Linux

[strongbad]

Any linux users here? I've always been a linux admirer, as I've always wanted to use it, but it was never extremely practical and I'm lazy. But I have some free time so I'm going to partition my laptop's HDD for linux mint alongside win7 (for gaming). Just interested in hearing about other boyager's experiences using linux.
I'm currently waiting for linux mint to release the torrents for LM12. The direct downloads were released on the mirrors earlier today, but they haven't posted anything on the official site. I'd just do those but my home connection is too unstable for direct downloads, so torrents are essential for large files.
itt linux

[snoorkel]

I use various Linux distros on a daily basis in my ~line of work

Personally I prefer RHEL systems (Fedora is the main open source desktop variant) over Debian (Ubuntu, Mint, etc) because the filesystem is setup much more efficiently and package management is easier.

Where desktops are concerned, I like KDE a lot more than GNOME which is the default for Ubuntu/Mint. In my opinion it's much more flexible and easier to modify and manipulate, also I've heard Ubuntu is implementing some very annoying changes in GNOME for newer releases.

For a REAL Linux experience, I would look into Fedora... It's just as accessible and supported as Ubuntu, with the drawback of being slightly less noob-friendly. I would recommend against Mint as I think its 'features' are mainly bloat. Kubuntu (Ubuntu + KDE default) has consistently been my favorite Debian variant for installing on personal machines for daily use.

Or you could have some fun and try something like openSUSE or Arch Linux  

[bluaki]

I'm using Arch Linux right now and it's currently the main OS I use. I just switched from Ubuntu like two weeks ago. I've pretty much been using Linux all the time (except when streaming) for like a year and a half now

Rather than using a full desktop environment like GNOME or KDE, I'm currently just using the Awesome window manager for basic interface and a couple Xfce applications like its file manager.

I've heard Ubuntu is implementing some very annoying changes in GNOME for newer releases.

Actually, in their default (since April), they simply replace the entire GNOME interface with their own. GNOME is really only used for like the file manager, settings dialogues, and service-type stuff now.

I would recommend against Mint as I think its 'features' are mainly bloat.

Last I checked, I agree with this and felt like all the "Mint Extras" were things I would absolutely never use. But I heard that the most recent Mint release actually fixes up the mess of an interface GNOME 3 has by default in a way that other distros don't (easily) have.

[snoorkel]

I'm using Arch Linux right now and it's currently the main OS I use. I just switched from Ubuntu like two weeks ago. I've pretty much been using Linux all the time (except when streaming) for like a year and a half now

Rather than using a full desktop environment like GNOME or KDE, I'm currently just using the Awesome window manager for basic interface and a couple Xfce applications like its file manager.

Last I checked, I agree with this and felt like all the "Mint Extras" were things I would absolutely never use. But I heard that the most recent Mint release actually fixes up the mess of an interface GNOME 3 has by default in a way that other distros don't (easily) have.

Nice, how is using Arch? I've set it up for a few clients but never actually tried using it as a desktop OS. Post screens!!!

Actually, in their default (since April), they simply replace the entire GNOME interface with their own. GNOME is really only used for like the file manager, settings dialogues, and service-type stuff now.

Got it, that would be easy to remedy then.

[strongbad]

I actually really like the way that the new mint release looks. I'm sure that I could get a more solid linux experience from other distros, but mint seems extremely accessible, looks nice, and should suffice for everything that I need it for.

[bluaki]

Got it, that would be easy to remedy then.

Technically speaking, the GNOME packages included with Ubuntu for use with Unity (the name for Ubuntu's interface) are recompiled with special changes, but that doesn't have any noticeable effect to Ubuntu users as far as I know and lets users still add the (seemingly normal) full GNOME environment after apt-get downloads a hoard of stuff.

It does, however, make installing Unity on any non-Ubuntu distro require a whole set of replacement GNOME packages outside that distro's normal repository.

Nice, how is using Arch? I've set it up for a few clients but never actually tried using it as a desktop OS. Post screens!!!

Arch itself was rather easy to set up and use (I quickly liked it better than Ubuntu), but my transitioning away from GNOME2 at the same time managed to be the source of much more significant configuration hassles with network and audio. I still haven't figured out how to, with Arch, do proper hotplug (dhcp + auto-enable) internet sharing over an extra ethernet port which networkmanager-gnome allowed with just one dropdown box item.

There was a desktop posting thread in the lobby just a couple days ago that I posted in. There's not really anything visually to show off about this setup.

I actually really like the way that the new mint release looks. I'm sure that I could get a more solid linux experience from other distros, but mint seems extremely accessible, looks nice, and should suffice for everything that I need it for.

Mint works. For any new or casual Linux user, I'd personally suggest going for any Ubuntu derivative/version. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Lubuntu are all simple and good for their respective environments and Mint is probably now a good close option for GNOME 3.

I'm not familiar with RHEL-based distros like Snorkel suggested, but I believe it's easier to find extra software packaged for .deb (Ubuntu/Mint/Debian) than .rpm (Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS) in case you want anything not in default respositories. There's probably more applicable online guides for Ubuntu-like things as well.

[snoorkel]

Technically speaking, the GNOME packages included with Ubuntu for use with Unity (the name for Ubuntu's interface) are recompiled with special changes, but that doesn't have any noticeable effect to Ubuntu users as far as I know and lets users still add the (seemingly normal) full GNOME environment after apt-get downloads a hoard of stuff.

It does, however, make installing Unity on any non-Ubuntu distro require a whole set of replacement GNOME packages outside that distro's normal repository.
Arch itself was rather easy to set up and use (I quickly liked it better than Ubuntu), but my transitioning away from GNOME2 at the same time managed to be the source of much more significant configuration hassles with network and audio. I still haven't figured out how to, with Arch, do proper hotplug (dhcp + auto-enable) internet sharing over an extra ethernet port which networkmanager-gnome allowed with just one dropdown box item.

There was a desktop posting thread in the lobby just a couple days ago that I posted in. There's not really anything visually to show off about this setup.
Mint works. For any new or casual Linux user, I'd personally suggest going for any Ubuntu derivative/version. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and Lubuntu are all simple and good for their respective environments and Mint is probably now a good close option for GNOME 3.

I'm not familiar with RHEL-based distros like Snorkel suggested, but I believe it's easier to find extra software packaged for .deb (Ubuntu/Mint/Debian) than .rpm (Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS) in case you want anything not in default respositories. There's probably more applicable online guides for Ubuntu-like things as well.

There is just as much development support for rpm softwares as deb, but it would only be more unknown packages that are available for just one or the other, anyway... Ubuntu is best for online documentation, though. They have a pretty sizable support forum where everything is in one place, compared to Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS bug fixes spread around random mailing lists and third party forums

I recommend Kubuntu again, really think it would be better than Mint (it's the same base, except more compact and robust, and easier to start tweaking immediately).

[the shortest route to the sea]

OpenSUSE seemed like a clunky and less-intense version of Ubuntu when I used it, I'd decide against it. It is an "easier" linux, though.

[strongbad]

There is just as much development support for rpm softwares as deb, but it would only be more unknown packages that are available for just one or the other, anyway... Ubuntu is best for online documentation, though. They have a pretty sizable support forum where everything is in one place, compared to Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS bug fixes spread around random mailing lists and third party forums

I recommend Kubuntu again, really think it would be better than Mint (it's the same base, except more compact and robust, and easier to start tweaking immediately).

Can you explain a little more why Kubuntu is a better option? Like specifically.

[strongbad]

downloading the latest kubuntu release alongside LM. I'll just dick around with them in virtual box to see which one works better for my needs.

[snoorkel]

downloading the latest kubuntu release alongside LM. I'll just dick around with them in virtual box to see which one works better for my needs.

good idea. I just like Kubuntu more because I think it's more robust in structure and included packages, plus comes with KDE which imo is easier and more fun to extend than GNOME

[?????]

I've been using Linux for a long time.