Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Distrohoppers, assemble! DE experiences on different distros
#21
(10-27-2018, 11:14 AM)spudnuts Wrote: I still have cds of things like caldera,lindows, and mandrake but if you want to try older distros you can find nearly all of them just using a search engine and if you can't get it there you can use the internet archive for instance I have mint from version 1 to 19 on a hdd as iso files.

I remember the first days of Linux Mint. On my machine it was broken as hell. It was my second tryst into Linux. About a year after my tryst with Red Hat when you used to be able to buy it in a store.
Reply
#22
HP Pavilion: 17"/AMD A8/1TB HDD/8GB RAM

For the last year I have hoped around, but I am into Fedora 29 at the moment. Mint was my first distro, and it helped me to get into Linux. Cinnamon is my #2 DE because it is that halfway mastery between Xfce and KDE, and it has a more intuitive feel than MATE`.

I love Gnome. Fedora became my daily driver because it is the latest version of vanilla Gnome, the most recent released packages (but no beta versions like Arch), and it has the backing of Redhat and now IBM. It feels more solid and yet elegant more like a BMW to Ubuntu's Honda. Fedora does not have PPAs and some of its other goofiness. I want to love Ubuntu because it is a great distro, but I have run into some issues with PPAs. There are a few PPAs for Cinnamon, and finding the current version became a chore.

The one problem that I have is that I need a working version of Jabref for the work that I do as a Grad Student and Academic. The version of JabRef in the Fedora repositories does not install (in the terminal because it is not in the store), the snap will not run, the app-image site has an entry without a file to download, and Flatpak has nothing to offer at this time. I want to compile my own, but I need directions on how to do that.

The JabRef issue has me ready to go back to Ubuntu.
Retlaw, the other soldier A.

(Numbers 6:24-26)
Reply
#23
I'm an artist so my go to is Ubuntu Studio. But I like some of the features of xubuntu. I have yet to break out of the ubuntu family. I'm curious about mint, Manjaro and others. Specifically the rollup feature on a window. I'm a fairly new Linux user. And this is one of the aspects of Linux that keeps me up at night. I've been mentally breaking down and analyzing the differences between distros and DE's. And I'm still confused..  So I am glad to have stumbled onto this thread. 
 
My main question is what the hell is Ubuntu Wayland??
Reply
#24
(02-21-2019, 09:54 AM)heymanhew Wrote: My main question is what the hell is Ubuntu Wayland??

On Linux and other Unix-oid systems (besides a few exceptions),
displaying graphics on screens is usually handled by an X-server,
to which clients (like for example libreoffice or firefox) connect
and which in turn draws the windows to the framebuffer.
The X-server however only handles the displaying,
other functions of the graphical user interface are handled by other Programs.
Examples are Window Managers, which control the size and placment of windows,
or Compositors, which make fancy effects like shadows or smooth video playback possible.


Wayland is a different, new-ish approach to drawing graphics on a screen.
Instead of providing a display server, Wayland provides a communications protocol,
which can be implemented by clients and so called Wayland-Compositors.
These Wayland-Compositors must handle what was previously handled by multiple programs
(Display server, Window Manager, Compositor, etc).


Depeding on who you ask, people will either tell you that wayland is usable or not yet usable.
If you care for my personal opinion:
I believe it is irrelevant whether Wayland is usable or not,
as the Display-Server-Model of X is vastly superior to the Wayland protocol,
as X is easiely networkable, among other necessities.
Reply
#25
(02-21-2019, 11:36 AM)leon.p Wrote: as the Display-Server-Model of X is vastly superior to the Wayland protocol,

Eeeh, it really depends on the use case. If people don't need a remote display, or to record their display (though I've heard that a screen capture API is in the works), or to run graphical programs as root, then Wayland is superior (depends on implementation) to X for the most part (edge cases always exist).
Name: Sandy Vujaković
Laptop: Dell Inspiron 3793 (17", i5)
OS: Ubuntu Groovy Gorilla
Reply
#26
(03-24-2019, 06:44 PM)elsandosgrande Wrote:
(02-21-2019, 11:36 AM)leon.p Wrote: as the Display-Server-Model of X is vastly superior to the Wayland protocol,

Eeeh, it really depends on the use case. If people don't need a remote display, or to record their display (though I've heard that a screen capture API is in the works), or to run graphical programs as root, then Wayland is superior (depends on implementation) to X for the most part (edge cases always exist).

I disagree.
X is designed as a mix-and-match system. I can choose what ever window manager I want,
combine it whatever compositor I want, wit whatever hotkey daemon I want, etc.
In wayland, a so called compositor is forced to be
1) A compositor
2) A server client-applications connect to
3) A window manager
4) And many more...

Take a look at desktop environments: They all split the tasks to multiple programs
(with the exception that sometimes a windowmanager is also a compositor),
because, as the UNIX philosophy dictates, an application should only have a single job to do.

What if you liked the window management part of a wayland compositor but not the compositing part?
On X, you could just change the compositor (like how many people use compton on XFCE), in wayland you are stuck with it.


Despite, one should not underestimate X networking:
I often run applications from virtualised systems natively on my desktop.
Reply
#27
Tongue 
(08-24-2018, 12:25 AM)alejandro Wrote: People that have been around Linux and new users might have something in common: going from one distribution to another, either out of curiosity, looking for a better experience, better support, a niche or a bigger community, etc. 

There are many reasons to distrohop, but there's something everyone notices:  A DE have a different feel depending on the distro you use.

So, assuming you have a preference on DE, what distro has the best experience for you? Why? What is different about other distros.

An example would be KDE on Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Manjaro and OpenSUSE. If I have to use KDE, I'll go with OpenSUSE every time, having Fedora KDE and Kubuntu as a backup. I don't like KDE on Debian. KDE on Manjaro is nice, but it doesn't fit my personal taste.

Obviously, since you can customize any distro as you like,  I'm talking about the out-of-the-box experience. What's the closes one to your liking as default?

Currently using Ubuntu 18.04 LTS on my Dell dual core i5 laptop.Works fine.Recently installed Mint 18.3 on my older i7 HP tower,only be cause I accidently erased Ubuntu when trying to install Pop os.Think I'll go back to ubuntu there too.Too confusing running 2 different distros for this old brain.I'm not as worried about tweaking as in having stuff just work.
Reply
#28
Running Kde Neon 5.15 atm. I didn't know if I was going to like the Plasma desktop but it is starting to grow on me. The Ubuntu 18.04 base likes my hardware so this distro might be worth sticking with for awhile.
Reply
#29
I've tried just about everything and always came back to something Debian/Ubuntu based because of it's great list of packages in the Repos and it's stability. Used MATE with Point Linux for a while then moved to Xfce and now that KDE is lighter and more stable I'm on it via Kubuntu. I'm always looking for the "Latest/Greatest" but now I normally use VirtualBox to check out new Distros instead of installing on bare metal. One of the great things about Linux is that it's Free to download and use so you can move around and check things out without any money coming out of your pocket unlike WinDoze where you have to pay to play.
Reply
#30
(03-25-2019, 07:16 PM)leon.p Wrote:
(03-24-2019, 06:44 PM)elsandosgrande Wrote:
(02-21-2019, 11:36 AM)leon.p Wrote: as the Display-Server-Model of X is vastly superior to the Wayland protocol,

Eeeh, it really depends on the use case. If people don't need a remote display, or to record their display (though I've heard that a screen capture API is in the works), or to run graphical programs as root, then Wayland is superior (depends on implementation) to X for the most part (edge cases always exist).

I disagree.
X is designed as a mix-and-match system. I can choose what ever window manager I want,
combine it whatever compositor I want, wit whatever hotkey daemon I want, etc.
In wayland, a so called compositor is forced to be
1) A compositor
2) A server client-applications connect to
3) A window manager
4) And many more...

Take a look at desktop environments: They all split the tasks to multiple programs
(with the exception that sometimes a windowmanager is also a compositor),
because, as the UNIX philosophy dictates, an application should only have a single job to do.

What if you liked the window management part of a wayland compositor but not the compositing part?
On X, you could just change the compositor (like how many people use compton on XFCE), in wayland you are stuck with it.


Despite, one should not underestimate X networking:
I often run applications from virtualised systems natively on my desktop.

One, my hat's off to you if you can make Mutter run under KDE, or make KWin run under GNOME.
Two, I am getting the feeling that this is another "To systemd, or not to systemd" kind of debate, at least from that point of view. Honestly, I find that systemd best suits me, just like Wayland.

Also, OpenGL keeps crashing KWin for some reason, but only when using Xorg/KWin never crashes on Wayland for me. I might as well also mention that libinput-gestures only works on Wayland (as well as GNOME's fractional scaling, at least for now).

EDIT: Also, I've now switched to Gentoo.
Name: Sandy Vujaković
Laptop: Dell Inspiron 3793 (17", i5)
OS: Ubuntu Groovy Gorilla
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)