2013: The Year You Switch To Linux?

Year I stick with what I have and not waste time or money on inefficient or incompatible crap.
 
SkribbelKat said:
I've been playing with Mint for about 2 weeks. Coming from Slackware and lean OSes like TinyCore, DSL, and Puppy, I really like it. Get the Cinnamon UI version of 14 if you have a choice.

Personally, I think it's a lot more efficient and faster than XP on the same hardware (Pentium M @ 1.7 GHz, 2 GB DDR2, 80 GB 5400 RPM laptop HDD, Intel GMA 915). I switched because I was getting lots of BSODs that were seemingly related to the laptop's video driver and Intel hasn't shipped a new one in years. It idles at about 200 MB of RAM used and where XP couldn't handle full screen YouTubes at 320, Mint seems happy at full screen 480. You can try the live disc, but you'll feel lots of lag if you do it from optical media that you won't see if you install it to a hard disk.
Click to expand...

Thanks. The whole Cinnamon, Mate, KDE, Gnome thing confuses me, it seems more like a religious debate as I can't even find a decent answer about whats better. Just when I think I have the answer I'll come across someone who says use XFCE or Enlightenment or one of the other window managers :eek:
 
I've been using Linux for about 4 years; I started with Linux Mint which made the transition easy. Although I have a Windows machine, I haven't had to turn it on for 2 years. Even my 70 year old parents use Ubuntu. I was sick and tired of fixing various errors so I put Ubuntu on for them; I haven't had any IT calls since- everything works like a champ.
Windows 8 acts like a curtain on a stage. Sure the curtain looks great, but it hides how the computer functions and makes it akin to magic. I say, open the curtain and stop treating me like an idiot! Those stupid squares on Windows 8 is all but calling you a two year old! Don't you find them demeaning?
Ubuntu is free, easy to use, fits ALL my computing needs, and is enjoyable. Windows 8 only contributes to the dumbing down of computing.
 
MrCrispy said:
Is a modern Linux distro (say Mint 14) any faster than Win 7 or Win 8? If price were not an issue which one would you choose? Windows certainly doesn't lack in quality freeware so that's really not an argument for me.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, Linux distros are very light. They can range from not-that-light (Mint) to "jesus christ, I've seen larger text files than this entire OS." This makes them pretty good on older hardware, particularly because of the kernel support, and generally Linux uses less RAM than your average Windows OS.

Windows 8 kind of threw a curve ball as it's the first time in recent memory that Microsoft addressed the bloated aspect of their OS, but I'd say Linux is still a way way lighter OS.
 
On computers, Ubuntu contributes to open source software use (which by the way is extremely easy to install), computing that inspires thinking, and makes computers fun. As for the phones, I expect them to do the same. I've held out on buying a smart phone because of the high monthly fees. If I can get a Galaxy for a good price, I'll try out Ubuntu on a pay as you go plan. The best part is that I can try it out, customize it, and decide to put a Android OS if it doesn't work out, all in freedom.
That's the greatest feature of a free OS- the user is in complete control. Why compromise your user experience? With Windows and Apple, if you don't like the experience, sorry you are stuck with it. I've tried many versions of Linux including Ubuntu 10.04/11.01/12.04, Mint, Ubuntu Studio, Fedora, Open Suse, Debian, EdUbuntu (for the kids), and Ubuntu Ultimate Gamers Edition. All had different feels and options. Why not find a linux distribution that fits your life rather than making your life fit into an OS?
I guess you try to claim I'm wrong for some reason or another, but I haven't bought an OS in 4 years and I couldn't be happier with my computing experience.
 
MrCrispy said:
Thanks. The whole Cinnamon, Mate, KDE, Gnome thing confuses me, it seems more like a religious debate as I can't even find a decent answer about whats better. Just when I think I have the answer I'll come across someone who says use XFCE or Enlightenment or one of the other window managers :eek:
Click to expand...

There is no right or wrong answer, it is all a matter of opinion and personal preference. Asking which one is better is only inviting trouble (and never ask which text editor is better, either).
 
aquabusa said:
I've been using Linux for about 4 years; I started with Linux Mint which made the transition easy. Although I have a Windows machine, I haven't had to turn it on for 2 years. Even my 70 year old parents use Ubuntu. I was sick and tired of fixing various errors so I put Ubuntu on for them; I haven't had any IT calls since- everything works like a champ.
Windows 8 acts like a curtain on a stage. Sure the curtain looks great, but it hides how the computer functions and makes it akin to magic. I say, open the curtain and stop treating me like an idiot! Those stupid squares on Windows 8 is all but calling you a two year old! Don't you find them demeaning?
Ubuntu is free, easy to use, fits ALL my computing needs, and is enjoyable. Windows 8 only contributes to the dumbing down of computing.
Click to expand...
I find unity demeaning. But fortunately you can change that interface.
 
In my experience, Gnome is the simplest to use, but I think it's just a matter of what you want to learn first. Commands such as installing a new software in terminal is as such: "sudo apt-get install wireshark"
'sudo' is a reference to you being root (having the administrative authority to install; incidentally, that one of the reasons linux is resistant to viruses), 'apt-get' is a standard Gnome command to get a application, 'install' is to install the program, and 'wireshark' is the program (a pretty cool one at that).
FYI, you don't need to learn the commands if you don't want to anymore. Just go into the software center and search for the program you want, then click on install. Linux has become so simple to use. No discs needed for drivers or programs. Just connect the machine to the internet and go. I highly suggest Linux Mint Cinnamon for new users. It's similar to the Windows 7 interface and very stable. You can run the OS off the disc or a usb drive without installing it if you want to try it out.
There is such a great community of users that any question about a particular OS will have an answer with a quick google search.
 
aquabusa said:
In my experience, Gnome is the simplest to use, but I think it's just a matter of what you want to learn first. Commands such as installing a new software in terminal is as such: "sudo apt-get install wireshark"
'sudo' is a reference to you being root (having the administrative authority to install; incidentally, that one of the reasons linux is resistant to viruses), 'apt-get' is a standard Gnome command to get a application, 'install' is to install the program, and 'wireshark' is the program (a pretty cool one at that).
FYI, you don't need to learn the commands if you don't want to anymore. Just go into the software center and search for the program you want, then click on install. Linux has become so simple to use. No discs needed for drivers or programs. Just connect the machine to the internet and go. I highly suggest Linux Mint Cinnamon for new users. It's similar to the Windows 7 interface and very stable. You can run the OS off the disc or a usb drive without installing it if you want to try it out.
There is such a great community of users that any question about a particular OS will have an answer with a quick google search.
Click to expand...

apt-get actually has nothing to do with GNOME. apt-get is a command-line utility that Debian-based distros (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint and their derivatives) use for package management. If you were using GNOME on Fedora, you would use yum instead.
 
damicatz said:
apt-get actually has nothing to do with GNOME. apt-get is a command-line utility that Debian-based distros (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint and their derivatives) use for package management. If you were using GNOME on Fedora, you would use yum instead.
Click to expand...

Ah, good to know! Although I've used Linux distros for 4 years, I don't consider myself any sort of expert. But you really don't need to be a whiz to use it. Learning all this stuff is part of the fun too.
 
jpm100 said:
I find unity demeaning. But fortunately you can change that interface.
Click to expand...

Yeah, or you can just use Mint, which is pre-packaged with Cinnamon and Mate, (both different approaches at trying to reproduce the Gnome 2 experience, one based on Gnome 2 code, and the other based on modified Gnome 3 code) and still uses all the ease of install, and hardware compatibility advances of Ubuntu as it is based on the same Ubuntu repositories and codebase.


That being said, just like Windows 8, Unity would probably be great in touch/tablet form. I just don't want it on my desktop.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039483565 said:
Yeah, or you can just use Mint, which is pre-packaged with Cinnamon and Mate, (both different approaches at trying to reproduce the Gnome 2 experience, one based on Gnome 2 code, and the other based on modified Gnome 3 code) and still uses all the ease of install, and hardware compatibility advances of Ubuntu as it is based on the same Ubuntu repositories and codebase.


That being said, just like Windows 8, Unity would probably be great in touch/tablet form. I just don't want it on my desktop.
Click to expand...

Well that's the thing. Microsoft's approach to Windows 8, was Ubuntu's approach to a Linux GUI. So Microsoft is actually ripping off Ubuntu's strategy. Although Microsoft's version is less desktop friendly than Unity.
 
jpm100 said:
Well that's the thing. Microsoft's approach to Windows 8, was Ubuntu's approach to a Linux GUI. So Microsoft is actually ripping off Ubuntu's strategy. Although Microsoft's version is less desktop friendly than Unity.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Unity is basically OS X with the dock configured on the left. Disabling the global menus makes it much less obnoxious. Windows 7 is very similar... except with the dock / launcher on the bottom... and a cascading app menu, rather than a dashboard.
 
I switched to Linux Mint MATE 14. Inside Mint I run an XP Virtual Machine for my favorite Windows apps. So, you don’t have to run M$ or Linux, you can run both OSes simultaneously. No rebooting, no dual-booting, everything is on one partition.
 
jpm100 said:
Well that's the thing. Microsoft's approach to Windows 8, was Ubuntu's approach to a Linux GUI. So Microsoft is actually ripping off Ubuntu's strategy. Although Microsoft's version is less desktop friendly than Unity.
Click to expand...

I don't know why people compare Unity with Windows 8, Unity isn't a hybrid design. As for desktop friendliness, Unity might be a bit better, haven't touched it in a while, but on the desktop is suffers the same issues as Windows 8 as the apps used on a desktop tend not to be touch friendly.
 
jwcalla said:
I don't know. Unity is basically OS X with the dock configured on the left. Disabling the global menus makes it much less obnoxious. Windows 7 is very similar... except with the dock / launcher on the bottom... and a cascading app menu, rather than a dashboard.
Click to expand...

Ubuntu and OS X both utilize docks, but their overall functionality differ a lot.

heatlesssun said:
I don't know why people compare Unity with Windows 8, Unity isn't a hybrid design. As for desktop friendliness, Unity might be a bit better, haven't touched it in a while, but on the desktop is suffers the same issues as Windows 8 as the apps used on a desktop tend not to be touch friendly.
Click to expand...

heatlesssun said:
I don't know why people compare Unity with Windows 8, Unity isn't a hybrid design. As for desktop friendliness, Unity might be a bit better, haven't touched it in a while, but on the desktop is suffers the same issues as Windows 8 as the apps used on a desktop tend not to be touch friendly.
Click to expand...

Of course you can't compare Unity and Windows 8.

Windows 8 is a flip-flop experience, not a hybrid solution. I don't know why you can't get this shit through that naive skull of yours.

Ubuntu is a hybrid design. It's tailored to each individual platform and their purpose while retaining the same UI familiarity and structure; it doesn't compromise anything. Why the hell do you think it's called "Unity" in the first place? One UI for all form factors. It absolutely does not suffer the same issues as Windows 8 because of that exact implementation alone, and Ubuntu Phone will give you an idea of what Unity will probably look like on a tablet device.

haven't touched it in a while
Click to expand...

Then I suggest you try the latest iterations of Ubuntu TV, Desktop Unity, and look up Mark Shuttleworths live demo of Ubuntu phone instead of being willfully ignorant. Do more research.. or at least look up videos, for fucks sake.
 
I actually find Unity to be more PC-centric than the other distros, surprisingly enough. The HUD and Unity launcher really utilize the keyboard and keyboard shortcuts better than any other desktop environment I've ever used and certainly better than any other Linux distro on the market today.

ALT + P launches my web browser and goes straight to Pandora :D And it's filled with little shortcuts like that. I absolutely love it. My hands stay on the keyboard and only leave to use the mouse if I really need to.
 
Never in my life thought I'd see Unity apologists. It's almost like seeing people viciously defending Windows Me.
 
Red Machine D said:
Never in my life thought I'd see Unity apologists. It's almost like seeing people viciously defending Windows Me.
Click to expand...

I use Cinnamon on my desktop buddy. :D Not a fan of unity, but I am open-minded enough to acknowledge its strengths and goals as a multi-platform UI for the average masses.
 
PunditGuy said:
80% Windows in my home, if you exclude the Android devices. Got a MythBuntu DVR hooked up to the big screen (I need to put Steam on there -- anyone try the beta?). It took some tinkering to get it where I wanted it, but less tinkering than I was expecting.

There are still some significant barriers to switching: games and Netflix chief among them.
Click to expand...

I recommend you use steam via wine as unless there is a linux version of your game available on steam and you have a license for it you wont be able to play it where as you should be able to play windows versions of games via steam through wine or PlayonLinux.

I ran in to this issue trying to get Torchlight working on my linux mint laptop. I was able to get it working successfully via the windows version of steam via wine. Since I don't own a copy of the linux version and there isn't one available on steam I could not play it via the native steam client for linux. I don't really know what type of game library steam has for native linux games but I wouldn't imagine its that expansive.
 
damicatz said:
apt-get actually has nothing to do with GNOME. apt-get is a command-line utility that Debian-based distros (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint and their derivatives) use for package management. If you were using GNOME on Fedora, you would use yum instead.
Click to expand...

Aptitude and Yum suck compared to YAST.
 
Red Falcon said:
Aptitude and Yum suck compared to YAST.
Click to expand...

I can't say I'm a big Suse fan.

Suse was my first linux distribution, I installed it on my 486 off of a free CD that came with some PC magazine in the early to mid 90s some time.

The experience turned me off from linux for over a half a decade.

Then in 2001, sick of windows and it's constant sunscreens I tried a pre-Fedora Red Hat (7.3 Valhalla, I think?) I liked it, it was rock solid and not hard to install like I had expected. I HATED the RPM package manager though. It constantly left me confused as to what dependencies were actually installed, and I didn't feel quite in control of the experience.

A couple of years later I heard of a brand new distribution called Gentoo. Boy were the early versions complex to install having to bootstrap the system and compile everything from scratch. The scripts helped but were far from perfect. The portage package manager was an absolute dream to work with though, apparently modeled after BSD's ports. Having to manually set up everything and edit text files for configurations I quickly became much better at using linux than I ever was with RedHat. I loved the rolling release, never having to reinstall new releases.

While Gentoo was awesome, after a few years of use I wound up having some hardware issues. In order for hardware compatibility I was forced to use the experimental package tree, which would once a week or so cause something to blow up, and lead to hours of troubleshooting in console. I decided to try this new distribution I had heard good things about called ubuntu. It was the polar opposite of Gentoo. Installing off of the disk everything just worked. I apt to be a decent package manager. I didn't like it as much as portage, but the convenience and lack of constant troubleshooting won me over.

I happily used Gentoo until one day after upgrading to a new release I was faced with a really odd and annoying window manager, I would later learn was called unity.

At first it was easy to witch back to Gnome but as time went on it became more convoluted with every release until I just decided to drop Ubuntu in favor of Mint, which I currently use dual booting with Win7 Pro. Mint is essentially what Ubuntu used to be, which is why I like it.

My server still uses Ubuntu Server Edition. Ubuntu is still great as long as you dont use Unity, and without X installed I'm perfectly happy with it. Also EVERYTHING is released directly for Ubuntu, so it makes my life easier during installs of server software.

My router and NAS run on limited FreeBSD installs (pfSense and FreeNAS respectively) and I really want stand the BSD experience. The standard console experience is terrible, and while you can change the shell, the commands use slightly different options which are a pain, and I have yer to figure out how Rojan install man on either, so no manpages which is a pain.

So here I am.

Win7 (games)
Mint (everything else desktop)
Ubuntu Server Edition (linux server)
pfFense (router)
FreeNAS (NAS)

I'm considering giving Gentoo another try though. I have fun memories of it, and I understand it is much improved (and I LOVE portage)

How about you?
 
MrCrispy said:
Thanks. The whole Cinnamon, Mate, KDE, Gnome thing confuses me, it seems more like a religious debate as I can't even find a decent answer about whats better. Just when I think I have the answer I'll come across someone who says use XFCE or Enlightenment or one of the other window managers :eek:
Click to expand...

It's already been said before, but the window manager is a matter of taste. I never really like Gnome and preferred KDE, but Cinnamon is Gnome-ish and I really like it. I disliked IceWM, but liked FluxBox.

Overall though, I think Cinnamon is a pretty good balance that gets a lot of stuff right. It seems pretty familiar for people who are used to the Windows UI so the transition isn't as jarring as it could be. The best suggestion I can make is to try stuff out before actually installing anything to a hard drive. You'll get a good idea if stuff like your NIC and GPU are properly supported out of the box or if you're gonna hafta roll up some sleeves to make it all work. Either that, or dump it on a spare computer. I wouldn't dedicate my super-important-must-function or plays-all-my-games system to Linux without having a lot of time to get used to it first. in fact, it's possible to use Linux for a long time and still pretty much be a novice. That's completely true in my case. :)
 
SkribbelKat said:
It's already been said before, but the window manager is a matter of taste. I never really like Gnome and preferred KDE, but Cinnamon is Gnome-ish and I really like it. I disliked IceWM, but liked FluxBox.

Overall though, I think Cinnamon is a pretty good balance that gets a lot of stuff right. It seems pretty familiar for people who are used to the Windows UI so the transition isn't as jarring as it could be. The best suggestion I can make is to try stuff out before actually installing anything to a hard drive. You'll get a good idea if stuff like your NIC and GPU are properly supported out of the box or if you're gonna hafta roll up some sleeves to make it all work. Either that, or dump it on a spare computer. I wouldn't dedicate my super-important-must-function or plays-all-my-games system to Linux without having a lot of time to get used to it first. in fact, it's possible to use Linux for a long time and still pretty much be a novice. That's completely true in my case. :)
Click to expand...

Exactly.


Like with most things in life there is no one choice that is objectively better than the other.

It's all a matter of preference, and depends on what you are looking to do.

I used to really like KDE back in my Gentoo days, but Ubuntu got me really used to Gnome 2, to the point where when they switched to Unity, I couldn't stand it, and moved to Mint, where I have the choices of Cinnamon and Mate which are both Gnome 2 workalikes.
 
I switched in 2012, but TBH, I can see why it's not being adopted. Everything that takes 5 seconds to do in windows requires hours or even days of research, and sometimes still does not work right. Linux is great for servers but still has lot of catching up to do on the desktop. Sadly part of the issue is that hardware is geared to windows so the Linux devs are left to write drivers for closed hardware. Would be nice if hardware makers would either supply proper Linux drivers or just supply everything needed for devs to write proper ones.

That and it would be nice if software companies would stop using crap like .net and start coding in more open platforms and make their apps work in multi platforms. Sadly, technology is not about advancement, it's about money, and there's no money in Linux.
 
Red Squirrel said:
Sadly, technology is not about advancement, it's about money, and there's no money in Linux.
Click to expand...

From the food we eat to the houses we live in to the curing of our aliments to education of our minds, it's all about money. I'd be happy to pay for software if all these other interests were about advancement.
 
nOrVow said:
http://funroll-loops.info/

Lol I'm just joshin' ya :p
Click to expand...

Hahaha that's pretty funny.


I really like the Gentoo philosophy, and really like Portage, but the truth is, those -o3's and hardware specific optimizations do very little for permanence, especially considering it's all GCC.

Now, a Gentoo configured to compile everything using the more efficient Intel compiler would be very interesting...
 
I like the idea of linux and I think its great there is a free alternative.

If I had a real use for it I might even use it. Just haven't found that use as yet.

My main issues with linux are -

1. The users. I find they are linux's biggest Achilles heel. All so keen for you to "come on in, the water is great!" but when you ask a question as to 'how, where, why and WTF is a tar.gz in the 21st century?' then its eye rolling all round and "go learn Noob!". Plus often linux tutorials are written by enthusiasts for enthusiasts. So the issue there is the first 3 pages are always missing. The assumption being that you've been using Linux for 10 years and know how to handle a tar.gz from the terminal or whatever. Whereas with a Windows tutorial, even if it means going into the Registry will say "Type Regedit into the Search/Run box and hit enter" to start with. It's the little things.......

2. The sheer diversity of distros, UI types and sub distros. Basically whichever distro you choose "you chose the wrong one dude!" That's kind of infuriating and has a constant "what am I missing elsewhere feeling?" I know linux fans feel the diversity is a strength but I feel it's a weakness. I would rather they dump 95% of the distros and concentrate on just a handful instead. Then some real progress could be made.

On another angle I build and sell custom PCs for folks. If they are short of cash I am more than happy to offer Linux as a free alternative to keep the cost down. I even show them it and make them aware it will do all the Ebay and Facebook they need.

But without fail they always stump up for Windows in the end. I cant give Linux away!
 
What's all this i hear about, "oh if Steam starts to support Linux, then it may be a viable OS for the home user / gamer?" That's a load of crap, there's a heap of games on Steam that don't even support beyond XP 32-bit operating systems, let alone getting all the independent devs to retrofit all their old games. As it is, I'm having to load VMWare with Windows XP for some of my older games to run such as GTA3.. But then switch to Linux all of a sudden you're stuck because most newer games just wont run in a sandbox, so you're stuck with dual-booting. My god, I thought the days of having to reboot Windows into DOS mode to play Doom were over.

Linux never will, ever never be the choice for gaming...
 
If they want Linux to be usable, they need to start packaging dependencies into the distro specific install packages, and modifying the script to install those dependencies if required. This will solve many issues. A user should not have to search online for a software package and install it manually to get an OS updater to work.

Also many apps are not designed as well as their Windows counterparts (when they exist). It's almost like the Linux app devs said "good enough" and left it at that. I'd be more likely to drop Windows if Linux apps had the same functions as their Windows counterparts. I realize part of this is that there's no standard way to do nearly anything (such as sound)...that needs to be fixed. If hardware I/O became standardized, it'd lead eventually to easier development (less bugs due to using incompatible I/O standards).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top