and feels very dated in 2026. You either live with it or you go out of your way to install a theme from the add-ons store.
Neither option feels particularly appealing when practically every other mainstream browser and several Firefox forks, have put real thought into what people expect from a modern web browser.
On top of that, its AIness and lack of genuinely user experience-centric additions have been making me wonder whether it is time to move on entirely.
But, it looks like there's some hope after all.
📝
Going forward, I’ll be using sentence case for most (if not all) of my article titles and headings.
This is my attempt to provide you, the readers, with a better reading experience, and many authors have already switched, so why not?
Under the internal project name "Nova," Mozilla is working on a significant visual overhaul of Firefox. Sören was the first to put out the internal design mockups, which show a very different version of Firefox than what you and me currently use.
The most obvious change is how rounded everything is. Tabs, the address bar, and the toolbar no longer sit as separate flat strips—they form a single floating island at the top of the browser.
The sidebar toggle and the web content area follow the same rounded design language, and even elements on the new tab page get the same treatment.
Flat, solid colors are also going away. Nova brings in subtle gradients across the interface, and the mockups show a clear lean toward violet as a color accent. Sören notes that this is likely tied to the active theme or what the user has chosen in the Appearance settings.
On the left is the vertical tab layout; on the right is the 'Appearance' settings menu. (Source: Sören Hentzschel)
That menu, btw, also sees a redesign, where the various options are laid out neatly with rounded corners and possibly a different font for the text.
There is also a structural change in how web content is displayed. Rather than sitting flush against the window edges, pages are presented inside a rounded container, visually separated from the other elements of the interface.
📋
You will probably recognize this from Zen Browser.
The mockups also showcase vertical tabs that already exist on the current build of Firefox, but, again, with a more rounded appearance and a slightly more accessible layout.
From left to right: Firefox Nova's dark mode, light mode, and Private Window. (Source: Sören Hentzschel)
Above, the dark mode mockup shows the split view feature in action, with two sites open side by side inside their rounded containers. The browser's interface is a black/red gradient, with the tab bar and toolbar housed in a single strip at the top.
The light mode mockup shows the browser menu open, which has noticeably rounded corners and floats as a panel rather than being pinned to the toolbar. You can also spot tab groups displayed as colored pills in the tab bar.
The private window mockup is the most visually distinct of the three. The entire interface is a dark purple, with large flowing curves and slightly varying shades of purple as the background.
Stay updated
If you want to follow development, Mozilla's Bugzilla page has an active set of entries tracking the work surrounding Nova.
Going through them, I came across several Figma links that presumably pointed to the actual design files. But none of them were accessible; my best guess is that they were taken down after the leak.
Also, there's no official announcement on this from Mozilla, but seeing that the mockups are now out in the wild, we can probably expect one shortly.
In the meantime, customize it yourself
We have a detailed video on customizing Firefox to give it a lean, minimal but efficient makeover. Perhaps you would want to give it a try before the new, redesigned version is released.
