Current Events > Did you switch to Linux?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I put Linux on a couple of ancient laptops I had that because I wanted a clean slate. Im so seldom on a laptop though that I really cant say if I prefer Linux over Windows lol

I do have an old HP Stream laptop that i think has a celeron and 2GB of ram that I would not mind reviving... I loved it when it was able to run windows 8.1 well, it's such a comfortable to use little machine.

Can Linux work well on something that limited? And by "work well" I mean like watch youtube witout lagging.

El_Dustino posted...

I do have an old HP Stream laptop that i think has a celeron and 2GB of ram that I would not mind reviving... I loved it when it was able to run windows 8.1 well, it's such a comfortable to use little machine.

Can Linux work well on something that limited? And by "work well" I mean like watch youtube witout lagging.

It will run better than Windows. But with hardware that weak, no OS will be able to fully rescue it, YouTube will lag bad.

El_Dustino posted...

celeron

*Vomits profusely everywhere*

Rai_Jin posted...

windows 10 gets updates for a while in europe, and even if not I'm waiting some years and maybe get linux with next pc. When they figure out they don't need 100 different versions.

That's not going to change because "linux" as an OS is a misnomer. It's not an OS but a Kernel.

RasterGraphic posted...

That's not going to change because "linux" as an OS is a misnomer. It's not an OS but a Kernel.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

El_Dustino posted...

I do have an old HP Stream laptop that i think has a celeron and 2GB of ram that I would not mind reviving... I loved it when it was able to run windows 8.1 well, it's such a comfortable to use little machine.

Can Linux work well on something that limited? And by "work well" I mean like watch youtube witout lagging.

I've tried tons of lightweight distros on several craptops and the one that stands out is MX Linux.

Rai_Jin posted...

windows 10 gets updates for a while in europe, and even if not I'm waiting some years and maybe get linux with next pc. When they figure out they don't need 100 different versions.

Who is "they" out of curiosity?

FL81 posted...

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

Is that a copy pasta?

Still probably useful for the user I responding to though.

No, I have Windows 11, and enjoy gaming.

RasterGraphic posted...

Is that a copy pasta?

Kinda. It's something Richard Stallman literally made an account on some forum in ancient history to post in a thread about Linux

I would like to add that while Linux is highly segmented and that is indeed almost part of the point. It's not nearly as bad as it sounds.

Yes, there's (likely) hundreds of distros, maybe over a thousand.

Most are non-serious hobby projects and can be ignored. Anyone can build a distro, "GNU/Linux" can be thought up as more of a toolset to do so.

In reality, there are maybe only maybe about 10 mainstream distros that really matter. More if you count niche ones, but only more advanced users have a reason to care.

It is then further grouped into about a 3 or 4 main "tribes". Debian based, Arch based, RedHat based, and Ubuntu based (which is just Debian based with extra steps). They each have their own quirks, benefits, and drawbacks.

Go for Ubuntu/Debian based if you want something that just works.

Go for Arch based if you're a more advanced user and are already pretty comfortable with the environment.

The audience for Red Hat is a mix of the two.

Basically, Debian distros are pretty compatable with other Debian distros, and so on.

And there is still a lot of inter-compatability between the families, albeit often with some mild fiddling.

The general layout and structure of each distro is almost always about the same.

The main differences are the package manager, the desktop environment, the philosophy behind package (software) releases, and the included utilities.

I'm a complete moron and I do this shit for the most part.

The segmentation isn't going to change, like ever. But distros are rarely entirely alien from one another.

Instead of learning distros, learn about the general file system layout you can expect, the difference between terms like "bleeding edge" , "stable" and "rolling release". Basic BASH shell commands (--help can save your life), most have direct analogs to the Windows command prompt. And the general usage of a package manager (they aren't THAT much different from another).

Then it all just comes down to personal preference. And yes, you can Frankenstein together components from different distros.

All in all, learning it can be quite a fun experience. Wikipedia is your best friend, also baby steps.

Maybe just start with just playing with Ubuntu's BASH on WSL. Create a few files, move stuff around, etc. Then try using apt to install new software or update what you already have.

The point being, it's segmented but most Linux users can talk to each other for a reason. We arn't all turbo computer users with encyclopedic knowledge.

what I would find useful is completely separating security updates and everything else.

and have some modularity with the rest instead of just versions. Unless it fixes something I probably don't need the newest software update to do whatever.

Anyone who wants to really learn Linux inside and out should think about giving Slackware a try. Even I felt like a poweruser, once I got over the initial learning curve. It felt like a very "pure" Linux experience to me. It's also the oldest distro that is still being updated.

I think Slackware turns people off because they look at it and assume it's outdated (just look at the curses-based installer and some of the documentation from the 1990s), but the -current branch is bleeding edge and the -stable branch is the latest stable version. People also don't want the hassle of installing everything from source*, which is understandable, but it also has its uses, and it's not as if you're installing new things every day. No software is modified from upstream, which means you can configure it exactly how you need it (or just use slackbuild scripts from slackbuilds.org/sbopkg to automate the build process). Also pretty much everything is configured using plain text files and scripts. It really gives you a lot of reasons to actually use the terminal.

Slackware uses the KISS design philosophy and it really shows. Even the init system is as simple as they come (unless they finally updated it for some reason).

** Actually system/security software are prebuilt packages in tarballs that simply extract from the root directory.

Rai_Jin posted...

what I would find useful is completely separating security updates and everything else.

and have some modularity with the rest instead of just versions. Unless it fixes something I probably don't need the newest software update to do whatever.

One of major philosophies behind Unix is that it's mostly a bunch of smaller programs "ducttaped" together. Linux follows that pretty strongly, youre not going to get much more modular.

There's nothing stopping you from only ever updating the actual Linux kernel if that's what you mean.

You can also easily update individual software packages if youd like.

I usually update everything maybe twice a day, but it rarely takes over a minute or requires a restart, and I can ignore it if I want. Actually more convenient than a Windows update that takes upwards of 15 minutes and also hijacks my machine with mandatory restarts that also take a lot longer than a typical restart.

Completely serious, most of my time with Windows is waiting for the thing to update or apply an update I didn't consent to. That just doesn't really happen on my distro of choice (mint).

RasterGraphic posted...

I usually update everything maybe twice a day

that's just, what do you even expect from it?

so the security is somewhat the same between the distributions because that's not the distribution's job? unless they mess something up.

RasterGraphic posted...

Completely serious, most of my time with Windows is waiting for the thing to update or apply an update I didn't consent to. That just doesn't really happen on my distro of choice (mint).

it just updates automatically after some time when shutting down and finishing in short time that I usually don't even notice when starting up.

Linux might be better for developers but day to day, i prefer using Windows...

I'm keeping this Windows laptop until it no longer works. I only use it for browsing anyway since I absolutely hate typing on a phone.

Microsoft requiring hardware upgrades just for Windows 11 is insane.

MarshMellow posted...

I'm keeping this Windows laptop until it no longer works. I only use it for browsing anyway since I absolutely hate typing on a phone.

Microsoft requiring hardware upgrades just for Windows 11 is insane.

windows has always had minimum requirements

Rika_Furude posted...

windows has always had minimum requirements

I get that, but my laptop was less than 7 years old when Windows 11 dropped and expensive. I can see if something's severely outdated not meeting the latest requirements.

MarshMellow posted...

I get that, but my laptop was less than 7 years old when Windows 11 dropped and expensive. I can see if something's severely outdated not meeting the latest requirements.

7 years is already a good life for a computer and its been another 4 years since then

Rika_Furude posted...

7 years is already a good life for a computer and its been another 4 years since then

Just saying, from 2015-2021 isn't a PC replacing window for me and I think the requirements for 11 were too high.

At any rate I don't need it on this machine. My desktop from 2020 will hopefully last through at least 1 more Windows upgrade.

MarshMellow posted...

Just saying, from 2015-2021 isn't a PC replacing window for me and I think the requirements for 11 were too high.

At any rate I don't need it on this machine. My desktop from 2020 will hopefully last through at least 1 more Windows upgrade.

A 2015 system is quite different from a 2021 one, especially on the lower end where most people's computers actually sit. I'd expect a PC from 2021 to be alright, but a 2015 PC would be quite old by now. The only requirement I think a little objectionable is SecureBoot and even then that's only because that can require an OS reinstall in the worst case scenario even if the hardware is there.

Rika_Furude posted...

7 years is already a good life for a computer and its been another 4 years since then

Mine is a 2020 build.

Rai_Jin posted...

that's just, what do you even expect from it?

Whatever the update entails, security, bugfixes, new features, etc.

Rai_Jin posted...

so the security is somewhat the same between the distributions because that's not the distribution's job?

There's not really a simple answer to this. Much of the security is up the specific packages and their maintainers, not all distributions use the same package versions. Some like to the stick to the most stable and battle tested versions, which means an update is less likely to break something, but arn't necessarily the newest version. Some other distros don't do this resulting in potential hiccups.

Both scenarios can lead to different kinds of headaches.

The piece to the puzzle that I'm not sure you're understanding is that Linux is a massive collaborative effort. A security hole isn't necessarily a distro's fault. It usually falls on the packages.

Rai_Jin posted...

it just updates automatically after some time when shutting down and finishing in short time that I usually don't even notice when starting up.

Then I guess updating Linux really is that much significantly faster because I definitely notice Windows auto updates and it makes me rage every time. The speed difference would probably blow your mind :/