Recent Posts

1

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by buster on February 03, 2023, 03:13:17 pm »

" Buster is not particularly interested in learning new things; at least as far as operating systems go"

Absolutely true. Spending too much time playing with desktops interferes with 'learning new things'. There are only so many hours in a day to learn.

Interesting that the desktops that most of the world uses are the same day after day.

2

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by fox on February 02, 2023, 07:45:09 am »

Well we'll have to disagree on the XFCE-Gnome relationship. I think that the toolset does define the relationship, not the performance.

Interesting about your Toshiba laptop. When it was mine, I never noticed it to be particularly slow, with either Windows or Ubuntu. I suspect it's a combination of aging parts and the greater resource requirements of current operating systems, although the latter doesn't explain why MX Linux would run any better. Ironically, I used to have MX Linux as a backup distro on my Dell xps 13. I found it to be slower than Ubuntu. Eventually I changed it for Linux Lite; not because of its speed but rather, just to try Linux Lite. (Your recommendation awhile back.)

I do agree with your argument about ease of use. As we know, Buster is not particularly interested in learning new things; at least as far as operating systems go.

3

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by Jason on February 01, 2023, 07:24:24 pm »

It's a rare thing to say but I'm with Buster here. Besides the toolset, Xfce has nothing to do with Gnome. All of the major desktops can be configured to look like one another as you've pointed out but Ubuntu and Xfce are very much different in looks including the setup tools that come with each.

When you said lighter, I thought you meant in resource requirements when I saw you first mention it. Xfce definitely uses fewer resources although Plasma is very similar in that vain. Having said that, if you have even a desktop less than 10 years old with sufficient memory (over 4 GB) and a decent graphics chipset or graphics card, you're not going to notice a difference in performance. I don't. And my desktop is 10 years old. But on the Toshiba laptop, I had, anything more than an Xfce desktop was virtually unusable. Using Windows 7 was painful. It had only 4 GB of RAM and a low-performance chipset. Even MATE was too much. Ran MX Linux beautifully, though, for two years.

Buster and I diverge on how easy each desktop is to use. For the average user, Gnome has far less stuff to fudge with, which can be a lot simpler for most folks, including myself. I've had no problem moving to Pop OS, which could possibly be considered a more complex form of Ubuntu. You get used to it. The argument could be made that Windows is much harder to use because it takes too much work to make it look like any Plasma-based distro which is pretty much impossible unless you get an add-on program. It's a lot easier to just adapt or stick with what you prefer than change everything to look like another desktop environment.

4

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by fox on January 28, 2023, 08:20:20 am »

Buster, I'm pretty sure you are referring to the desktop configuration and in your case, I'm I think that you are most comfortable with anything that is set up like Windows XP. XFCE is set up that way by default, but Gnome can be set up almost like that with the help of extensions. In any case, the GTK toolkit (GTK3, I think) underlies both Gnome and XFCE, whereas Plasma uses the QT toolkit. In that way, Gnome and XFCE are related.

The default Ubuntu desktop is not the same as vanilla Gnome; I don't care for the configuration of the latter either. Vanilla Gnome hides the dock and provides no application menu, except when you hit the cmd key. (Then you get applications in rows and columns.) In Ubuntu, you get a dock, but on the left-hand side of the screen, which I prefer. But the settings allow one to move the dock to the bottom. Add the ArcMenu extension, and you get a customizable application menu not very different from that of XFCE or Plasma. I have ArcMenu installed, though I rarely use it, as my most used applications are on my dock. I know that there are other differences between XFCE and Gnome, but given my setup, I find XFCE to be just a simplified version of Gnome.

5

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by buster on January 27, 2023, 04:30:59 pm »

" I consider XFCE to be just a lighter version of Gnome."

I think some of us will disagree with this statement. Have tried many times but find Gnome awkward. Too many things to be 'fixed' before comfortable use. And I know that you love it.

As a contrast XFCE has always been comfortable to me, from the moment it is installed.

6

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by fox on January 27, 2023, 07:19:44 am »

Manjaro puts out three official images, one with Plasma, one with XFCE and one with Gnome. I think that in the past, XFCE was the default but now, the three appear to have equal status. I chose Plasma because I wanted to play with that desktop. My Ubuntu is with Gnome, and I consider XFCE to be just a lighter version of Gnome. As to speed, I think it is Manjaro itself and not the Plasma desktop that makes it faster. I say this because I used to have Arch as a secondary distro. I used Gnome on it and it was fast like Manjaro. Why do you think that Plasma is faster than Gnome?

7

Distributions / Re: Review of Arch Linux

« Last post by Jason on January 26, 2023, 08:28:25 pm »

I don't use it much; I maintain it and use it occasionally. In terms of speed, it's definitely more responsive than Ubuntu. But that is likely because it is Arch-based. Since I use Ubuntu Gnome and Manjaro Plasma, I can't separate out the effects of the distro from the desktop.

It's probably more likely Plasma. Btw, I hadn't realized that Plasma was the default for Manjaro. That's cool.

8

General Discussion / Re: Looking at a new prepaid cellphone service provider

« Last post by Jason on January 26, 2023, 08:26:25 pm »

Telus had a prepaid plan for $10/month - no idea if they still do. I'd be surprised if Rogers had one; they're so expensive.


Update: Telus doesn't have the $10 plan anymore.

9

General Discussion / Re: Looking at a new prepaid cellphone service provider

« Last post by Jason on January 26, 2023, 08:25:36 pm »

Thanks for the info Jason.
Isn't it Telus or Shaw that is trying to sell Freedom Mobile to a Quebec mobile provider?  I don't think I would want to pay in advance, for a year's service of mobile, when they might wind up swiching their Network infrastucture.

I believe it's Rogers that is making a play for Shaw. I guess Shaw owns Freedom; had no idea. I don't think the infrastructure would change, just the owner, Videotron, out of Quebec as you say. I think the feds were requiring them to divest themselves of Freedom to even consider letting them buy Shaw. Honestly, I think Rogers should fix their network since they had two wide-scale outages in 2 years and not buy another one. I'm hoping the Minister doesn't let them do it. We need more competition in mobile, not less.

10

Articles, Tutorials and Tips / Re: Being Stupid Slows Down Computer Problem Solving

« Last post by Jason on January 26, 2023, 08:20:19 pm »

I also found it interesting that without doing anything at all, by pressing print on both my phone and tablet, these two devices had connected themselves to the printer all on their own and printed. Neither is Windows or Mac.

I don't think either of those devices is Windows or Mac.

 I've never had the need to print from a phone or tablet but I usually put the HP software on it to do so. I never tried just seeing if it would show up automatically. With Android, anything is possible. My HP printer shows up automagically in Linux (when it's on). Since Android is based on the Linux kernel, it should be able to do it, too.