11: Everything runs pretty much everywhere. You are not tied to any particular distro, nor support provider. That means more competition, lower prices and higher quality.
12: Everything is pretty much eternal. If Canonical pulls the plug on Kubuntu, no problem. You can always switch to OpenSuse. If you absolutely, positively can't live without Kubuntu (or any other piece of Linux software, for that matter), you can download sources, and maintain it yourself.
> Bright future
A couple of reasons why the bright Linux future is always just around the corner, and never quite here yet.
1: DirectX. Let's face it- DirectX looks far better than OpenGL, and most of the games run under it. That means most of the people will have Windows at home, and will consequently prefer Windows at work.
2. OpenOffice/LibreOffice. No further explanation is necessary, I guess.
3. LINQ to SQL. Microsoft considers this strategic technology for a reason. There are a couple of ultra fancy open source development tools (Qt Creator, Netbeans, ...) that could almost compete with Visual Studio, but none of them incorporates any kind of object-relational mapper. As a matter of fact, LINQ to SQL is light years ahead of any open source ORM I came across so far. And that means, that Microsoft will continue to dominate the world of the big business core applications.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
I dunno . . .
What you describe provides an easier way to get certain things done, perhaps, but it's not exactly "The Killer Feature of IDEs and Frameworks". I am not sufficiently experienced with LINQ (thank goodness) to be able to comment substantively on how well it compares to various open source ORMs, but I know that the Ruby community (for instance) offers some ORM tools that are amazing -- and that, sometimes, ORMs are (by definition) "leaky abstractions" that cause problems for production code.
If what you're saying is that LINQ provides a significant advantage in terms of great development tools, I suspect I will have to disagree (though you're welcome to try to change my mind). If all you're saying, though, is that "enterprisey" development shops prefer Microsoft's brand of bureaucracy and problem-obscuring toolsets over those available in open source alternatives, though, I suspect you're right -- and yes, this does mean that a lot of bureaucratic, top-heavy, "enterprise" organizations will continue to favor the MS development stack.
What you describe provides an easier way to get certain things done, perhaps, but it's not exactly "The Killer Feature of IDEs and Frameworks". I am not sufficiently experienced with LINQ (thank goodness) to be able to comment substantively on how well it compares to various open source ORMs, but I know that the Ruby community (for instance) offers some ORM tools that are amazing -- and that, sometimes, ORMs are (by definition) "leaky abstractions" that cause problems for production code.
If what you're saying is that LINQ provides a significant advantage in terms of great development tools, I suspect I will have to disagree (though you're welcome to try to change my mind). If all you're saying, though, is that "enterprisey" development shops prefer Microsoft's brand of bureaucracy and problem-obscuring toolsets over those available in open source alternatives, though, I suspect you're right -- and yes, this does mean that a lot of bureaucratic, top-heavy, "enterprise" organizations will continue to favor the MS development stack.
If the average, Windows using person, ever tried to do a compatible thing in Linux like say . download a cd/dvd player or download an image viewer, you get a set of complex instructions almost always written poorly assuming that the downloader knows where the "XC-Geg bin" is located or what the "hyper gizmo extractacator" is. Go there and do that with that and you get your dvd player. Got that? Whew! Unless Linux can shorten and simplify the steps needed to do common Windows things and get the writers of the instructions to stop assuming that whoever wants to simply download a DVD player is steeped in the technical s of how to operate Linux from the command prompt, then Linux will always be "just around the corner."
Linux Mint answers uche's point.
I don't like all that messing about in Terminal either, but;
From the desktop click on Software Manager, browse applications or enter "dvd" in the search. A list of DVD players will pop up, select one, click install. The Software Manager then downloads and installs for you.
Done.
You didn't need to search the internet, you didn't need to select a file to download or look for it and run it after downloading it, and you didn't need to enter any payment credentials. Oh and you didn't need to know any "hyper gizmo extractacator" stuff either
The OS also deals with the updates for all the software you install via this method, so you don't need to run the installed applications to find the "update" button either.
I don't like all that messing about in Terminal either, but;
From the desktop click on Software Manager, browse applications or enter "dvd" in the search. A list of DVD players will pop up, select one, click install. The Software Manager then downloads and installs for you.
Done.
You didn't need to search the internet, you didn't need to select a file to download or look for it and run it after downloading it, and you didn't need to enter any payment credentials. Oh and you didn't need to know any "hyper gizmo extractacator" stuff either
The OS also deals with the updates for all the software you install via this method, so you don't need to run the installed applications to find the "update" button either.
I recently purchased a used IBM laptop that came with Vista. But I thought that I would try Ubuntu and was pleasantly surprised on how easy it is to use. When I tried Linux before I spent much of my time trying to figure out how to install an application or apply settings. Now applications are much easier to install and updates are automatically applied and Libre office is a great product. For what I need my laptop for; browsing the web, email, writing some documents, spreadsheets, and twitter it fits the bill perfectly. I am not going into what version is better, but what has happened with the Linux desktop distributions over the last couple of years has changed my mind. Now I would now not really have a problem deploying Linux as a desktop solution to some of my clients.
@jkameleon
I wonder, have you seen Oilrush (http://oilrush-game.com/)? I ran it under both windows and Linux, and both look incredibly good. Few games come close to the incredible graphics that game has.
If OpenGL games don't alway look good, I blame the makers of the game, not the technology behind it. If anything, OilRush certainly prooves OpenGL is lacking nothing.
I wonder, have you seen Oilrush (http://oilrush-game.com/)? I ran it under both windows and Linux, and both look incredibly good. Few games come close to the incredible graphics that game has.
If OpenGL games don't alway look good, I blame the makers of the game, not the technology behind it. If anything, OilRush certainly prooves OpenGL is lacking nothing.
Problem is that you have to get the blockbuster titles interested. These days you really want Steam supported for sales, delivery and updates. You also want things like Skyrim developed without the DirectX addictions. I'd seriously love to not need a reboot just to play a bit of Shogun 2 or Skyrim (and still hand over my wallet happily if someone produced a Longbow3 update to Jane's chopper sims).
Weren't you complaining about multimedia problems only a few days ago?
That aside, Linux distros have a big chance to make serious gains in the desktop market, given how awful W8 DP and W8 CP are.
That aside, Linux distros have a big chance to make serious gains in the desktop market, given how awful W8 DP and W8 CP are.
Linux distros have a big chance to make serious gains in the desktop market, given how awful Vista has been.
Linux distros have a big chance to make serious gains in the desktop market, given how awful Office 2007's interface is.
and so on.. and so forth..
Sadly, I don't think it's going to be opening floodgates because of the latest change Microsoft makes to it's new product version. I wish it where that simple.. it doesn't seem to be though.
In our case, it's Exchange/Outlook, Word, Excel and Powerpoint along with Quickbooks. As long as I'm unable to break our company's addiction to those programs, we'll be ridding the MS treadmill.
Linux distros have a big chance to make serious gains in the desktop market, given how awful Office 2007's interface is.
and so on.. and so forth..
Sadly, I don't think it's going to be opening floodgates because of the latest change Microsoft makes to it's new product version. I wish it where that simple.. it doesn't seem to be though.
In our case, it's Exchange/Outlook, Word, Excel and Powerpoint along with Quickbooks. As long as I'm unable to break our company's addiction to those programs, we'll be ridding the MS treadmill.
I'm a Windows user.
I don't enjoy using Ubuntu 10.04, more than W7.
It's OK (Centos and Mint are OK too).
"... given how awful Office 2007's interface is."
Apparently a lot of people like the "Ribbon" (not me though).
The distro makers would have to take advantage of the opportunity.
I suspect that more people know about Linux distros now, compared to 2007.
More people are receiving Linux distro training, which means more IT people who could implement it effectively (it's required in my Networking course).
If MS keeps p****** off their existing users, eventually something will give.
I don't enjoy using Ubuntu 10.04, more than W7.
It's OK (Centos and Mint are OK too).
"... given how awful Office 2007's interface is."
Apparently a lot of people like the "Ribbon" (not me though).
The distro makers would have to take advantage of the opportunity.
I suspect that more people know about Linux distros now, compared to 2007.
More people are receiving Linux distro training, which means more IT people who could implement it effectively (it's required in my Networking course).
If MS keeps p****** off their existing users, eventually something will give.
Why it will never be "the year of the Linux desktop" for businesses:
- Supportability.
- Easy one-step updates.
- Policy management.
- Integration into a directory service.
- A full, complete business suite 100% compatible with The Competition.
- Consistency.
We all know the pieces are all there. You can't sell pieces to a CIO, though. Sometimes IT sucks.
- Supportability.
- Easy one-step updates.
- Policy management.
- Integration into a directory service.
- A full, complete business suite 100% compatible with The Competition.
- Consistency.
We all know the pieces are all there. You can't sell pieces to a CIO, though. Sometimes IT sucks.
I thought that Samba 4 was able to integrate with AD.
If the Linux factions could stop fighting amongst themselves, over who's going to be "top dog" (like the Australian Labor Party) they could make serious market share gains.
A Linux distro skinned up and slightly modified, to make it seem to work like Windows 7, would probably be a big hit with disgruntled MS users.
Linux7?
Obviously it would take several years of concerted effort to create the distro and convince businesses to use it.
If W8 "bombs", MS can just extend W7 (just like XP because of Vista's reception).
They could then just "brush off" the old code and release a new OS using it.
If the Linux factions could stop fighting amongst themselves, over who's going to be "top dog" (like the Australian Labor Party) they could make serious market share gains.
A Linux distro skinned up and slightly modified, to make it seem to work like Windows 7, would probably be a big hit with disgruntled MS users.
Linux7?
Obviously it would take several years of concerted effort to create the distro and convince businesses to use it.
If W8 "bombs", MS can just extend W7 (just like XP because of Vista's reception).
They could then just "brush off" the old code and release a new OS using it.
The modular aspect of Linux makes it extremely versatile. It's what I love about Linux. Unfortunately, it's also like buying a house from the lumber yard. You can have anything you want, you just have to build it.
Most people just want to move in. Plus, IT doesn't want to start every helpdesk call with "OK, what lumber did you use?"
Most people just want to move in. Plus, IT doesn't want to start every helpdesk call with "OK, what lumber did you use?"
XP pretty much amounted to a reskinning and extended lifespan for Win2K, as a way to get people past the disaster of WinME. It's funny that XP served to cover the disasters in Microsoft's Windows OS product line at both ends of its tenure, starting out as a cover for the WinME disaster and ending things as a cover for the Vista problems.
The MS Office ribbon is a solution to a very serious problem in MS Office applications -- and it's an effective solution. It is also a highly aggravating solution, that introduces problems of its own. Unfortunately, there is no reasonable way to solve the problem better under current conditions, as far as I'm aware.
The problem it solves (or, more accurately, "mitigates") is interface proliferation. Feature creep has turned into feature invasion over the years in MS Office applications, and those features are represented by menu options and buttons and widgets exploding all over the MS Office interface, in ways that are increasingly chaotic, confusing, and cluttered (the three Cs of bad design, perhaps). The ribbon eliminates a lot of that by contextualizing the interface, thus providing a means of simplifying it. It comes with trade-offs, of course, but whether those trade-offs are worth it or not depends on the user.
This is a problem endemic to the entire concept of the modern office application suite, unfortunately. This is why I'm not sure there's any better solution to the problem than something like the ribbon right now. In short, the real solution is to find ways to get away from office suite software, and complete necessary tasks using tools more specialized for such purposes, or that in combination provide a cleaner solution built from more flexibly reusable components.
The problem it solves (or, more accurately, "mitigates") is interface proliferation. Feature creep has turned into feature invasion over the years in MS Office applications, and those features are represented by menu options and buttons and widgets exploding all over the MS Office interface, in ways that are increasingly chaotic, confusing, and cluttered (the three Cs of bad design, perhaps). The ribbon eliminates a lot of that by contextualizing the interface, thus providing a means of simplifying it. It comes with trade-offs, of course, but whether those trade-offs are worth it or not depends on the user.
This is a problem endemic to the entire concept of the modern office application suite, unfortunately. This is why I'm not sure there's any better solution to the problem than something like the ribbon right now. In short, the real solution is to find ways to get away from office suite software, and complete necessary tasks using tools more specialized for such purposes, or that in combination provide a cleaner solution built from more flexibly reusable components.
I've always felt that the problem (apart from feature creep) is Microsoft's complete inability, to write useful help or tutorials.
The numerous Windows help sites prove this.
I have found that you are always better off searching for a "community" help site, than trying to use the built-in help.
To be fair, it isn't just a MS problem though.
It applies to every bit of software that I've got installed on my PC.
The numerous Windows help sites prove this.
I have found that you are always better off searching for a "community" help site, than trying to use the built-in help.
To be fair, it isn't just a MS problem though.
It applies to every bit of software that I've got installed on my PC.
QUOTE: I've always felt that the problem (apart from feature creep) is Microsoft's complete inability, to write useful help or tutorials.
That's certainly *a* problem in the Microsoft world, but I think it's a relatively small part of this particular problem (usability damage due to interface proliferation). All that application help and tutorials can really do is help people memorize how to find things or give them a way to check how to do something every time they do it; the overall "design" of the modern office suite is not really designed, at all, but rather is accreted over time like barnacles on a ship's hull. Good application design might come with help/tutorial support to ensure the interested user understands the design philosophy of the application so that finding out how to do things can be done by reasoning through it, rather than having to simply hunt it down by trial and error every single time until it is memorized -- the opposite of what a modern office suite application requires. Like the ribbon, help/tutorial support can only mitigate this problem a little, and cannot really solve it.
The fact Microsoft's employees as a whole seem congenitally incapable of producing good help documentation and tutorials only exacerbates this atrocious state of affairs; it doesn't create the situation in the first place.
That's certainly *a* problem in the Microsoft world, but I think it's a relatively small part of this particular problem (usability damage due to interface proliferation). All that application help and tutorials can really do is help people memorize how to find things or give them a way to check how to do something every time they do it; the overall "design" of the modern office suite is not really designed, at all, but rather is accreted over time like barnacles on a ship's hull. Good application design might come with help/tutorial support to ensure the interested user understands the design philosophy of the application so that finding out how to do things can be done by reasoning through it, rather than having to simply hunt it down by trial and error every single time until it is memorized -- the opposite of what a modern office suite application requires. Like the ribbon, help/tutorial support can only mitigate this problem a little, and cannot really solve it.
The fact Microsoft's employees as a whole seem congenitally incapable of producing good help documentation and tutorials only exacerbates this atrocious state of affairs; it doesn't create the situation in the first place.
there are usually servicable 3rd party websites that can provide help for windows specific problems. These are general help websites, but rather websites related directly to the trouble-causing hardware or sofware. Ms office help files are actually among the best help files i've ever seen.
If it works for you, use it.
IMO, Office 2003 Help was superior to Office 2007 (I don't have Office 2010).
Excel Help has always been the exception (i.e. its help is generally useful).
IMO, Office 2003 Help was superior to Office 2007 (I don't have Office 2010).
Excel Help has always been the exception (i.e. its help is generally useful).
I don't know whether this means you have totally different help needs than me and pretty much everyone I know, or just have been so unlucky as to have never seen a good help system (thus having a much lower bar for "good").
the answer to the ribbon is kill the ribbon.
I almost smashed my laptop when I encountered the ribbon. After I had calmed down I learnt how to kill the ribbon and soon stopped thinking of all the money and dev time wasted on it.
I almost smashed my laptop when I encountered the ribbon. After I had calmed down I learnt how to kill the ribbon and soon stopped thinking of all the money and dev time wasted on it.
I think one of the biggest reasons these "big chance" moments seem to fall flat is the simple fact that such chances have been consistently squandered. When someone develops a newer and stupider version of a popular product, competitors shouldn't take that opportunity to waste resources trying to duplicate those mistakes or invent new, equivalent mistakes; they should, instead, double down on the advantages they already have and do the opposite of whatever the competition is doing wrong. This has not been how Linux community developers have tended to respond to such opportunities, in general.
(edit: typo)
(edit: typo)
I'm not a big fan of the OS X desktop. But it has some advantages that I think Unity is trying to take advantage of. Also, browser UI has completely changed. And I think Unity is the chance to do for the OS what Chrome did for the browser. Unified search box, quick links to most used apps, clear and large simplified icons, etc.
I like Unity for the most part, and think it gets a bad rap from the "get off my lawn" crowd.
I like Unity for the most part, and think it gets a bad rap from the "get off my lawn" crowd.
Things I don't want on my lawn include:
* inconsistent icon persistence behavior
* three times as many clicks to get to something I like
* elimination of a lot of handy keyboard shortcuts
* heinously surprising window-anchoring management
* reduced context-based option access
* One True Interface Configuration
* and much, much more
Notice that I'm not actually just an old fart telling the kids to get off my lawn (though, if I have to get old and crusty, I could do far worse than to end up like Clint Eastwood's character in Gran Torino, with his M1 Garand in his hands growling "Get off my lawn!"). I'm not complaining about the fact menu access is now at the top of the screen instead of the bottom, the menu bar for the active application appearing at the top of the screen instead of on the application window itself, and so on. My problems with Unity are valid, reasonable technical and interface design related issues.
There is one nice thing in development with relation to Unity, at least: HUD. That's a pretty spiff mixing of interface paradigms to offer something new and potentially very efficient for users. Only time will tell whether the Unity developers at Canonical are going to completely screw that up and turn it into just another tentacular appendage of the Nameless Horror that Unity threatens to become.
* inconsistent icon persistence behavior
* three times as many clicks to get to something I like
* elimination of a lot of handy keyboard shortcuts
* heinously surprising window-anchoring management
* reduced context-based option access
* One True Interface Configuration
* and much, much more
Notice that I'm not actually just an old fart telling the kids to get off my lawn (though, if I have to get old and crusty, I could do far worse than to end up like Clint Eastwood's character in Gran Torino, with his M1 Garand in his hands growling "Get off my lawn!"). I'm not complaining about the fact menu access is now at the top of the screen instead of the bottom, the menu bar for the active application appearing at the top of the screen instead of on the application window itself, and so on. My problems with Unity are valid, reasonable technical and interface design related issues.
There is one nice thing in development with relation to Unity, at least: HUD. That's a pretty spiff mixing of interface paradigms to offer something new and potentially very efficient for users. Only time will tell whether the Unity developers at Canonical are going to completely screw that up and turn it into just another tentacular appendage of the Nameless Horror that Unity threatens to become.
There is nothing here that is understandable to a non-Linux user. Is this a better interface? I don't know, I don't know what any of the things you praise ARE. Just so you know. Maybe another article aimed at recruitment? from Windows 7, which is a good platform, just annoying to be under Microsoft (or anyone's) control.
Well, that really depends on just exactly what "Better" is. Compared to Windows 7, it's definately more stable. It's come a long way, but I think it's still prefered by those who like to "tweak" and "customize" their desktop perhaps a bit more than Windows 7 would allow.
As complicated as OS's are now days, it's really moved beyond simply saying one OS is better than another. It's more a question of what do you need the OS to do, and perhaps what rights/control are you willing to give up, then you can answer which may be a better choice.
I think that's one of the plus's of Linux is that depending one what you are focused on, there is a linux distro out there tuned specifically for that purpose.
If you've never tried Linux, download a live version and boot it up. See what you think. The package managment systems included in many of them now days are amazing. Loaded with all kinds of apps and utilities that have been validated and tested on that Distro. A processs that is not only handy, but improves overall security.
As complicated as OS's are now days, it's really moved beyond simply saying one OS is better than another. It's more a question of what do you need the OS to do, and perhaps what rights/control are you willing to give up, then you can answer which may be a better choice.
I think that's one of the plus's of Linux is that depending one what you are focused on, there is a linux distro out there tuned specifically for that purpose.
If you've never tried Linux, download a live version and boot it up. See what you think. The package managment systems included in many of them now days are amazing. Loaded with all kinds of apps and utilities that have been validated and tested on that Distro. A processs that is not only handy, but improves overall security.
We are interested in computers and many of us even make our living that way. Most computer users couldn't care less about computers. I wonder how many of the general population have even heard the word "Linux." I know one can't sell to the general public without advertising. In the case of Linux it seems one can't even give it away for free.
The best thing (or is it?) that can happen to Linux is if Google creates its own desktop distribution. It's not quality or ease of use that keeps Linux confined to the niche of computer enthusiasts (gamers are not computer enthusiasts, they're drongos), it's being unknown.
The best thing (or is it?) that can happen to Linux is if Google creates its own desktop distribution. It's not quality or ease of use that keeps Linux confined to the niche of computer enthusiasts (gamers are not computer enthusiasts, they're drongos), it's being unknown.
Android is growing more commercially successful at a faster rate than Linux-based desktop and server OSes at present, and Google is increasingly acting like Big Brother.
QUOTE: In the case of Linux it seems one can't even give it away for free.
This reminds me of a passage in the (now somewhat dated, but still fairly relevant and informative) Neal Stephenson (short book length) essay about operating system history "In the Beginning was the Command Line". You can download it for free from cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html if you like.
This reminds me of a passage in the (now somewhat dated, but still fairly relevant and informative) Neal Stephenson (short book length) essay about operating system history "In the Beginning was the Command Line". You can download it for free from cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html if you like.
One of Linux's strengths use to be support for older hardware - but Unity struggles and Gnome 3 refuses to work on my IBM T23 Thinkpad.
XFCE is barely bearable after Gnome 2, LXDE is almost impossible to configure, and KDE is so slow and klunky it's not even funny - for a Fedora user 'fings ain't what they used to be'.
David
PS Fallback mode? - Don't get me started!
XFCE is barely bearable after Gnome 2, LXDE is almost impossible to configure, and KDE is so slow and klunky it's not even funny - for a Fedora user 'fings ain't what they used to be'.
David
PS Fallback mode? - Don't get me started!
Have you read any of the articles about the new Raspberry Pi model B board? It has a 700MHz ARM CPU and 256MB of RAM. There are a couple of Linux distros made to run on it.
If you dig a bit, I think you'll find that Ubuntu, SuSE, and a few others offer variations of their OS for "vintage" equipment. You just have to look around at their download options.
If you dig a bit, I think you'll find that Ubuntu, SuSE, and a few others offer variations of their OS for "vintage" equipment. You just have to look around at their download options.
And the blackbox desktop environment runs like lightning on my old thinkpad. I even use slax with a stripped down (but you wouldn't notice) KDE environment on a 486DX based laptop I still play with.
Knoppix is another slim distro, and damn small Linux is specifically designed for your type of hardware, though I've never had to go 'below' Slax on any but the 486, which despite having run Slax/KDE OK was actually much more useful with Puppy.
Knoppix is another slim distro, and damn small Linux is specifically designed for your type of hardware, though I've never had to go 'below' Slax on any but the 486, which despite having run Slax/KDE OK was actually much more useful with Puppy.
The one caveat I would mention in regard to Slax is it is meant to be
ran as a "live" distro, from CD or USB. Although it is possible to put
it on a hard drive, it doesn't really boost performance. It is sure handy
though for a USB thumb drive that you can use to trouble shoot another
PC!
ran as a "live" distro, from CD or USB. Although it is possible to put
it on a hard drive, it doesn't really boost performance. It is sure handy
though for a USB thumb drive that you can use to trouble shoot another
PC!
Over the years I have used Slax far more than any other distribution for rescuing windows systems or retrieving data off a drive with a broken OS. I love the fact that you are root throughout, including having write access to all drives and partitions.
I've been able to simply copy a good C:\boot folder over a corrupted one using Slax, a 5 minute fix that doesn't require having the install media. (which few people have anymore thanks to cheap manufacturers trying to save 5 cents)
I've made more money using Slax than any other distribution. I am forever indebted to Tomas M for both Slax and the Linux live-scripts he created, making a "live" system possible in the first place.
I have a USB drive that has my own, persistent /home partition on it, so every time I boot the live CD I have my own desktop, with my own tools. No other distro is designed to do this, to my knowledge.
I also installed it to HD on a few of those older laptops, I gave several laptops to children who's family couldn't afford a computer, an old P-II or P-III is still quite useful with Slax on board, and safer than if you tried to run the windows 98 they were designed to run originally.
BTW I use Slax 5.1.8.1, the last fully mature release, in my opinion. I never had much luck with Slax 6.
I've been able to simply copy a good C:\boot folder over a corrupted one using Slax, a 5 minute fix that doesn't require having the install media. (which few people have anymore thanks to cheap manufacturers trying to save 5 cents)
I've made more money using Slax than any other distribution. I am forever indebted to Tomas M for both Slax and the Linux live-scripts he created, making a "live" system possible in the first place.
I have a USB drive that has my own, persistent /home partition on it, so every time I boot the live CD I have my own desktop, with my own tools. No other distro is designed to do this, to my knowledge.
I also installed it to HD on a few of those older laptops, I gave several laptops to children who's family couldn't afford a computer, an old P-II or P-III is still quite useful with Slax on board, and safer than if you tried to run the windows 98 they were designed to run originally.
BTW I use Slax 5.1.8.1, the last fully mature release, in my opinion. I never had much luck with Slax 6.
Or Puppy.
Or DSL.
If none of those work, spend $50 at a garage sale and get a faster machine.
Or DSL.
If none of those work, spend $50 at a garage sale and get a faster machine.
wow, this is exactly the problem that is my main complaint about linux. Xfce is like an unfinished gnome 2 that obstructs and/or omits many of gnome2's most useful features. Lxde has potential, but attempting configuration requires a scavenger hunt for various .config files hidden away in the bowels of the file system. Some of these can be found and managed with little enough inginuity; but still so many tweaks and desired functions remain elusive. KDE - might just be the worst of all as it is bloated with flashy desktop effects, employs a frustrating, overy comple,x and disorganized UI settings configurationsetting. Besides from being consistantly slow, KDE's performance is otherwise erratic; full of glitches, errors and crashes even when attempting to perform the most basic task.
What is most unbearable is the fact that among all these useless desktops its painstaikingly clear that Linux possess all the parts, pieces, and tools necessary to make a killer desktop that could more than stand its own being as functional, easy to use, and visually attractive as the lateest windows 7 or mac 0S.
What is most unbearable is the fact that among all these useless desktops its painstaikingly clear that Linux possess all the parts, pieces, and tools necessary to make a killer desktop that could more than stand its own being as functional, easy to use, and visually attractive as the lateest windows 7 or mac 0S.
I heard Linux Mint being the finest distro out there..?. Period.
Straightway +1
Straightway +1
Last time I looked at DistroWatch, Mint had taken the #1 spot away from Ubuntu, and by a comfortable margin. (I don't use either one.)
I don't use ubuntu or mint either, but mint certainly earned it's current status. All the convenience of ubuntu's software repositories with none of the 'unity' confusion.
I still think that if Mandriva survives it's current financial stresses, it promises to become THE best desktop Linux bar none. They have taken on all the hard transitions, systemd, rpm5, the latest qt etc etc, and gotten them tamed. A fully updated 2011 system is a dream to operate.
They are positioned to have a more cutting edge, stable and downright fun release, should they live to put out another release. I'd suggest they take their time, not rush ANYTHING and release a 100% bugless system, regardless of how long it takes.
I'd call it 2013, even though they should be able to get something out the door before autumn.
I still think that if Mandriva survives it's current financial stresses, it promises to become THE best desktop Linux bar none. They have taken on all the hard transitions, systemd, rpm5, the latest qt etc etc, and gotten them tamed. A fully updated 2011 system is a dream to operate.
They are positioned to have a more cutting edge, stable and downright fun release, should they live to put out another release. I'd suggest they take their time, not rush ANYTHING and release a 100% bugless system, regardless of how long it takes.
I'd call it 2013, even though they should be able to get something out the door before autumn.
Mandriva is Mandriva..but Linux Mint's community is actually exploring more and more. Take Cinnamon for example .
Mandriva on the other hand doesn't even closes to Linux Mint. What I feel (IMO) is that the Linux Mint is going to be one hell'ava fine distro when it comes out in its full glory
.
And more of the like is yet to come from Linux Mint. I hope you can get what I am trying to say here.
. Mandriva on the other hand doesn't even closes to Linux Mint. What I feel (IMO) is that the Linux Mint is going to be one hell'ava fine distro when it comes out in its full glory
.And more of the like is yet to come from Linux Mint. I hope you can get what I am trying to say here.
Yeah, Mint is pretty great right now and getting better as the community grows.
I admit being a bit of a cheerleader for Mandriva. I'm also a Buffalo Bills fan, same thing.
I admit being a bit of a cheerleader for Mandriva. I'm also a Buffalo Bills fan, same thing.
I think this reflects the initial reaction of many to the 11.04 release of the Unity desktop. I switched to Kubuntu for awhile and then moved back after 11.10. I'm running Unity now and I'm...OK with it. I think I'll stck it out as it definately improved from .04 to .10
I put up with Unity for nearly a year before I installed Cinnamon, Mint's UI.
Big sigh of relief.
The killer was how much of a pain Unity's desktop switcher is. It takes WAY too long and far too many clicks.
If 12.04 doesn't look better off a live thumb drive, I'll be installing Mint as my next major upgrade.
Big sigh of relief.
The killer was how much of a pain Unity's desktop switcher is. It takes WAY too long and far too many clicks.
If 12.04 doesn't look better off a live thumb drive, I'll be installing Mint as my next major upgrade.
mint was my introduction to Linux.
positive
It's generally cleaner and easier to use than windows, has most basic software most users need already installed.
i can use it to fix windows when windows dies.
negative
the drivers are not as good and so performance lacks a little for wifi and gfx for example, but that may improve over time.
When the drivers go up a notch or 2 then it will be easier to move away from windows completely.
positive
It's generally cleaner and easier to use than windows, has most basic software most users need already installed.
i can use it to fix windows when windows dies.
negative
the drivers are not as good and so performance lacks a little for wifi and gfx for example, but that may improve over time.
When the drivers go up a notch or 2 then it will be easier to move away from windows completely.
And with a little luck going to be getting and machine to put one of the Linux versions on it glad to see they have come so far I am excited and my hats off to all the developers and everybody involved. Tanks
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
