Live data from Hacker News

Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

tinycorelinux.net

1–10 of 258 posts

Re: Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

#2
Looks really nice, I like the idea.

But can they please empower a user interface designer to simply improve the margins and paddings of their interface? With a bunch of small improvements it would look significantly better. Just fix the spacing between buttons and borders and other UI elements.

Re: Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

#3
This is cool. My first into to a practical application of Linux in the early 2000s was using Damn Small Linux to recover files off of cooked Windows Machines. I looked up the project the other day while reminiscing and thought it would be interesting if someone took a real shot at reviving the spirit of the project.

Re: Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

#5
post #2

Looks really nice, I like the idea. But can they please empower a user interface designer to simply improve the margins and paddings of their interface? With a bunch of small improvements it would look significantly better. Just fix the spacing between buttons and borders and other UI elements.

One could argue that visible borders are a feature, not a bug.

If you are trying to maximize for accessibility, that is.

Re: Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

#6
post #2

Looks really nice, I like the idea. But can they please empower a user interface designer to simply improve the margins and paddings of their interface? With a bunch of small improvements it would look significantly better. Just fix the spacing between buttons and borders and other UI elements.

Modern UX trends are a scourge of excessive whitespace and low information density that get in the way of actually accomplishing tasks.

Any project that rejects those trends gets bonus points in my book.

Re: Tiny Core Linux: a 23 MB Linux distro with graphical desktop

#8
post #4

The site doesn't have HTTPS and there doesn't seem to be any mention of signatures on the downloads page. Any way to check it hasn't been MITM'd?

Ideas to decrease risk of MITM:

Download from at least one more location (like some AWS/GCP instance) and checksum.

Download from the Internet Archive and checksum:

https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/http://www.tinyc...

Post reply on HN