• @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 months ago

        I’ve heard that the Arch wiki is fairly helpful for people using other distros though. Haven’t made the jump quite yet. Trying to figure out what reasonably cheap monitor to get.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          It really is, I learned a lot when I played with Arch. I don’t use Arch anymore but it was a great learning experience. If you have an old machine that you don’t need to daily drive. Install it and play, break things, fix things, and don’t ask questions in the form. If it is a question that is answered in the wiki you will just be told to go read the wiki and maybe roasted a little.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 months ago

            While I do have an HP2000 from 2010, I also just built a gaming tower that has nothing but a BIOS. I just need a decent and fairly cheap monitor. Suggestions are welcome, as I’m somewhat lost as to whether a tablet or an actual monitor is the best solution here.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 month ago

              Sorry I am the wrong guy to ask. I don’t do desktops and I don’t follow specs. I am a bit of a luddite who happens to use Linux. Not sure how that happened.

      • Justas🇱🇹
        link
        English
        12 months ago

        On the other hand, Manjaro asked me to preserve contents of my /home partition automatically, and that used to be the most difficult part of my Ubuntu reinstallations.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      I had no opinion on nixos until I got sick of reading about it in so many places unprompted. I’m assuming that’s how it was for arch but that was before I used Linux so wasn’t around any spaces that talked about it

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 months ago

    Really. Most people just want their computer to do Internety things. Some officey things, and then show them a film.

    If someone doesn’t get those pretty easy the first try they are going to head back to their corporate masters.

    Honestly most of us really just need the same thing. I have run a number of different distros, and yeah Arch is really fun. The thing is I realized I just need the basics and I want free time. So I came full circle and went back to Mint. Is it one of the most vanilla flavors of Linux? Absolutely, but it usually just works and I appreciate that now in my life.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 month ago

      Is it one of the most vanilla flavors of Linux? Absolutely

      it’s really not though. Distros like Debian, Fedora, and Slackware are a lot more vanilla. Linux Mint develops a lot of their own tools and rices the desktop a lot.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 month ago

        I have always used the Xfce DE so mine is pretty vanilla. I have no idea what cinnamon is like.

        I don’t know if maybe it is a difference in definitions. I would say those are simpler and very stable. But they are harder to use as a daily driver’s personal computer. I have never used slackware or Fedora, but Debian is so held back to keep it stable Often you have to go find software that is newer to get it to be able to deal with everybody else. It seems much more of a server than a daily. But IDK it has been a while since I looked at it.

        Mint has good moderation updates, tends to play better with proprietary codec, Nvidia, etc. without having to mess around with it too much. At the same time at least for me it’s very stable.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 month ago

          When I think of a vanilla distros I think of the ones that ship packages straight from upstream with no or minimal changes. Mint is a good distro, but I wouldn’t call it vanilla. Also Mint would have to be mint flavored not vanilla :P

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 month ago

            I get what you’re saying. I guess I’m using vanilla in a slightly different context. I was more talking about the end user experience and how much you needed to know first how much it did itself. To me it is the changes to packets that makes mint vanilla it is somebody else doing the work for you.

            As for the flavoring I think you got me there

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 month ago

    As someone who started in the deep end back in 2001 (My first distro was a Slackware derivative) I actually enjoyed the satisfaction of trying to get XFree86 to work and seeing all the available command line tools. Of course this was back in the Windows 98 days so I was already used to going into MS-DOS mode. My first computer was a Commodore 64 as well so didn’t get mollycoddled at all when learning to use a computer.

  • @lurch
    link
    English
    -52 months ago

    no u! 😢