I'm a big fan of Xubuntu. Right out of the wrapper it's configured almost exactly the way I like my own Xfce desktop. It's very nimble and quick on modest hardware, and of course it has those wonderful, vast Ubuntu software repositories. It used to ship with Synaptic Package Manager, but now it's using "software manager" which is okay, but I prefer Synaptic, so I add it.
The
only PPA I've added is Ubuntuzilla so I can get my beloved Seamonkey suite and keep it updated. One of my pet peeves is the addition of a zillion and twelve PPAs to any distro (LXLE and Linux Lite both do this), especially for software that is
already available in the Ubuntu repositories anyway! "Yeah but not the latest and greatest version," you might say. Exactly. The latest version might not even work on an "older" OS like 18.04, which Linux Lite 4.x is built from.
Why make unwitting Beta testers out of newbies?! I don't get why some Ubuntu-based distros do that, especially since the Ubuntu software repositories are the largest in the entire galaxy. It's no wonder that update problems are always an issue.
Linux Lite is unique in a lot of very cool ways. The Welcome screen, user manual, and cool tools are the best ever, anywhere. The highly modified Xfce desktop is genuinely original and super cool. Better IMO for new users than Linux Mint by about 1000%. But I'll always be
a Xubuntu fanboy as well.
[member=6925]Artim[/member], why then do you use Linux Lite and not Xubuntu, unless you use Xubuntu but just attend LL forums?
For me, lightweight = able to run effectively with low-powered CPUs.
In this regard, my personal criterion for deciding if a distro is lightweight is whether it's
capable of running effectively (i.e. without noticeable lag) on a machine with a single-core (dual-threaded) Intel Atom CPU. The hardware at my disposal for this test, is a 10" Samsung netbook N145 (Intel
[email protected]; 2GB RAM) - see signature below.
LL2.8 32-bit/64-bit = definitely lightweight and runs very well on this machine, which I use mainly while on my travels, listening to downloaded podcasts and music files stored on its SSD. I wonder what the risk is, in continuing to use LL2.8 on this machine (for these uses) even though this edition is no longer officially supported ?
Outside LL2.8, running well on an intel
[email protected], there isn't a huge amount of choice.
Distros with a Debian base are the main ones, as 32-bit is still ongoing with many of these, with AntiX, being a real gem - I've tried it & it's a great little distro in many respects. For the Intel Atom, I've also tried Manjaro & Slitaz. MJ works (see signature) but is laggy & overbloated. Slitaz (independent base) has some great features, but is too much trouble (very buggy, lots of apps not working properly, recurrent problems with dependencies, panel disappearing at will etc, insufficient info for newbies, etc).
Well that's my tupenny's worth ...
LiLi 2.8 made me return to Linux for good.
But, I prefer 3.8 over it though for older machines, it just seems more "polished".
I also have an Atom lying around (DELL Mini1010), it's more of a museum piece now though since the battery doesn't hold a charge
Also I must add to my own post :
My personal minimum : (FUNCTIONAL) + XFCE+Whiskers + Lightweight.
I.e. not crashing or having weird/interface or glitches all the time
(09-25-2019, 01:30 PM)TheDead link Wrote: [ -> ]But, I prefer 3.8 over it though for older machines, it just seems more "polished".
You're right there, series 3 is much more polished as I guess you'd expect with LL's evolution - however I found 3.8 lagged on the Intel Atom, and that might have been due to Ubuntu introducing SystemD at that time ...
(09-25-2019, 08:10 AM)MS link Wrote: [ -> ][member=6925]Artim[/member], why then do you use Linux Lite and not Xubuntu, unless you use Xubuntu but just attend LL forums?
I respect Linux Lite, I admire the very cool tools used, the Manual is second to none, nice community. So I visit once in awhile to contribute a little something here and there if I can.
Quote:m654321[/member]"]For me, lightweight = able to run effectively with low-powered CPUs.
In this regard, my personal criterion for deciding if a distro is lightweight is whether it's capable of running effectively (i.e. without noticeable lag) on a machine with a single-core (dual-threaded) Intel Atom CPU. The hardware at my disposal for this test, is a 10" Samsung netbook N145 (Intel [email protected]; 2GB RAM) - see signature below.
LL2.8 32-bit/64-bit = definitely lightweight and runs very well on this machine, which I use mainly while on my travels, listening to downloaded podcasts and music files stored on its SSD. I wonder what the risk is, in continuing to use LL2.8 on this machine (for these uses) even though this edition is no longer officially supported ?
Good to have a solid point of reference, but mind we must also apply a contributing factor called "modern" to the equation, adding to what [member=6733]TheDead[/member] has put. This is also my beef with the Debian, having spoken of the installer. Being lightweight or even functional - if that collides anyhow - must not cancel the quality of meeting the presentday standard of expectations. LinuxLite shows that you can be lightweight and economic, while still delivering with well tailored style. If the distro is super lightweight but barely making common sense to a homeuser or if the distro is otherwise fine but feels just too much like yesterday - like, instead of being inspired with WindowsXP, it tries to recreate WindowsXP - then it is simply a no-go, to me.
(09-25-2019, 10:44 PM)Artim link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=MS link=topic=6724.msg48914#msg48914 date=1569399043]
[member=6925]Artim[/member], why then do you use Linux Lite and not Xubuntu, unless you use Xubuntu but just attend LL forums?
I respect Linux Lite, I admire the very cool tools used, the Manual is second to none, nice community. So I visit once in awhile to contribute a little something here and there if I can.
[/quote]
Therefore you are an occasional LL user and an LL sympathizer? Nice that you contribute to the forums anyway, we certainly should appreciate your time and knowledge.
(09-24-2019, 08:46 PM)Moltke link Wrote: [ -> ]Choices my friends ... choices!! That's one, amongst the many other beauties the Linux/Unix world offers us, you can take it or leave it, but you can't deny it, and that's why having an OS for veryONE isn't a bad thing, in fact, I think it's wondeful.
It is, my point was that for a newbie those hundred of distributions can be quite overwhelming.
Add to this that a lot of them are (really) not professional looking at all, unlike Linux Lite of course
. This can be quite offputting to get into Linux.
If you try and ask on Reddit, "Which Linux Distro should be my first?", you will be swampped with different opinions.
Stumble upon a nice article while writing this post when searching DuckDuckGo with "My First Distro" and Linux Lite is on there, yay!
https://www.lifewire.com/choose-best-lin...ds-2201172
A cool thing they put in there is "Level Of Expertise Required" for each distributions, I agree with most of their ratings too (maybe not Puppy that I would put a "Medium" on, always found it a little weird specially for a newbie. LoLz.
Quote:Stumble upon a nice article while writing this post when searching DuckDuckGo with "My First Distro" and Linux Lite is on there, yay!https://www.lifewire.com/choose-best-linux-distro-for-needs-2201172
A cool thing they put in there is "Level Of Expertise Required" for each distributions, I agree with most of their ratings too (maybe not Puppy that I would put a "Medium" on, always found it a little weird specially for a newbie. LoLz.
While the article is quite informational I don't agree on that Android requiring low expertise since at times you'll need to edit grub or it won't boot. I tried and failed lol Also, slackware "high" ... I've tried it and it was easy to install and set up, I didn't used it too long though. Arch "medium-high" definitely high, at least for install and set up, once you've done that is just like any other OS.
Quote:for a newbie those hundred of distributions can be quite overwhelming
I disagree, I know most people always say this but it is 2019 not 1970 so most people should have pretty much an idea what they want their OS to do, what they need it for, most people own and use on a daily basis mobile devices being a tablet, smartphone, raspberry pi or even a smart tv. Also, there's plenty of information on the web about it making it even easier to decide, look at sites like
https://distrotest.net/ which allows you to try many distros in your browser without even downloading a single bit of it, or what about
https://distrochooser.de/en/ which by answering some questions suggest some choices for you to try ... there's no excuse, if people want to try Linux the only thing keeping them from doing it is themselves.
Well, Linux has never been for the masses, so I guess, we could also assume that if one is unwilling to dig through a thousand page long theoretical physics manual, it is up to blame oneself for.