Linux

Emerson Street, if I were you, I'd get an external backup drive, make an image of my windows system (verify the backup) and then try what you propose. Personally, I'd find it a pain in the neck having to go into the BIOS to choose the hard disk to boot from. I haven't had any trouble with debian installing grub and picking up windows 7 in the grub menu, but I have had issues with other distributions, and Windows 7 does get its knickers in a twist when XP wouldn't have, so I think you're right to be cautious.

If you've got a backup to restore, you can experiment and not worry about things going screwy on you.
 
Doesn't Ubuntu have it's own 'Software Center' thing these days? It's all kind of moot since the back end is 'aptitude' (or apt-get) for most of these things.

I just use aptitude on the cli. I don't recall the last time I ran Synaptic*.

Oh, and I use Mint. Ubuntu is losing the plot with Unity methinks.


* Always made me think of synapse + tic == nervous tic in the brain! :) Not encouraging :D
 
Last edited:
Donn said:
Doesn't Ubuntu have it's own 'Software Center' thing these days? It's all kind of moot since the back end is 'aptitude' (or apt-get) for most of these things.

I just use aptitude on the cli. I don't recall the last time I ran Synaptic*.

Oh, and I use Mint. Ubuntu is losing the plot with Unity methinks.


* Always made me think of synapse + tic == nervous tic in the brain! :) Not encouraging :D
Click to expand...

I use the Synaptic package manager (yes, that's what I was talking about) to install and uninstall specific packages.

When uninstalling with the software centre, certain packages stay behind, clogging up the works, so to speak.

Oh, and Unity is also a big factor in my considerations, but that's old news.
 
I am pretty darn sure that Ubuntu will always have something like Synaptic in it, so I wouldn't worry about it. Perhaps the new Software center will be easier to use.
If you are worried about the bits and bytes of packages etc. then you need to be on the command line (cli) anyway - so then use apt-get and apt-cache and company. (Or, as I mentioned, use 'aptitude'.)

Synaptic may be using older libraries that Ubuntu is moving away from. I know this is a 'problem' in the Linux world as things evolve and splinter it's hard to keep software stable. My own floss software is getting long-in-the-tooth and I fear I won't have the energy to keep it current. (Just a hypothesis.)
 
Donn said:
I am pretty darn sure that Ubuntu will always have something like Synaptic in it, so I wouldn't worry about it. Perhaps the new Software center will be easier to use.
If you are worried about the bits and bytes of packages etc. then you need to be on the command line (cli) anyway - so then use apt-get and apt-cache and company. (Or, as I mentioned, use 'aptitude'.)

Synaptic may be using older libraries that Ubuntu is moving away from. I know this is a 'problem' in the Linux world as things evolve and splinter it's hard to keep software stable. My own floss software is getting long-in-the-tooth and I fear I won't have the energy to keep it current. (Just a hypothesis.)
Click to expand...

That could be it. If it is, then they'd better make the Software Center with the inclusion of the ability to remove residual packages. I use the CLI plenty, but when browsing packages, a GUI just has its advantages.
 
Donn said:
Did you just dis the old IBM keyboards? The ones that go "clack!"? You insensitive clod! :)

I still have a love-on for them. My brother in law recently found one in a stack of old pc's at work. He has it at home now, on his Ubuntu server. He clacks at me and smiles beatifically. I grimace. Me want.
Click to expand...

I can remember seeing 'keyboard repairs' adverts in mags like 'Creative Computing' and "Compute!"

Considering that you could bludgeon somebody with oldskool IBM keyboards, wipe off the blood and get back to work, I wonder, aside from coffee accidents, could possibly damage them!
 
'Stop that friggin' clacking!"

"But I'm hacking eBay for your birthday present..."

"Oh. Ok, then. As you were."
 
I am on Fedora 16 now after giving Crunchbang a try. Crunchbang gave a significant performance boost with video playback on my netbook. I decided to try it our when I found Pardus struggling badly with a HD video file, as well as stuttering a fair bit with YouTube vids. Crunchbang was spartan but solid. I may well return but playing with different distros is an addiction.

Fedora is a different experience than I remember from a couple of years ago. It's interesting not having minimize and maximize buttons on native windows but its training me into new working habits. I haven't tested out the hefty video file but I suspect it will have similar problems to Pardus.
 
RANT! Right, that's it. Gnome is almost as good as dead to me.

I just installed Ubuntu 11.10 yesterday, to see how good it was, in order to find out whether I would make the jump to 12.04 when it comes out.

I installed Gnome 3 immediately, because Unity (which will not be mentioned hereafter) doesn't do it for me. Maybe I'll try it later on, but I wanted to try the new and improved Gnome first. I'd been dying to get it out for a test drive, and this was my moment.

After a fairly shaky start (I accidentally didn't take the .gnote folder with me, losing all my notes in the process (I copied the .gnome2 folder in stead, stupid me)), I found my footing in Gnome shell.

Things went okay, until I wanted to start my usual array of background programs, which resided in the notification area in gnome 2.x. Imagine my surprise when they didn't do that. In stead, I had to go search for the notification area, finding out that it's hidden from sight in the lower right hand corner. Are they crazy? It's a notification area, not a nothing to see here area.
Add to that the annoying fact that when you hover over an icon it folds out to show the name of the program. I am not an idiot. If I hover over anything, a tag with the name of it shows up, and since that functionality is not gone, having the name show up twice merely furthers my annoyance. Sure it means that in emsene you have a history function when you click the text, but I really don't care about that. When I use a notification area, I just want to hover over, click the icon and show the window. I don't want to hover over the icon, wait until the text rolls out, and THEN move to the icon again (because it moves to the left to accommodate the text) and THEN click to show the window.

Another thing is the absence of a window list. Sure, they have the slick dash, but you can's access the dash from the window in which you're working. Oh, no. They make you go to the upper left hand corner to do that.
I want to change to a new window with the click of the mouse, and not via a mouse movement. No, Alt-Tab is not a good alternative, because it means that, before I can select the program I want to use, I first have to use a keyboard command, royally ruining any work-flow I still had.

That brings me nicely to the hierarchical drop-down menu for selecting programs.
What's that you say? There is no hierarchical drop-down menu for selecting programs? Well, that's just it. I want such a menu.

As if that's not enough, I can't add any applets to the panel by myself. I can't change the place of the panel, and I can't add any other panels. I can't even change the colour or background image.
I guess user customisation isn't as needed as I thought it was.

Extensions are available, sure. But when I enabled the "Bottom Pane" extension, it hid the notification area, which doesn't move above the panel.
And when I enabled the "application menu", it had categories you had to open by clicking, and not by hovering, adding to the annoyance on another level.
In short, extensions aren't real fixes of all problems, they are merely ways to feel like you're not completely powerless.


Gnome wanted to make things more integrated, but they decided to de-emphasise the user in the process.

And if that makes me sound like a cry-baby who doesn't get what he's used to, then so be it. I mean, I have a lot of programs that are Gnome dependent, and moving to KDE or XFCE (or even Lxde) wouldn't solve the problem. Trust me, I've looked at all three.

Before Gnome Shell, I just went on with things. Now, I habitually walk into walls with things I want to do.

If anyone knows of a good Gnome alternative (as in, fork) that is usable already, don't hesitate to let me know.
 
Gnome 3 terrifies me. I am still on Mint ...um ... something point something .. jeez .. maybe two years old now? I will need to jump to something modern soon and I am just ... nervous.

Stop posting such horrible stories! You make meh unhappeh :)
 
Donn said:
Gnome 3 terrifies me. I am still on Mint ...um ... something point something .. jeez .. maybe two years old now? I will need to jump to something modern soon and I am just ... nervous.

Stop posting such horrible stories! You make meh unhappeh :)
Click to expand...

You know what they say about warned people, right?

On a more positive note, the extensions aren't nearly as bad as I'd thought. They aren't a sufficient fix to keep me completely, but they're good enough to hold me until I've found a better alternative.
 
Something is annoying me about Gnome 3 and Fedora 16 is that it wants me to put my laptop into suspend mode while I prefer a full power down. I don't think I should have to get under the hood to fix that sort of thing. Fedora is not gong to last much longer on this system.
 
True. I am duly warned.

I was around for the KDE 3 to 4 fiasco. Oh the pain. That's when I jumped to Gnome. I could have lived with KDE 4 but so much stuff was broken. Crashes, rects on the screen dumping random bytes, old beloved apps totally hobbled. It was awful.

Sounds like the same has come for Gnome. Did Micro$oft get moles into the works? :)

Ah well, boo hoo. Am sure I will adjust.

I *think* the current release of Mint uses Gnome 2 still, so that will carry me a few years. Maybe past the rough seas of early versions.

On the gnome/gtk apps in <other> desktop issue: it's been my experience that these things generally work. Just install the relevant libs (which apt will do) and you probably won't notice beyond oddball style shifts.

Only the Gnote front. Hey baby! I use that too. I shun mono and was so happy to see Tomboy redone in something native.
 
I'm curious, given all the animosity I read toward Unity and Gnome 3, why I'm not seeing more commentary being given to KDE.

I like KDE. I soured on Gnome way back in Red Hat Linux 5 (that was before Fedora Core restarted the numbering at 1 again, and Fedora is now up to 16) when its internet dialing tool didn't work. I tried the one in KDE and it worked flawlessly the first time. I've been using KDE ever since.

I find it flexible, configurable, easy to use, and with lots of little things that make my life easier. For example I like to use Alt-Tab to switch windows. As I press the tab key to go to the next window, the border of the window in question is highlighted. That means I can look at the window I want to switch to, even if it's on a different monitor, and press Alt-Tab until I see the border highlighted.

Something I don't see with KDE is this idea of "let's just throw out everything we've done in the past an implement a whole new way of doing things." The changes in KDE are much more incremental. KDE 4 is in many ways quite different from KDE 1, but because the changes were evolutionary instead of revolutionary the "WTF?!" moments are radically reduced in number.
 
I also started on Redhat 5. Free CD from a nascent brother in law. :)

KDE was my desktop for years. I would have stayed there but, as mentioned, KDE4 just did not work on my pc. It was too hacky when it came out, plus I think my 3D card is now too old for anyone to care about. This is why I am worried about Unity/Gnome3 and KDE4 - I can't afford new hardware willy nilly.
I was on Kubuntu at the time, jumped to Ubuntu and thence to Mint.

My fave KDE apps were Konqueror (the best file manager ever) and Kmail. The Konsole was also superior to anything I have seen in gnome land. The desktop was better than Gnome 2.
In vers 4 (kubuntu distro), both Konqueror and Kmail were badly gutted and hobbled; that shocked me. I left KDEville soon after.

I guess it's chance and reaction. I don't think any of the desktops are significantly superior. Maybe Gnome2 will surprise me.
 
Blue Mountain said:
I'm curious, given all the animosity I read toward Unity and Gnome 3, why I'm not seeing more commentary being given to KDE.

I like KDE. I soured on Gnome way back in Red Hat Linux 5 (that was before Fedora Core restarted the numbering at 1 again, and Fedora is now up to 16) when its internet dialing tool didn't work. I tried the one in KDE and it worked flawlessly the first time. I've been using KDE ever since.

I find it flexible, configurable, easy to use, and with lots of little things that make my life easier. For example I like to use Alt-Tab to switch windows. As I press the tab key to go to the next window, the border of the window in question is highlighted. That means I can look at the window I want to switch to, even if it's on a different monitor, and press Alt-Tab until I see the border highlighted.

Something I don't see with KDE is this idea of "let's just throw out everything we've done in the past an implement a whole new way of doing things." The changes in KDE are much more incremental. KDE 4 is in many ways quite different from KDE 1, but because the changes were evolutionary instead of revolutionary the "WTF?!" moments are radically reduced in number.
Click to expand...

Have you been living in a cave? There was an immense falling out over how buggy KDE 4 was.

But you're right though. Incremental really is the way to go. I can still remember when I switched from Firefox 2 to 3 (I was using Windows at the time I think). Boy, that was a change.


You know what, if I can find adequate KDE 4 alternatives for many of the Gnome dependent programs I use, I might switch to that after all. It can't be worse than Gnome 3. Right? I mean, does KDE still give the user all freedom to change things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom