41–50 of 58 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mint's pretty great. I use it because it's basically a lightweight Ubuntu.
What does it remove from ubuntu?
I've never understood the love for Mint. All it is is Ubuntu with a Gnome 2 style desktop and things already configured for Linux newbies. I installed it long ago and it was way buggier than Ubuntu. Right now on openSUSE Tumbleweed with Gnome Shell, couldn't be happier. And if I were to give a vote for most 'desktop ready' system, I'd go with Fedora (the only thing I dislike about openSUSE is how PackageKit and YAST…
I've been using WindowMaker since before Ubuntu even existed, and I fundamentally cannot understand switching distros because of a default UI. The first thing I do when I install any distro is install a brace of packages, WindowMaker among them, and create a good environment for myself. I could not care less about the intricacies of the default UI because if I'm using it for more than a trivial amount of time, someth…
You're right though that it's odd that some users who _do_ know those things will distro hop for that reason.
There is very little difference between Mint and straight Debian. I prefer Debian because it's more stable and has a continuous rolling release cycle. Ubuntu pissed a lot of people of when they forced Unity down our throats. This is why many moved to Mint in the first place.
Alternative desktop environments such as Xubuntu, Lubuntu and Kubuntu have always been available on Ubuntu. Unity was never forced down anyone's throat; it was made the default; that's all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It kept "normal" desktop paradigm when everyone around was submitting to (IMO insane) design experiments everywhere. Then it was the only Linux distro that was handling HiDPI correctly and made it look better than Windows on retina displays.
If you mean "normal" as similar to Windows 95, then there was a very good reason to experiment with alternatives: the US patent system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It kept "normal" desktop paradigm when everyone around was submitting to (IMO insane) design experiments everywhere. Then it was the only Linux distro that was handling HiDPI correctly and made it look better than Windows on retina displays.
If you mean "normal" as similar to Windows 95, then there was a very good reason to experiment with alternatives: the US patent system.
For an experienced Ubuntu user, who knows how to configure their system to their liking, including switching the DE if desired - what exactly would be the benefits of migrating to Mint?
Not having to do all that.... I wouldn't migrate to it just to migrate. Migrate to it when you would have migrated anyway.
I maintain a script that configures a pristine installation of Xubuntu to my exact preferences.
Migrating to Mint wouldn't save me the trouble of writing / updating the script. While I'm sure Mint works out of the box (IMHO, so does Ubuntu), it won't bundle the exact shortcuts and settings tailored to my workflow.
I don't even need to switch desktop, I just use Xubuntu that runs XFCE out of the box (and kindly discards the Canonical commercial / user-intelligence "features"). Not sure why a programmer would need anything more than XFCE as their DE, but you can also get an Ubuntu "flavour" (i.e. edition) for any of the popular DEs, including Mate.
> Migrate to it when you would have migrated anyway.
Indeed, I suppose Mint would be at the top of my alternative list if I absolutely had to get off Ubuntu for any reason (which seems implausible). Otherwise, seems like it's a more newbie-friendly (and somewhat bloated) rendition of Ubuntu.
I remember reading (this was around when version 17 launched) about a couple serious issues people had with Mint. Have these been fixed/addressed?: 1) the mixing and/or renaming of Ubuntu and Debian packages - resulting in the maintainers just blacklisting upstream packages when something breaks because of this (even security updates! which, if I remember correctly, were set to 'optional' by default which is just stu…
I've never understood the love for Mint. All it is is Ubuntu with a Gnome 2 style desktop and things already configured for Linux newbies. I installed it long ago and it was way buggier than Ubuntu. Right now on openSUSE Tumbleweed with Gnome Shell, couldn't be happier. And if I were to give a vote for most 'desktop ready' system, I'd go with Fedora (the only thing I dislike about openSUSE is how PackageKit and YAST…
I like that it's Debian/Ubuntu based so I can follow instructions for almost anything on the internet. For example, the other day I was looking into VPN solutions and ended up going with IPVanish (I may try out a different one next month)... good luck finding OpenSuse instructions. It's just Ubuntu and if you're lucky, there's an RPM for Fedora/CentOS. I like Cinnamon. Going forward with GTK3 but not with Gnome3. Nic…
I've never understood the love for Mint. All it is is Ubuntu with a Gnome 2 style desktop and things already configured for Linux newbies. I installed it long ago and it was way buggier than Ubuntu. Right now on openSUSE Tumbleweed with Gnome Shell, couldn't be happier. And if I were to give a vote for most 'desktop ready' system, I'd go with Fedora (the only thing I dislike about openSUSE is how PackageKit and YAST…
This fellow has a very different idea of what an "older" computer is than I do.