Slashdot Mirror
The Well-Tempered Debian desktop
An anonymous reader writes "What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad? How does it turn out? Surprisingly well! The article comprises an entertaining account of the entire process, complete with lots of informative screenshots, from downloading the net-install to tangling with Wi-Fi and modem PCMCIA cards as the last step — and everything in between. A great primer for Debian newbies... Go Debian!"
How about installing Debian Etch on an NSLU2?
What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad?
The real question is: what happens when non-popular-linux-website folks attempt to install a Debian Etch on an old thinkpad? I'm not sure the report would be so peachy...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
``What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad? How does it turn out? Surprisingly well!''
Only if you don't know Debian and you don't know IBM ThinkPads. If you do know them, you know that Debian generally works really well. Of course, Linux support for laptop hardware isn't always stellar, but IBM seems to actually have made an effort to ensure their hardware, including ThinkPads, played nice with Linux. Alas, Lenovo seems to have no intention of continuing that tradition.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I just did the exact same thing myself. I don't know what type of computer this guy had, but I installed Etch on a Thinkpad 390X this past Friday. (That's like a 5 year old at least model I got for $40 used...) It went suprisingly simply actually. It even detected my wireless card no problems, which really surprised me.
The only hitch in the procedure that is even sorta the fault of Linux is that I don't know how to get it so that the computer will hibernate/resume.
I'm not sure if I am correct here, but I believe that this particular user had customized KDE with the Redmond KWin window border theme that ships with KDE.
This page describes install of Debian Etch on Dell Inspiron 1150, including tweaks for Compiz and Truecrypt encryption.
The only hitch in the procedure that is even sorta the fault of Linux is that I don't know how to get it so that the computer will hibernate/resume.
Oh yeah, and my sound card doesn't work.
Totally off topic, but the real question in my mind is why do the two most popular GUI's for Linux insist upon copying Windows in the first place? OSX provded that you do not need a start button to have a good GUI. I'd like Linux a lot better if the developers could get a little more original with the GUI. Or if they'd at least target a *good* GUI to copy ;-)
Personally, I don't use a windows-like theme at all, but the answer is that the Windows look and feel is familiar to people who are moving from Windows to Linux (easier transition) or who work in both environments on a regular basis (consistency.) I would have thought this is obvious...
But the better they get at copying the Windows look and feel, the less reason there is to switch. I would have thought that was obvious.
Only on Slashdot would me-tooism be celebrated as a virtue.
And now, a PSA from David Lynch.
Does this mean that year 2007 will be the YEAR OF LINUX DESKTOP?
I kid, i kid! =)
I don't know about this article. The author wasn't able to completely fill his desktop with icons.
Well, for two reasons. The first is that it makes it easier for new users to switch to GNU/Linux, and the second is that it is a pretty good system (*gasp*).
I mean, think about it. What are the parts that are copied? Similar looking and placed minimize, maximize, close buttons, a menu button, some sort of a menu and panels. Those are all very useful. Their exact location and appearance is there because it is more familiar to Windows users. It is fairly easy to change, too.
For example, my setup is as follows:
A Mac OSX-esque panel thing at the bottom (autohides). It has some of the programs I use regularly). I use the Mist GNOME theme, with a Close button (looks like an X) in the left corner, centered title text (this took editing raw XML to accomplish, BTW, since Mist has title text aligned to the left, by default), and a minimize button on the right. There is no maximize button, because that effect can be accomplished by double-clicking on the title bar. At the top, there is a short panel with the menu, weather, workspace switcher, window list, sound applet, language applet, notification area, sticky-notes applet, power supply applet, networking applet and clock applet.
This FUD ? again ? Ubuntu is free of charge and always will. Canonical want to make money on SUPPORT.
But it's a good idea to look at Debian from time to time. And anyway as an Ubuntu user, I consider to be part of the Debian family.
The "dear editor" should try installing Etch on a LENOVO-built T60p, and then maybe, just maybe I'll be impressed!! (Writing this on an IBM-built T42p while my brand new LENOVO-built T60p languishes!!!)
i know i sound like a fanboy, but i simply love debian...
to the point of tattooing the swirl on my left arm.
and windowmaker's icon in my back.
and yes, i'm as geek as geek can be.
What ? Me, worry ?
That's why they include WindowMaker. No START button and simple interface.
Indeed. I always like to think this is a sign of newbs. If you need to overwrite the files a package maintainer maintains, what good is a package maintainer anymore? He has three paths from here:
/usr/local.
A. Keep doing what he is doing, and suffer compounded problems in the long run. (Which is why I think he is a newb, as most people learn this lesson early).
B. Deal with what his package manager gives him.
C. _Understand_ his system and the intimacies of his package manager. Prevent problems before they happen. Install in
People aren't switching for the GUI, they're switching for the price. The GUI is one of the reasons they stick with windows.
(Statements apply to the vast majority of non-technical people I know; the people who know what they're doing and *do* swap for the interface know how to set a non-default WM)
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
Well,
/Apps in your filesystem and find all of your applications by their name and icon... try doing the same with any Linux distro /usr/bin.
/Apps folder. MacOSX for instance only keeps the "userland" applications there.
The problem is that MacOSX has this "Application Folder" concept, so you can just browse to
To be able to provide the same simplicity we must change the current layout of the Linux filesystem, I know at least one Linux distro that have done this: GOBO Linux.
Gobo use a rather radical approach to the problem, where every application goes under the
---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
So your assumption is that Linux's different UI is one of the reasons which would motivate someone to switch from MS Windows to Linux?
If it has the "same" UI as Windows, then the UI ceases to be a reason to switch?
Well, I did not switch for this reason (and frankly don't think anyone switches to Linux because of it's UI). On the contrary. I thought and felt that the UI differences were more of a challenge against my decision to switch than an incentive. I knew that I would have a lot of learning and readjusting to do, having used Windows and DOS for so long.
At the end, in my case, the UI differences weren't much of a barrier, since I had some experience with an other UI (had used OS/2) and was well motivated by the freemdoms of the GPL and the absence of a license fee. Actually learning a new UI that has it's own virtues was actually fun for me.
Nevertheless, I generally regard UIs that need active learning to use as a barrier to technology adoption. (I.e. except when the challenge is fun.)
Therefore, UI similarities with Windows are not a virtue, but a chosen tactic to lower the difference barrier that can avert switchers. (And that doesn't mean Linux does not have UI features/virtues that I use and I miss when I have to use Windows at work. It has and I do.)
Therefore, having the "same" UI doesn't mean one less reason to switch, nor is it considered a virtue.
____________________
On the other hand, if aliens started mimicking the Windows Start button and UI on their systems, UseIt.com wouldn't have much to "complain" about Usability in the Movies and the UIs in the movies would be a lot more dull :-)
Suprisingly, linux separates userland utilities already - well at least debian does. Check your /usr/bin folder and compare to /usr/sbin. Alternatively, compare /sbin and /bin.
The reason it doesn't work so well to do it the way you suggested is because there is a lot of gray area. Every person, company, shareware maker, vendor, etc. is going to have a different opinion of where software should go. Just look at unix in general or even other distros (besides debian/ubuntu/gentoo). Apple can do it without few issues because they are the sole authority on their OS. What's the difference between MS and Apple again?
Ubuntu may always be "free of charge," but that doesn't mean it will always be free in the way that really matters. The Ubuntu team has already begun shipping binary blobs in the kernel, non-free wireless drivers, and proprietary nvidia drivers in their standard, default setup. Debian's primary goal is to be a free (as in free speech) operating system, and as Ubuntu diverges from that fact, it becomes difficult to argue that they're truly "part of the Debian family."