A perfect combination for a potential new distro

Romashka · 2006-11-02 19:44:48

Dusty wrote:

well there's always the option of adopting this project and making it workable...

linuxconf and other tools are evil, plain text configs are good!

Of course tools like linuxconf are useful for newbies which scare manual config editing, but IMHO it's better to start new project than adopt linuxconf to Arch specifics.

Mr Green · 2006-11-02 20:18:15

I was only joking about linuxconf & yes I am a newbie

bodhi.zazen · 2006-11-03 23:06:39

Interesting thread.

I came to Arch from ubuntu via zenwalk.

The Arch way is best for me as I like the simplicity. I use Fluxbox and the CLI on top of a minimal Arch install.

GNOME/KDE/and even XFCE are too bloated. Ubuntu is slow because of all that bloat.

Better to understand anc configure the OS yourself...

If you are looking for a nice distro, have yo looked at Fluxbuntu? Lightweight Ubuntu + Fluxbox.

Fluxbuntu

Download from the "experience" section.

sarah31 · 2006-11-03 23:36:45

btw i posted as uknowme since I need to sign up again to PM Dusty to get my old nick back.

I won't be around much and I know some of you don't like me or want me around ... too bad

T-Dawg · 2006-11-03 23:43:18

sarah31 wrote:

btw i posted as uknowme since I need to sign up again to PM Dusty to get my old nick back.
I won't be around much and I know some of you don't like me or want me around ... too bad

I thought you didn't want your nick anymore? Or anything to do with arch?

sarah31 · 2006-11-03 23:53:44

I don't have anything to do with Arch. As for the nick .... well I was chatting through PM's with Dusty and said "fork it" may as well take the old nick.

So what now? You gonna sue me for changing my mind? I was bored and Mr Green suggested I should come back some time ago in an email.

:shrugs:

Dusty · 2006-11-04 00:01:22

sarah31 wrote:

So what now? You gonna sue me for changing my mind?

Its a woman's prerogative. ;-)

Three cheers for firefox 2.0 which taught me how to spell prerogative and thinks that 'firefox' is not a word.

Methinks I've gone off topic again. Hasn't happened since... Sarah31 left. Hmmm....

Hey Penguin, did you notice I hacked your signature?

Dusty

T-Dawg · 2006-11-04 00:04:29

Its a little hard to sue people over the internet. Chill. I just didn't understand why you've decided to come back after making such a stink to leave and have your existance compeletely anniliated for ever and ever amen.

T-Dawg · 2006-11-04 00:06:24

Dusty wrote:

....
Hey Penguin, did you notice I hacked your signature?
Dusty

As a matter of fact I just noticed it. I tried to rectify the situation by altering yours but unfornunately, your untouchable admin. Sneaky, sneaky...

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 00:06:33

Yawn! You bore me. Next.

T-Dawg · 2006-11-04 00:08:02

I am not your friend.

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 00:13:08

Okay sounds good. Seems to me it you who needs to chill. Me I am laughing.

Dusty · 2006-11-04 00:15:47

thankfully, I"m easily amused. You guys aren't boring me at all.

Dusty

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 00:33:29

Dusty wrote:

thankfully, I"m easily amused. You guys aren't boring me at all.
Dusty

Well if we exceeded 22 minutes you might lose interest as that is the typical attention span max.

Dusty · 2006-11-04 05:35:31

sarah31 wrote:

Dusty wrote:
thankfully, I"m easily amused. You guys aren't boring me at all.
Dusty
Well if we exceeded 22 minutes you might lose interest as that is the typical attention span max.

Are you serious? If I could hit 22 minutes focusing on any one thing I'd be unstoppable. Hell, if I could reach 12 minutes it'd probably be progress.

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 06:03:15

sorry what. uh, um..oo shiny.. now what were we talking about .. um ... uh.

stavrosg · 2006-11-04 09:18:32

Why the nick rename? I think I liked Penguin better

T-Dawg · 2006-11-04 11:40:25

stavrosg wrote:

Why the nick rename? I think I liked Penguin better

Because I never really liked it from the beginning. It was quickly thought up just to ask a question and never return again. But I did. People call me T or big T or T-dawg so I switched it. Most people here don't know who I am anyways...

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 13:51:14

T-Dawg wrote:

stavrosg wrote:
Why the nick rename? I think I liked Penguin better
Because I never really liked it from the beginning. It was quickly thought up just to ask a question and never return again. But I did. People call me T or big T or T-dawg so I switched it. Most people here don't know who I am anyways...

Well it certainly matches your maturity

T-Dawg · 2006-11-04 14:28:53

sarah31 wrote:

T-Dawg wrote:
stavrosg wrote:
Why the nick rename? I think I liked Penguin better
Because I never really liked it from the beginning. It was quickly thought up just to ask a question and never return again. But I did. People call me T or big T or T-dawg so I switched it. Most people here don't know who I am anyways...
Well it certainly matches your maturity

Did you forget your sig?

sarah31 · 2006-11-04 21:44:43

No did you forget to chill?

ibrahim · 2006-11-04 23:23:26

What gui config tools are there exactly that are ubuntu specific and not available on arch? I'm sure there must be some but are there really *that* many?

As much as I think for the most part people's talk of speed and bloat is mostly placebo based and nothing more than a way to try and flaunt their computer know how as some sort of badge of achievement if it's really that much of a concern then why not just start with an ubuntu server install and only add what you need from that?

chrismortimore · 2006-11-06 13:14:06

ibrahim wrote:

if it's really that much of a concern then why not just start with an ubuntu server install and only add what you need from that?

I don't know what the current state of affairs is, but when I did a server install, it still added a lot of bloat that I didn't expect. When I read "server install", I was expecting to get just a base system (ala Debian)

sarah31 · 2006-11-06 18:08:53

Making something more user friendly ALWAYS means some bloat. Anyone who thinks it doesn't really needs to go back and look at the progression of the "mainstream: OSes to see that. all one can really hope for is that the "bloat" does not reduce efficiency (and by this i do not necessarily mean user efficiency).

Dusty · 2006-11-06 18:18:17

sarah31 wrote:

Making something more user friendly ALWAYS means some bloat.

This is almost completely true, but not quite. The tricky part is the definition of the phrase "user friendly". The most optimally unbloated OS for any *one* user is the OS that does exactly what that user wants and no more, requiring nothing of them. For certain users, there are a lot of features required to do what they want, but those users want those features, so it isn't bloat for them.

The bloat problem comes in when you are trying to please two or more users. Two different users have different tastes, different requirements on an OS that does exactly what they want. For an OS to support both those users, it has to have all the features that both users want. However, some features that one user requires will appear completely unnecessary to the other user, and vice versa. Thus, both users find the OS bloated.

The progression of the mainstream OS's that Sarah31 mentions is the desire to support more users, thus implementing more features that some users don't need. The perception of bloat increases.

Of course, in reality, no OS supports exactly what any one user wants, and no user wants everything that any one OS provides. In this way, for all users, all OS's are simultaneously bloated and deficient.

Dusty

Arch Linux

#26 2006-11-02 19:44:48

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#27 2006-11-02 20:18:15

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#28 2006-11-03 23:06:39

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#29 2006-11-03 23:36:45

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#30 2006-11-03 23:43:18

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#31 2006-11-03 23:53:44

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#32 2006-11-04 00:01:22

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#33 2006-11-04 00:04:29

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#34 2006-11-04 00:06:24

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#35 2006-11-04 00:06:33

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#36 2006-11-04 00:08:02

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#37 2006-11-04 00:13:08

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#38 2006-11-04 00:15:47

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#39 2006-11-04 00:33:29

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#40 2006-11-04 05:35:31

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#41 2006-11-04 06:03:15

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#42 2006-11-04 09:18:32

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#43 2006-11-04 11:40:25

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#44 2006-11-04 13:51:14

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#45 2006-11-04 14:28:53

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#46 2006-11-04 21:44:43

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#47 2006-11-04 23:23:26

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#48 2006-11-06 13:14:06

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#49 2006-11-06 18:08:53

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

#50 2006-11-06 18:18:17

Re: A perfect combination for a potential new distro

Board footer