my adventure into Linux

[brynn]

Hi Friends,
(This has probably been done so many times before, you might be looking for one of those vomit smileys (and which, sorry, I don't have any here).  So if that's the case, just don't read it.)

For myself, I'm starting this thread to help me remember and keep track of articles and resources and other details that I find along the way.  And if I'm stuck on something, I might ask questions, in case someone else might have a tip.

For everyone else, maybe someone could learn something from my journey. If anyone has any other helpful info or comments or answers to my questions, I will really appreciate being able to study it, so please feel free to share, if you like.

[brynn]

From the end of the other thread linked above, Moini gave me this link, a while ago:  http://distrochooser.de/?l=2

After spending a couple of hours with it, I've concluded that it's not the best for people using Linux for the first time.  I think it's better for people who already have some experience with it.  It's been consistently giving me Zorin OS and PCLinuxOS, for my best distros.  Oh, and also ubuntuGNOME.  But I have not seen those mentioned in any of the articles I've read. 

That "test" seems to be the most confused when I answer every single question.  Then it gives me something like 5 or 6 distros which scored say 92%, a couple that scored 85%, a few with 73%, etc.  But if I skip those questions where I could really answer either of the choices (there are 6 or 8 that I could answer either way) it can finally produce a solid result.  But as above, those 2 which I haven't seen in any articles.

Getting to the articles.  Already I've been provided with some articles, some mentioned towards the end of this thread http://forum.inkscapecommunity.com/index.php?topic=417.0, and some shared privately, which I'll post the best as I go.

From a DDG search (Duck Duck Go) "which Linux distro" I've found several helpful articles, especially a series from Life Hacker:  http://lifehacker.com/5778882/getting-started-with-linux-the-complete-guide.  Also a few from Life Wire:  https://www.lifewire.com/choose-best-linux-distro-for-needs-2201172.  A couple from PC World:  http://www.pcworld.com/article/2947333/operating-systems/the-best-linux-distributions-for-beginners.html.

And of course, DistroWatch.com

In general, it seems most articles are focussed on  Ubuntu and Linux Mint as the most popular for beginners or ex-Windows users.  I found a couple of articles which compare only those 2.

The most confusing thing so far is the distro chooser test was always resulting in systems which use KDE desktop environments.  But as I read about desktkop environments, it seems like I want to avoid that.  Afaiu desktop environments, I think I'm looking at 3 or 4.  The one that's native for Ubuntu, which I think they said is Unity, and Cinnamon, which is the native one for Linux Mint.  However, LM offers a few different options there, and most people have suggested to me that XFCE is probably the best desktop environment.

So based on today's research, I think I'll want to try Ubuntu and Linux Mint, for sure.  I might also try lubuntu and/or kubuntu (just so I can see what this kde desktop is) and maybe unbuntu GNOME, and maybe Zorin OS.

It sounds like most people probably start off with something like Ubuntu or LM, and then after they learn it, a couple years later they move on to something more complex, according to their own particular needs and interests.  That's the part that seems the most strange to me, as an ex-Windows user.

What would be so hard to make a system which someone can use as a beginner, and still be able to grow into advanced usage, without having to install a whole new os?  I'd like to find 1 os and stick with that, if possible.

Ok, so my next step is going to be perusing this page:  http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major. 
And also, I need to buy a bunch of new usb drives, to try all the systems on the new computer, and also to transfer my files.  Previously I had put them on cd/dvds, but I might not be able to have a disc drive with the Windows 7 Pro system.  We'll see.....

I'm still waiting for the return mailing labels for the Windows 10 computer (which the tech reps broke).  But hopefully I can send it back by the end of this week.

More to come 

[Pilosopong Tasyo]

Just to give you an idea, get ready to - the Linux family tree

Also, Filesystem Hierarchy Standard

[brynn]

Wow!  Well it's pretty, if nothing else.  But that's a lot of different kinds of systems!

Thanks for the info 

[Pilosopong Tasyo]

...that's a lot of different kinds of systems!

It does, doesn't it?  But under the hood, they use the same core kernel and utilities (Linux + GNU).  To oversimplify, the only difference among the majority, if not all, of desktop Linux distros is the user interface (DE).  Granted there are distros geared towards special applications and a target audience.

To a lot of newbies, though, that's enough to elicit confusion and the complaint of "too much choice."

[brynn]

Yes, you may have read in the other thread where mikey is suggesting Ubuntu Studio for us, as Inkscape users.  Apparently it's set up with all kinds of creative or artistic programs - graphics, video, etc.  I've heard of more people (Inkscape users) using Linux Mint, than Ubuntu Studio.  But I'll have a chance to try out both of them.

The difference really is the desktop environment?  I thought Linux Mint offers a few different desktop environments?

How many DEs are there - roughly?  So I might guess that for some distros, the DE can only work with that particular distro?  Or maybe some DEs can only work on certain distros?

Well, the return mailing label arrived today, so I've sent the ex-new computer back.  Now I just have to wait for them to credit my account, so I can afford to buy Windows 7 Pro system.  They said it would be within 2 weeks after they receive the system in their something department.  So I'm still waiting on that.

But, I bought some new usb drives today, so I can start downloading.  And also I can start saving my files and etc on on them, since I previously had everything on cd/dvd 

[Pilosopong Tasyo]

The difference really is the desktop environment?

Well, that's me oversimplifying things, but at the end of the day, that's pretty much it.  Over the course of using Linux full time (I started my transition to desktop Linux in 2009), I noticed Distro A's "XYZ" DE looks and feels similar to how Distro B's "XYZ" DE works.  The UI between two distros may be slightly different, but the underlying functionalities are practically the same.  That's because they were built using the same DE, with each distro putting their own finishing touches before releasing it to the public.

Look at how similar these pairs of distros look:

• Ubuntu KDE - http://i.imgur.com/Uq7TXn8.jpg
  Fedora KDE - http://i.imgur.com/tJDVTjc.jpg

• Ubuntu GNOME Shell - http://i.imgur.com/9vBuiMA.jpg
  Arch GNOME Shell - http://i.imgur.com/Ibn55po.jpg

Like someone said in the Mint forum: "The DE is Just Lipstick on a Pig."

I thought Linux Mint offers a few different desktop environments?

Yes, officially there's Cinnamon, MATE, Xfce, and KDE.

How many DEs are there - roughly?

More than 20 based on ArchWiki - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/desktop_environment#List_of_desktop_environments

A handful are quite popular though.

So I might guess that for some distros, the DE can only work with that particular distro?  Or maybe some DEs can only work on certain distros?

Technically no.  You can install more than one DE on the same distro and switch among environments at the login screen.  The question is, will the installed DE integrate well with the distro's native DE?

The Overview in the ArchWiki link I posted above pretty much explains it:

A desktop environment bundles together a variety of components to provide common graphical user interface elements such as icons, toolbars, wallpapers, and desktop widgets. Additionally, most desktop environments include a set of integrated applications and utilities. Most importantly, desktop environments provide their own window manager, which can however usually be replaced with another compatible one.

The user is free to configure their GUI environment in any number of ways. Desktop environments simply provide a complete and convenient means of accomplishing this task. Note that users are free to mix-and-match applications from multiple desktop environments. For example, a KDE user may install and run GNOME applications such as the Epiphany web browser, should he/she prefer it over KDE's Konqueror web browser. One drawback of this approach is that many applications provided by desktop environment projects rely heavily upon their DE's respective underlying libraries. As a result, installing applications from a range of desktop environments will require installation of a larger number of dependencies. Users seeking to conserve disk space and avoid software bloat often avoid such mixed environments, or look into lightweight alternatives.

Furthermore, DE-provided applications tend to integrate better with their native environments. Superficially, mixing environments with different widget toolkits will result in visual discrepancies (that is, interfaces will use different icons and widget styles). In terms of user experience, mixed environments may not behave similarly (e.g. single-clicking versus double-clicking icons; drag-and-drop functionality) potentially causing confusion or unexpected behavior.

[brynn]

Thanks PT.  That's very helpful!

To a lot of newbies, though, that's enough to elicit confusion and the complaint of "too much choice."

As a newbie, hearing that generally the difference among them is the gui or de, is a big relief.  I don't have to try to understand all kind of technical issues which makes them different, before I can decide which one to use.  But it leaves me to wonder about something that is much more fundamental, and perhaps troubling.

So many developers find it easier to go out and build their own distro, rather than try to find enough consensus to have 1 single os, with many different interchangeable interfaces?  That's a bit disturbing.  It seems like it would be better to work together and build a single better product.  Or maybe it's more of a case of status or cv-building that they created a distro rather than they created only a de?  But either way, I'm having a hard time understanding why there are so many different distros, whose major differences are generally their interfaces.

I'm happy to learn that I just have to choose an interface, instead of learn all kind of technical crap.  But I must still be missing some piece of the picture.

[Pilosopong Tasyo]

So many developers find it easier to go out and build their own distro, rather than try to find enough consensus to have 1 single os, with many different interchangeable interfaces?  That's a bit disturbing.  It seems like it would be better to work together and build a single better product.  Or maybe it's more of a case of status or cv-building that they created a distro rather than they created only a de?  But either way, I'm having a hard time understanding why there are so many different distros, whose major differences are generally their interfaces.

Borrowing from this thread:

I know Linux is about choice, but is it possible that it has too many editions? KDE, Gnome, Unity, Xfce, Debian, Cinnamon, MATE. etc. Is it feasible to hope the communities could pool their resources and create one super-polished environment? I think together Linux has more developers and talent than Windows and Mac but it's just so fragmented. I don't know, maybe I don't have the big picture and the fragmentation is actually a good thing... but so far there's no ideal distro for me. Each one has shortcomings.

To put it into perspective, Linux isn't "about choice". Life is. Here's your question rewritten to show how it looks to Linux users that have taken some time to test out various desktop environments to find the best fit for their needs.

I know car brands are about choice, but is it possible that there are too many brands? Ford, Honda, Chevrolet, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo, Tesla. etc. Is it feasible to hope the manufacturers could pool their resources and create one super-polished car brand? I think together car manufacturers have more developers and talent than motor and moped manufacturers but it's just so fragmented. I don't know, maybe I don't have the big picture and the fragmentation is actually a good thing... but so far there's no ideal car for me. Each one has shortcomings.

You can replace "car brands" in the above with anything you use or buy in daily life, and find that for most things you either trust a salesperson or your previous experience, or you take some time to "shop around" and find the best match for your needs.

No two users are alike, each have their own needs, preferences, skill level and own different hardware.

The same can be said of developers.  One distro developer have a specific goal on how a desktop should look and behave.  Other devs who agree on such goals may join the project and start contributing.  Others may not, however, or the contributions they send are not in line with the original goals of the project and thus are rejected (or, like in the case of the OpenOffice project, contributions were ignored or refused for whatever reason, hence it got forked and LibreOffice was born).

And thanks to the GNU GPL, these devs have the license to fork the existing distro (or any open-source project for that matter) or make their own from scratch and pursue their own direction.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

[brynn]

Hah, well at least I'm on track with other newbies!

The analogy of car brands vs distros doesn't seem quite right.  Because different car brands work differently under the hood.  Different kinds of engines, etc.  It's not simply about the driver interface or outward appearance.

But it does seem like a lot of wasted energy....and resources -- all the separate websites for different distros, forums, presumably mailing lists, wikis, etc..  What if there was just 1 basic system with interchangeable interfaces?

Especially with all the ex-Windows users who I wouldn't be surprised will be flocking to Linux (or Mac), over the next few years, because of  Windows 10 and whatever comes after.  And they all have to go through this introduction.  I'm not saying they shouldn't have to do their own research. But it would make it much less intimidating, and much more attractive to consider such a change!

However, having said all that.  I'm still really happy to learn that most of the differences among distros is the interface!

[Pilosopong Tasyo]

Windows 7 editions - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7_editions
Windows 10 editions - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_10_editions

One can also say that it seems to be a huge waste of resources with all those Windows editions and variants to choose from, isn't it?  Then again, those editions exist to target users with different needs / target different markets.  It's not so different with the Linux world.   

At the end of the day, it all boils down to having choice, not the lack of it.  Despite the myriad of choices out there, you only need to choose from a very small number of distros and DEs.  Two distros come to mind* -- Ubuntu and Mint.  Both are immensely popular, both have big support forums.  As for the DE, well it's pretty subjective, but base it on your hardware capabilities and needs.  Is your hardware fairly recent? Powerful processor and plenty of RAM? Then go for the more "prettier" UIs -- Unity, Cinnamon, GNOME Shell, KDE.  Fancy a mobile- or tablet-inspired UI? Unity and GNOME Shell has you covered.  Want a more traditional interface (i.e., a "Start" menu, task bar, system tray) instead?  Your choices are Cinnamon, MATE, XFCE, LXDE, KDE.  Or, if you prefer the DE to be less of a resource hog, perhaps MATE, XFCE, or LXDE would fit the bill.

Note that the distros and DEs mentioned are geared towards general-purpose usage.  Typical things you do at home and/or the office.  There's also an education-oriented Ubuntu variant: Edubuntu which uses the Unity UI, pre-installed with education programs, and diskless software for the classroom environment.  There's also Ubuntu Studio (used by at least another member of the forum), a multimedia-production-focused distro which uses the XFCE DE, a tweaked kernel, and pre-installed software for musicians, those in video production, and graphic artists.

BTW, before I forget, you need to know that Ubuntu follows a predictable upgrade cycle.  It releases a new version of the distro (with updated kernel and software) every 6 months, April and October.  The version numbers tend to follow the year.month pattern -- 16.04, 16.10, 17.04, et al.  Also, these interim releases are supported for 9 months only.  However, there are also LTS (long-term support) versions released every two years -- 12.04, 14.04, 16.04 (which I use), future 18.04 and so on.  These LTS releases are supported for 5 years.

Mint (an offspring of Ubuntu) used to follow the Ubuntu release cycle: LTS releases every two years with interim releases in between.  This is no longer the case, however.  We now only use and follow Ubuntu's LTS package base.  This gives the Mint devs more time to focus on refinements and features in the Cinnamon and MATE DEs.


*my opinion, not trying to downplay other distros and DEs that are not mentioned.

[mikey]

The analogy of car brands vs distros doesn't seem quite right.

The car model analogy is actually very good.

I'm still really happy to learn that most of the differences among distros is the interface!

If that were true, the src and configs would be the same across diff distros(even across similar variants)...most definitely NOT TRUE. Checksums alone prove that but using diff tools such as Kdiff and Meld or using various IDEs can tell you so much more. Some distros offer more and better libraries suited to your needs without having to look for them. etc etc etc

[brynn]

One can also say that it seems to be a huge waste of resources with all those Windows editions and variants to choose from, isn't it?  Then again, those editions exist to target users with different needs / target different markets

No, that's not what I meant.  No, because you can access ALL of them from one website.  All the editions, support, forum, KB (in leiu of a wiki), community, downloads, everything -- one place.

Well, comparing Windows and Linux seems like apples and oranges, to me.  People don't generally go to MS to download an os.  They buy it with their computer.  Most Windows users aren't aware of all those editions.  Computer manufacturers offer either Home Premium or Pro.  Someone would have to know enough to specifically ask for one of the other editions.

But Windows only has one source, no matter which edition you want, which is Microsoft.  But what I was thinking of with resources is that each Linux distro has its own website, its own download location, forum, maybe wiki, I guess, and that's not to mention the human-powered community behind each one.  How ever many distros there are is how many times of wasted energy and resources there are.

Linux could easily corner the market, so to speak, with a little more proprietary approach.  Linux could be Samson taking down the giant proprietor without spending a cent -- literally!!  The slingshot is the awesome product.  Just present the product as if it were proprietary, yet without actually being paid.  One website, one download location, one (huge) forum.  Market Linux, why not?  No one ever had this thought before?

And that would not take away choice.  It would be providing more people with choice.  Because there's not much of a centralized place for potential new users to grab a foothold, I'll bet most never learn about ALL the choices.

If I ever manage to learn enough, maybe I'll do that some day -- make a single website to introduce Linux to newbies.  Yes, DistroWatch is nice, but it's hardly newbie-friendly.  You pretty much have to know what you're looking for to find something.  What's needed is a website to teach newbies about Linux.