Slashdot Mirror

I think it is the upcoming popular Linux for the desktop.

Upcoming?

Linux Mint has received the most hits of any distro over at DistroWatch for the past 2.5 years or so, after it surpassed Ubuntu.

There's no way to get hard numbers on this sort of stuff, but Mint has already been one of the most popular Linux desktop distros for years, and some have claimed (based on DistroWatch and other sites with hit counts) that it has been #1 (or close to it) for a few years already.

I'm sure others will chime in here with some other data, but my anecdotal evidence is that I know four friends who switched to Linux in the past couple years. While I'm sure I talked about Linux with them, I wasn't involved in their decision, and I don't think any of them had a lot of guidance from other friends about which distro to go with... they just wanted to try Linux. And all four have ended up using Mint. Some checked out Ubuntu but didn't like it, or read articles saying Mint was better, so they decided to try Mint instead.

Again, I'm not claiming this is hard proof of anything. But there's been a lot of buzz around Mint, and it clearly has had enough positive press to pull in some of my friends who were looking to try Linux.

In fact, I would recommend it to anyone who wants to upgrade an old WinXP computer to something more 2014.

Agreed. Even 5 years ago, I would NOT have recommended desktop Linux as a serious replacement, unless the person had some family member or friend who could be "tech support" when something weird went wrong and the fix required editing a bunch of text files on the command line. I certainly wouldn't recommend any inexperienced users try to install it by themselves, unless they were technologically savvy and had some command line experience. (Someone might get lucky, though, and get a system working immediately with no tweaking.)

But today? It may not be the perennial "Year of the Linux desktop," but we do finally have things that "just work" in many more user cases than ever before. I hopped from distro to distro for years, trying to find something I didn't have to tinker with all the time or worry whether multimedia would randomly not work or whether an upgrade would break half of the things I spent hours fixing for last upgrade. Linux Mint was the first to approach a relatively stable "just works" philosophy for the casual desktop user.

I even installed it on an older useless underpowered laptop for a clueless family member over the holidays (Windows had slowed the point that it wasn't useful, and they were tired of Windows). I didn't make any special tweaks other than putting a few shortcuts on the desktop. I knew I only see these people over the holidays, so I wouldn't be around for random tech support. But I wasn't concerned because they had basically just stopped using this computer, so the worst case scenario was that it remained useless. Recently, I heard it was still working great... and if Mint can survive as a useful system for 6 months on the machine of a clueless relative who never used Linux before, well, I'd say that's an achievement.

format c: - voila, all crapware removed. Then go to http://www.distrowatch.org/ and select a non-crappy OS and install. There, saved you $99 bucks.

I tell everyone to use a far better decrapifier. Those who have listened always thank me profusely every time the subject comes up. BTW - Where is the source code for the one you mentioned, so I can verify that it really does what is promised, and doesn't add malware in the process?

"The majority of Linux users are ... *tada* admins running heavy shit on Linux, not desktop users."

You really shouldn't be proud of yourself for broadcasting your ignorance, and should definitely not be fooled by any mod ups. Perhaps you have heard of Mandriva? Ubuntu? The hundreds of other desktop distributions you can find with distrowatch? Linux is very popular on the desktop in Europe, and gaining popularity here in the US. Wallowing in your ignorance doesn't cure it.

You clueless Linux geek-wannabe. The number of distros have no bearing whatsoever on the linux desktop/server usage ratio. Not. At. All.

It is called logic, and it should be evident to anyone with a modicum of logic and arithmetic skills (which one would think a real geek would have) to see that you cannot deduce an abundance of desktop users over server deployments simply by looking at the number of distros. How stupid to make that type of leap.

I hate to toot my own horn, but Jesus, you are so clueless. I've been using Linux, UNIX, VAX and PICK systems for over 17 years now, in private and public sectors, on the enterprise and on defense. I've been using Linux for real usage since I was downloading the slackware distros through CompuServe on slow-as-molasses dial-up, way back when you had to configure everything by hand on a shell prompt (as opposed to point-n-click on whatever distro-specific GUI tool running on Gnome, KDE or whatever.) I dunno, I'm not a l33t hax0r rock start, but shit, maybe I might know a thing or two about Linux and how it is actually used.

It would be the day that some kookamimee distro fanboy is going to tell me about my ignorance about Linux.

Seriously, if you guys are the future users of real world Linux, we are screwed. The only difference between you people and Windows users is that you actually believe you are technical.

"The majority of Linux users are ... *tada* admins running heavy shit on Linux, not desktop users."

You really shouldn't be proud of yourself for broadcasting your ignorance, and should definitely not be fooled by any mod ups. Perhaps you have heard of Mandriva? Ubuntu? The hundreds of other desktop distributions you can find with distrowatch? Linux is very popular on the desktop in Europe, and gaining popularity here in the US. Wallowing in your ignorance doesn't cure it.

Someone should decide to run another OS rather than put up with such crappy performance. You can make your life a lot easier if you take a look at Ubuntu or the many other options.

btw, even the "Vista Premium Ready" specs are a bit low for the bloated mess that is Vista.

What are you on? Out of aluminum foil?

What do you think you're computer is going to do? Dial home to Microsoft and alert them you're on?

And if you are so afraid of your computer sneaking details about you to others, why not try a trusted computing platform?

Please keep your fear mongering to yourself. You have less anonymity posting to Slashdot than you do with local face recognition.

I swear I hit the preview button...

there will always ALWAYS be a place for the determined to find software for free.

Yup. There always will be.

But I dont give a fuck. Microsoft Windows fucking sucks. The box I am on right now is Windows. If you want to stand for this shit then fine do whatever you please. But until you decide to use FreeBSD or one of the many other alternatives like one of my favorites Gentoo Linux or Debian Lunix or one of the many others... Stop bitching about rights erosion. Excuses about market share and running easily managed homogenous networks are tired. If you cannot use a computer... Don't use one. Nothing is private. Especially now. If it wasn't a computer giant watching us it would be a media company or something else. Everyone has an axe to grind, this is just another example of that. People are paranoid now because of the massive FUD that has been disseminated by hollywood in movies like Swordfish, the many claims of "spying" unbiased liberal and conservative media has been bashing the public with lately and over the years. Not to mention that we all already have a bar code implanted in us... It's called a social security number. If you believe you aren't being watched well. You are mistaken. Nothing is private. The first reason to switch from Windows should be because it fucking sucks. Then you should worry about your (already) non private data.

1. Make everyone shareholders. I think this idea is no better than what we have now, and probably worse. Anyway, set a "release" price on new works (ideas, art). When enough people have collectively put up enough money to meet the price, release it to these people only. They are now shareholders. Whenever outsiders want in, they buy shares. Everyone who is already in gets a bit of this money, thus the incentive not to give away property. You can't sell out, because proving that you've forgotten an idea is impossible. As more people buy in, the share price goes DOWN, because what it is really doing is spreading the release price plus some profit out among more and more people. It doesn't go down entirely proportionally, so that early adopters are rewarded for their discernment, and of course the creators/inventors/authors are the first people in. As an example, suppose the release price was $1 million. 100,000 people put up $1, 50,000 put up $2, and a wealthy impatient person puts up the other $800,000. Then it's a hit and a million people decide to jump in for $1 each. The first shareholders will get some, not all, of that money, and the share price can be lowered to, say, 75 cents. When the price goes below some minimum (1 cent?) the shareholding arrangement is dissolved and the "properties" are thereafter public domain.

2. Similar to 1, but skip all the shareholder stuff and release it to the public, not to "shareholders". Rather like this idea.

3. Change to a "Creditright" system. All ideas are freely available. The only obligation is give credit where due. Accreditations are counted. How exactly this can be achieved without inconvenience, cheating, or violating privacy isn't easy, but it can be done, and has been done for centuries. The process is called "voting". Voting is of course a high stakes, expensive, slow, trouble prone and inconvenient process, but I think computers and the Internet could really be an enabling force here, making it possible to have the needed frequency of votes at a reasonable level of convenience and reliability. Then, to "promote the arts and sciences", appropriate organizations will have as their sole duty keeping the counts and giving out money proportionately. Something like Distrowatch could be a starting point. They would be funded by tax revenue, which makes sense because if it is everyone who "owns" an idea because trying to restrict copying is absurd, then it is everyone who should reward the creators proportional to the value of the idea. Shut down the patent office and set those people to these new duties. Perhaps the government should do it, maybe by having an agency devoted to the task. Or perhaps independent corporations would handle the task. After all, we have safety organizations such as Underwriter's Laboratories. So, like every time someone listens to a song, the counter for that song ticks up another spot. All this does is count votes. The problem of haggling over how much money each vote is worth can be left to annual budget battles. If the government feels that there isn't enough research, it's very easy to pump more money into this system. Also, could have charitable organizations help out. Great way to "feed starving artists". All kinds of questions can be fairly handled in this "Creditright" system. One example is "reach through patents". Would be easy to count. For example, if a particular song uses a particular new instrument, could have anything from add 1 to the count for that instrument, or add the counts for that song to the counts for that instrument. Let voters or arbitrators or the courts or official boards or committees decide how the counts should be interpreted, and what they're worth. But of course we would develo

.. it's Redhat's little experiment to see if the community can sustain development of a distribution whose parts or whose sum may become useful in their enterprise editions later. it has no primary project of maintaining an easy to use desktop platform. their own site makes this quite clear.

and so i wasn't suprised that all my encounters with Fedora prove it's far more suited to very interested enthusiasts than new users. this seems due to the Redhat association; as though being tagged with such a name brand it has proven itself to be ready for widest distribution.

Fedora needs alot of work to be a sensible productivity platform for Jane Sixpack. Ubuntu or Mepis are far more suitable for new users, out-of-the-box. given the choice of all three, nearly all of my students dropped Fedora for the Debian-based Mepis and Ubuntu distributions.

administrators shouldn't be so easily swayed either. Fedora is difficult to maintain and install compared to that of Mepis or Ubuntu. it took 2 of us 4.5 hours to install Mepis on 30 dell workstations, all just worked with absolutely *no* after-the-fact configuration. Fedora Core 4 took 3 people 2 full days to get to that state on the same number of machines.

Fedora, as a would-be flagship of Desktop Linux for so many, gives a bad first impression. Fedora users promoting the project should read the distribution home page before reccommending it to uncle Keith.

then again, it seems uncle Keith has already decided.

Microsoft has released a free security update to Windows users today: Service Pack Linux. Service Pack Linux includes a fix for all IE vulnerabilities, as well as flaws in Outlook and Office. IIS users will be happy to know that Service Pack Linux will fix many problems with Microsoft's premier web server package as well. Service Pack Linux is considered the most comprehensive security fix in Windows history. Users should get it now at http://distrowatch.org/

Mandrake 10.1 Official does everything you mentioned including Firefox and fully working sound. It has a resize utility(built into the installer program) to allow you to resize your current partition making life a lot easier. I agree that older linux distros (like Red Hat 7, Suse 8.0 or previous) were more difficult to install than Windows but things have gotten a WHOLE LOT EASIER. Be sure the distro you use has a 2.6 kernel. I find that Linux is much faster and is a lot more "fun" than using Windows. http://www.mandrakelinux.com/ http://distrowatch.org/

Not necessarily, but it is a nice reason to move away from Microsoft Windows.

Linux Anyone?
SuSE (Novell)
Red Hat
Mandrake
GenToo
Slackware
And get others from Distrowatch

Sure, a shitload of packages filled with last years versions.

Most packages are less than 2 weeks behind official upstream releases. Gnome 2.6 took exactly 16 days to enter unstable after it was officially released by the Gnome guys. I was able to upgrade with the usual apt-get update && apt-get dselect-upgrade with absolutely no problems, as usual.

Sure, if two weeks isn't fast enough for you, you can add an experimental source in /etc/apt/sources.list, which I've done recently to install GCC-3.4 so I could test it's FPU code performance.

But then again if you're such a version number junkie you probably don't care about getting real work done and so Debian may not be the best distro for you.

If you venture outside of the debian cult compound you will find many Gentoo and FreeBSD users who "made the switch" away from Debian in the last couple years. Shit some are even going to Fedora! Debian is definitely hemorraging userbase but slackware has shown theres always enough fanatics around to keep a project going long after it's relevance has expired.

Sure... That's why Knoppix/Debian are a close 3rd/4th behind Mandrake/Fedora on distrowatch? I suppose Gentoo and SuSE are distros with a "hemorraging" user base who's relevance has also expired?

Debian has never been a distro for everyone and I think the same people who stuck with Debian years ago are the same sorts of people who will stick with Debian in the future. With the growth of the 'net and increased awareness of Linux, all distros are under much higher scrutiny from a much broader crowd of people looking to try out Linux.

Regardless, Debian undoubtedly remains the best Linux distro on non-x86 hardware, and certainly holds its own amongst the more x86-centric distros. It has excellent QA and the best quality packages with hassle-free upgrades that I've seen on any distro. I haven't tried to use Gentoo seriously; I didn't like the way it liked to smash config files in /etc.

I've got another rant post that might help to explain the difference between unstable/testing/stable to you.

Cheers

I suggest checking out the major GNU/Linux distros that use the RPM system. Mandrake looks particulary good for someone abandoning Redhat.

Of course, I use Gentoo; so this is pure speculation. ;)

You might also take a look at distrowatch to find candidates...

• Mandrake : 991
• Red Hat : 696
• Knoppix : 643
• Debian : 567
• Fedora : 518
• Gentoo : 477

My suggestion would be nix (no pun intended) the whole linux angle to this. The kids are going to be learning difficult apps, and having to deal with an operating system that functions differently (think stuff like cut/paste) will just be frustrating.

Around 18 years ago, I was a kid and some of the other kids in my school mocked me for using a "hard-to-learn-and-use" IBM computer instead of a Mac or a IIe. There was a not-so-user-friendly operating system called DOS 3.3. You had to edit files without a graphical environment (you think vi is hard, ever try EDLIN?) and had to configure things like PATH$, PROMPT=, FILES=, in files called config.sys and autoexec.bat. Was it harder to learn on this environment than a Mac? Different maybe, but not harder. Kids are willing to try about anything if you don't tell them it's hard beforehand.

I say let them use Linux at the camp and maybe they'll learn a thing or two about something different. You're right about the speed, I think the OS should be loaded on the hard drives. But give the kids a CD distro like Knoppix , PC Linux OS, Suse Live Eval, or Mandrake Move to take home so they can show their parents what they did at camp.

Who knows, maybe one of those kids will like using the OS and will try to develop something that others will want to use.

My suggestion would be nix (no pun intended) the whole linux angle to this. The kids are going to be learning difficult apps, and having to deal with an operating system that functions differently (think stuff like cut/paste) will just be frustrating.

Around 18 years ago, I was a kid and some of the other kids in my school mocked me for using a "hard-to-learn-and-use" IBM computer instead of a Mac or a IIe. There was a not-so-user-friendly operating system called DOS 3.3. You had to edit files without a graphical environment (you think vi is hard, ever try EDLIN?) and had to configure things like PATH$, PROMPT=, FILES=, in files called config.sys and autoexec.bat. Was it harder to learn on this environment than a Mac? Different maybe, but not harder. Kids are willing to try about anything if you don't tell them it's hard beforehand.

I say let them use Linux at the camp and maybe they'll learn a thing or two about something different. You're right about the speed, I think the OS should be loaded on the hard drives. But give the kids a CD distro like Knoppix , PC Linux OS, Suse Live Eval, or Mandrake Move to take home so they can show their parents what they did at camp.

Who knows, maybe one of those kids will like using the OS and will try to develop something that others will want to use.

http://distrowatch.org/

It seems to me that there are TONS of viable options...

beg me pardon, on the risk of beeing downmodded etc. why the hell is everyone thinking debian is the only free distribution ? go to http://www.bsd.org/, http://old.lwn.net/Distributions/ or http://www.distrowatch.org/ if you want a unbiased answer to what`s free software based systems - have a look there, and discover there is more to *n?x than redhat and debian.
why is everyone so biased and mainstream ?

regards,
anonymous rocklinux, openbsd and slackware user.