1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Linux users?

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by embellisher, Mar 12, 2006.


  1. same here...actually i tried running the Kubuntu liveCD and it didn't even work...

    anyways, as far as cd/mp3 players, i had a degree of success with XMMS and Realplayer, which although i hate in windows, i was happy to see something familiar when i first started linux :)
    personally i like GNOME, and that can do everything i want it too...very nice interface i thought...
     
  2. phxlbrmpf

    phxlbrmpf

    Dec 27, 2002
    Germany
    I recently installed Ubuntu and added Kubuntu later on, and it looks as if Kubuntu's stability has come a long way, I've been playing around with it for a while and didn't have a single crash. I really like KDE a lot, it looks really stylish and feels very functional.
     
  3. winston

    winston Supporting Member

    May 2, 2000
    East Bay, CA
    This is a dangerous statement! If you mount writeable partitions with a live CD you can easily erase/change information.

    I don't understand the KDE-hating going on either. The fact that Ubuntu's implementation of KDE is glitchy doesn't mean that that's the case in other distros. Slackware stopped including GNOME starting around v.10 due to concerns about stability and difficulty of packaging for their small dev team.

    I find GNOME prettier, but having gotten used to the functionality of KDE's Konqueror file/web browser and other integrated tools I find the native GNOME offerings to be lacking. Lack of easy menu updating in GNOME is a pain. I do use GNOME in Planet CCRMA/Fedora Core 4 because Fedora's KDE implementation sucks.

    There's also a lot to be said for using smaller desktop managers like XFCE4, FluxBox, and WindowMaker. I haven't quite figured out Enlightenment/E17 but the screenshots I've seen are very snazzy.

    Regarding multi-boot setups with Window$, I haven't had any problems with two versions of PlanetCCRMA (FC3/4), 2 versions of Vector, Slackware, and Mepis residing alongside 3 Win partitions. Be sure to defrag your Win partitions just to be safe and back up your data. I resized my NTFS partition without any data loss.

    You don't absolutely need a /boot partition. I installed and ran Ubuntu with the /boot on the / (root) partition with no problems. My choice for partitioning involves /, swap, and a /data partition so I can share data easily between distros. Here's a good how-to on the subject: http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/11802.html
     
  4. AspiringBassMan

    AspiringBassMan

    Dec 10, 2005
    UK
    not true about the stability part. gnome has greater stability than kde because its more modular. its also significantly easier to debug. the ONLY reason why gnome was dropped was because gnome is made up of lots of small libraries whereas kde is made up of a few large libraries, thereby taking a lot longer to install because it all requires compiling from source.

    true. i have installed linux without one in the past. the boot info is written to and contained in the MBR.
     
  5. I don't know either...i actually like KDE more than GNOME, but GNOME is a perfectly capable WM.
    And i also didn't make a boot partition and i didn't have any problems either
     
  6. AspiringBassMan

    AspiringBassMan

    Dec 10, 2005
    UK
    its not a windows manager ;). its a desktop environment. many people seem to make that mistake and they're totally different. a desktop environment includes a window manager together with all the other components (eg panel, etc) and the associated libraries. examples of a windows manager are metacity(the default one used in gnome) and kwin(the one used in kde).
     
  7. ok...i must have confused it when i was reading about the low memory install for ubuntu, it recomended that i install iceWM, and i guess i just figured that since it had me install that and not Gnome, they must both be the same, and they said that IceWM was a windows manager (hence the wm) so i assumed that they were both windows managers...
     
  8. Gnome (and KDE) are window managers plus a lot of other stuff. If you were to install IceWM on a system that already had Gnome or KDE installed then you'd be able to select that window manager rather than the default.
     
  9. AspiringBassMan

    AspiringBassMan

    Dec 10, 2005
    UK
    yup, iceWM is just a window manager. its posible to use metacity on its own without gnome, but i'm not aware that its possible to use kwin without kde because they are much more entwined. if you just use a window manger, you won't get all the libraries such as librsvg, libxml, etc or the panel etc or many applications that often come with a gnome desktop environment. many people chose to run only a window manager because they are often significantly faster without all the 'baggage' thats installed with a desktop environment. the main thing that slows a desktop environment down is all the libraries that have to be loaded too, but thats not a prerequisite with (most) window managers. thats why you will find that gnome is a lot quicker if as little as possible of kde is installed...and visa versa. the snappiest window manager of all that i know of is blackbox because its so minimal.
     
  10. I wouldn't be surprised if Ratpoison beat it. Blackbox seems to draw a bunch of fancy window decorations, which must suck up resources.
    0
     
  11. Sometimes it's useful to use the term Window Manager as a coverall, rather than having to say "Which desktop environment or window manager do you use". Not all of us are pedantic enough to have to point out the difference.
     
  12. AspiringBassMan

    AspiringBassMan

    Dec 10, 2005
    UK
    its better to be correct than not. given that there are a lot of newbies reading the thread and who want to learn, why give something the wrong name and confuse people needlessly? its a bit like referring to a "a bass", "a mandolin", and "a cello" during a music training programme by the name of "a guitar" because they've all got strings. and then someone comes along and says "Not all of us are pedantic enough to have to point out the difference"
     
  13. Nice try, but that's not an apposite analogy. No one would try refering to those instruments under one collective name (except perhaps strings), whereas there's a finer line between a window manager and a desktop environment (just look at enlightenment, refering to itself as a 'desktop shell'). The difference is trivial and to most users would make no difference.
     
  14. Oh man....another geek fight is starting up again...

    Gnome and KDE are fully-integrated desktop environments whereas IceWM, Blackbox, Fluxbox, and XCE are simply window managers...it's like the difference between really old versions of Windows (pre 3.0) and Win9x/XP (one's a prettier interface to the command line while the other is fully integrated into the system...and I agree these distinctions are trivial to n00bs...<ducks and hides>
    :bag:
     
  15. AspiringBassMan

    AspiringBassMan

    Dec 10, 2005
    UK
    there's no trying about it. just stating facts where they should be stated. there's a world of difference between a desktop environment and a window manager. lets see what happens when a newbie is asked what window manager he/she is using for gnome, whether it be enlightenment, compiz, metacity, rox, blackbox, or whatever.
    you're not helping newbies by muddying the waters.
    http://www.tuxfiles.org/linuxhelp/xwtf.html
    using window manager and desktop environment interchangably is just lazy thinking. its like referring to basses as guitars.
     
  16. patrickj

    patrickj

    Aug 13, 2001
    Ellicott City, MD
    Endorsing: Spector Bass Guitars
    Another linux user here. I've been a Linux user since the old old Yggdrasil and Slackware 1.0 floppy days. Used Redhat up until about version 7 iirc, then had a mild affair with Mandrake. Now I use Ubuntu (PPC / x86) and OSX.

    FVWM2 forever!
     
  17. Trevor.A

    Trevor.A

    Jan 2, 2005
    Lubbock, TX
    I've always wanted to use Linux, but the only thing holding me back is my games. What would I need to do to run my games (HL2, CS:S, BF2, D3) with Linux? I would love to finally git rid of M$...
     
  18. You'll probably want to keep a Windows partition around for those games. I've heard success stories about running HL2 and CS:S in Wine. Dunno about BF2. Doom 3 has a native port, available from id's ftp server, so no worries there.

    Don't hesitate to check out the excellent Linux games available. Take a look at Tremulous, Cube, Sauerbraten, Nexuiz, and Warsow for starters, since you seem to like FPSes. They're no substitute for games you like, of course, but they're a lot of fun too.
     
  19. Trevor.A

    Trevor.A

    Jan 2, 2005
    Lubbock, TX
    Looks like a Windows partition would be best as few of my games will run seamlessly. I found Cedega but I'm to cheap to pay the $5/month. Those games look pretty cool, I'll definitely check 'em out.
    So which version is best to start out on? i have a cd that lets you boot into Linux, just to get a feel for it and see what it's like.
     
  20. The apt repository of debian based systems makes them quite attractive IF you have broadband. I quite like ubuntu, but it comes without non-free codec support (mp3, dvd etc). Easily fixed through the repository by installing all the gstreamer codecs.

    I also like Vector, and I used to use slackware, but it can be a pain to install software as a beginner on it.

    Ubuntu has a 1 CD live edition so you can boot to linux from CD with no change to your PC. Perhaps give that a go? If you want to see amazing xgl effects then try Kororaa, but I warn you that once I got over the effect of amazing visuals, I found it hard to use.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.