We are still actively working on the spam issue.
Talk:/fglt/
Recommended distros for beginners
I don't think Debian is a good choice for newbies. --Morpheus (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
It disgusts me that you want newbies to use an infested distro that doesn't respect their privacy like Ubuntu, with their horribly out-of-date official repos filled with software patched until it's nearly falling apart, with bugs specific only to its own family, and nearly no contribution or relation with upstream. Not a single Ubuntu install has worked fine for me over 3~ years, while pretty much every other distro does work. At the point where you're willing to call that a newbie-friendly experience, you might as-well recommend them Gentoo, as even that gave me less trouble than Ubuntu usually does, and that's not even bringing up Ubuntu's relation with Amazon and how utterly horrible and in-experienced with Linux their forums are. I have installed Debian, and guess what, it's not hard at all, I've begun contemplating that "installing debian is harder than shitbuntu" is a myth, since Debian's installation is literally spamming "next" and choosing your own DE and username/password. Please stop recommending Linux that doesn't respect the user. --Topcuck1337 at blahblah date, I can't even into wiki editing.
First of all, let's break down your points.
>horribly out-of-date official repos
Isn't Ubuntu's repo more up-to-date than Debian jessie?
>Not a single Ubuntu install has worked fine for me over 3~ years
Your experience != Their experience. Don't force your experience down their throat
>It disgusts me that you want newbies to use an infested distro that doesn't respect their privacy like Ubuntu,
I understand that Ubuntu (Unity) with Amazon is bullshit. That's why the OP didn't include Unity into the list of recommended distros.
>>Please stop recommending Linux that doesn't respect the user.
>recommending Debian, which isn't "Respecting Your Freedom" according to FSF
If I were to recommend distros that respects your privacy and freedom, I'd recommend the FSF-endorsed distros instead.
--Morpheus (talk) 07:02, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
>Isn't Ubuntu's repo more up-to-date than Debian jessie? That's why you use Debian testing/SID. Stable is more suitable for servers goy.
>Your experience != Their experience. Don't force your experience down their throat That's understandable, even though said experience was consistent across multiple machines.
>I understand that Ubuntu (Unity) with Amazon is bullshit. That's why the OP didn't include Unity into the list of recommended distros. You realize, the issue is not simply Unity, it's the fact that the devs who included Amazon into the default OS are the same breed of those that maintain the repos, not to mention their repos are heavily patched, and the variants use the same repos. If the devs included Amazon spyware in the default DE, how can we be sure their patches don't include spyware too?
>If I were to recommend distros that respects your privacy and freedom, I'd recommend the FSF-endorsed distros instead. Let's see what they say about Debian.
>Debian's Social Contract states the goal of making Debian entirely free software, and Debian conscientiously keeps nonfree software out of the official Debian system. However, Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software. According to the project, this software is “not part of the Debian system,” but the repository is hosted on many of the project's main servers, and people can readily learn about these nonfree packages by browsing Debian's online package database.
>There is also a “contrib” repository; its packages are free, but some of them exist to load separately distributed proprietary programs. This too is not thoroughly separated from the main Debian distribution.
>Previous releases of Debian included nonfree blobs with Linux, the kernel. With the release of Debian 6.0 (“squeeze”) in February 2011, these blobs have been moved out of the main distribution to separate packages in the nonfree repository. However, the problem partly remains: the installer in some cases recommends these nonfree firmware files for the peripherals on the machine.
Which can be summed up as, Debian keeps the non-free out of the default installation, but still offers it on their servers.
In comparison to Ubuntu, Fill the default OS with proprietary, telemetry, and Amazon.
Debian is relatively much more "free" compared to Ubuntu, and let's be honest, most modern hardware requires le proprietary blobs, so you're gonna have them running either way, the "free" argument that comes with Linux is reducing non-free as much as possible. With Debian does so much more than Ubuntu.
Also, in my opinion, I think the FSF's arguments against Debian are boolshiet, as they're too strict with everything anyway.
However, I believe that recommending a FSF-endorsed distro is STILL better than Ubuntu, much better actually. I would use them if only they worked with my hardware. -Topcuck1337 at blahblah date.
>You realize, the issue is not simply Unity, it's the fact that the devs who included Amazon into the default OS are the same breed of those that maintain the repos, not to mention their repos are heavily patched, and the variants use the same repos. If the devs included Amazon spyware in the default DE, how can we be sure their patches don't include spyware too?
I'm not entirely sure about this, but don't they include the source code?
>Which can be summed up as, Debian keeps the non-free out of the default installation, but still offers it on their servers.
>In comparison to Ubuntu, Fill the default OS with proprietary, telemetry, and Amazon.
>Debian is relatively much more "free" compared to Ubuntu, and let's be honest, most modern hardware requires le proprietary blobs, so you're gonna have them running either way, the "free" argument that comes with Linux is reducing non-free as much as possible. With Debian does so much more than Ubuntu.
Okay, but won't it create a problem with *especially* Broadcom-powered devices? Since without a proprietary driver enabled by default, it can't function at all.
So, to finish this up, add Debian, without removing Ubuntu first? since in your last edit you also included Mint, and Mint is an Ubuntu off-spring (unless you're talking about LMDE, which isn't "advertised" as much as the Ubuntu-based version) anyway won't it be irrelevant to delete Ubuntu?
--Morpheus (talk) 23:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
>I'm not entirely sure about this, but don't they include the source code?
I believe the source code can be found somewhere on the internet, but it's the same argument that goes against systemd, how many eyes do you actually think are monitoring and auditing every single patched package that goes into Ubuntu? Non-Canoncial eyes, that is. I believe it is generally good practice to abandon everything made by a developer that can justify selling their user's information to third parties.
>Okay, but won't it create a problem with *especially* Broadcom-powered devices? Since without a proprietary driver enabled by default, it can't function at all.
So with Debian, WiFi-enabled Broadcom devices are stuck in that state where they can't use networking and can't download their own drivers to fix it? Indeed I would suppose that fixing that is too much work for a novice Linux user.
>So, to finish this up, add Debian, without removing Ubuntu first? since in your last edit you also included Mint, and Mint is an Ubuntu off-spring (unless you're talking about LMDE, which isn't "advertised" as much as the Ubuntu-based version) anyway won't it be irrelevant to delete Ubuntu? To be honest, I'd go as far as removing everything Ubuntu related. Though I wonder, does LMDE include those Broadcom drivers? If so, it'd be a perfect candidate to go there instead of the Ubuntu stuff. How about Antergos? The devs aren't retarded like Manjaro ones, and Antergos works really well. --Topcuck1337, blahblah date.
>I believe the source code can be found somewhere on the internet, but it's the same argument that goes against systemd, how many eyes do you actually think are monitoring and auditing every single patched package that goes into Ubuntu? Non-Canoncial eyes, that is. I believe it is generally good practice to abandon everything made by a developer that can justify selling their user's information to third parties.
Back to the systemd argument again, eh? But your point is fair enough.
>So with Debian, WiFi-enabled Broadcom devices are stuck in that state where they can't use networking and can't download their own drivers to fix it? Indeed I would suppose that fixing that is too much work for a novice Linux user.
Assuming that Debian has a Broadcom driver inside their LiveISO/netinstall, and they give option to install it just like how Architect does, it would be possible to use networking, but I don't think they have it.
>To be honest, I'd go as far as removing everything Ubuntu related. Though I wonder, does LMDE include those Broadcom drivers? If so, it'd be a perfect candidate to go there instead of the Ubuntu stuff.
I'm not sure, LMDE is LinuxMint derived directly from Debian, assuming they are just Debian + Cinnamon + yadda yadda Mint's greeny shit, Broadcom won't be incuded.
>How about Antergos? The devs aren't retarded like Manjaro ones, and Antergos works really well.
Antergos is rolling-release, I don't think newbies would be immediately comfortable with rolling-releases. Cnchi installer was a pain though compared to Architect's.
--Morpheus (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Addendum: Debian does include non-free drivers in some images of their installation medium, but you have to dig deep to get it. And I don't think they included it by default on their main page.
>I'm not sure, LMDE is LinuxMint derived directly from Debian, assuming they are just Debian + Cinnamon + yadda yadda Mint's greeny shit, Broadcom won't be incuded. Linux Mint is not only Distro+Cinnamon+Custom programs, it also contains bugfixes and general user-experience improvement. I have found this true since some bugs that were in the Ubuntu release that X version of Mint was made out of, were non-existent in Mint. There we have reason to believe that Mint used the non-free images to build their LMDE, since obviously more than a DE and some software goes into their distro.
This is also another reason why I like Mint, obviously much more care went into it than other *buntu derivatives, since pretty much *all* of them contained the same bugs Ubuntu did. Only Linux Mint was an exception.
>Antergos is rolling-release, I don't think newbies would be immediately comfortable with rolling-releases. Cnchi installer was a pain though compared to Architect's. Why, though? A rolling-release is immediately more comfy than a standard release based distro, since you never have to re-install, and all your changes are permanent. Arch also very rarely breaks, and when it does, the Arch doods usually have a fix up on their website.
Personally, I never had issues with Cnchi, I've never used Architect, but given how popular it seems among retards in /g/, it's probably easy enough for them to use. As long as it leaves the default installation with DE and some GUI apps, then it's good enough for the newbie.
Also, how was Cnchi a pain?
PS:- I say we replace Linux Mint with LMDE, and Ubuntu with Antergos/Architect/Debian non-free live image. -Topcuck1337, blahblah date.
>Linux Mint is not only Distro+Cinnamon+Custom programs, it also contains bugfixes and general user-experience improvement. I have found this true since some bugs that were in the Ubuntu release that X version of Mint was made out of, were non-existent in Mint [citation needed]. There we have reason to believe that Mint used the non-free images [citation needed] to build their LMDE, since obviously more than a DE and some software goes into their distro.
- General UX improvement, such as Cinnamon? Even with XFCE/MATE/KDE versions, they barely make any differences with their Ubuntu counterparts. Also, see the citation needed part.
>Why, though? A rolling-release is immediately more comfy than a standard release based distro, since you never have to re-install, and all your changes are permanent. Arch also very rarely breaks, and when it does, the Arch doods usually have a fix up on their website.
- Some new users won't be comfortable with rolling-release and having to update every week, I don't know if Antergos has a GUI pacman wrapper or not. Just look at Windows, they use numbered versions and the programs use separate pseudo-rolling release for updating (it isn't integrated to a repo like Linux does) while keeping Windows' version. I am aware that we can't get the latest version because they're frozen, but hey, backport exists for a reason.
>Personally, I never had issues with Cnchi, I've never used Architect, but given how popular it seems among retards in /g/, it's probably easy enough for them to use. As long as it leaves the default installation with DE and some GUI apps, then it's good enough for the newbie.
- Architect, from my experience, is Arch installer without Antergos' shit. It basically installs Arch and DE/WM of your choice, no "default apps bullshit" except if you want to install GNOME Extras/KDE Extras/*insert DE here* Extras.
>Also, how was Cnchi a pain?
- People often complain about Cnchi, of how it frequently breaks, just look at this.
P.S. : Keep including Ubuntu, exclude Unity, add Debian, but I don't think the newbies will understand about the differences of "non-free enabled version" with the default version in Debian mainpage.
--Morpheus (talk) 04:06, 20 November 2015 (EST)
>General UX improvement, such as Cinnamon? Even with XFCE/MATE/KDE versions, they barely make any differences with their Ubuntu counterparts. Also, see the citation needed part. No citations, just my experience, I experienced a bug in booting in 14.04 stock Ubuntu and Xubuntu and even Elementary, however it wasn't on Mint. Too lazy to google around for it, and I probably wouldn't be able to find it, as this was a long time ago.
>Some new users won't be comfortable with rolling-release and having to update every week, I don't know if Antergos has a GUI pacman It does. And why wouldn't they? The pacman wrappers download the updates as soon as they come out, anyway, plus, nothing's preventing you from sticking to a stable configuration. Why bother with backports when you can always have the latest, and the old?
>People often complain about Cnchi, of how it frequently breaks, just look at this. All installers have their shortcomings, and they don't seem to have that many issues, imo, an installer like Cnchi is leagues better than the colossal mess that is Anaconda. Also, Cnchi is under active development, and bugs are always being fixed. I believe the installer is fine.
>Keep including Ubuntu, exclude Unity, add Debian, but I don't think the newbies will understand about the differences of "non-free enabled version" with the default version in Debian mainpage. >Keep including Ubuntu refer to all above points I made
>I don't think the newbies will understand about the differences of "non-free enabled version" that's why you add the link to the non-free in the post.
Also, I'm fairly certain LMDE is based on the non-free version as the value user experience the most, however, I can't test.
PS:- Remove everything Ubuntu related, add LMDE and Antergos. -Topcuck1337 at blahblah date
>No citations, just my experience, I experienced a bug in booting in 14.04 stock Ubuntu and Xubuntu and even Elementary, however it wasn't on Mint. Too lazy to google around for it, and I probably wouldn't be able to find it, as this was a long time ago.
- Seriously though, what kind of bug? When you installed Mint, the upstream maybe has fixed it.
>All installers have their shortcomings, and they don't seem to have that many issues, imo, an installer like Cnchi is leagues better than the colossal mess that is Anaconda. Also, Cnchi is under active development, and bugs are always being fixed. I believe the installer is fine.
- Anaconda is a piece of shit - I agree, Cnchi however also frequently breaks from that link I provide, we can't really sure that any installer would do fine -- so whenever I recommend an Arch(-based) distro, I always root for Architect instead.
>Also, I'm fairly certain LMDE is based on the non-free version as the value user experience the most, however, I can't test.
--Morpheus (talk) 08:52, 20 November 2015 (EST)
I just kinda forgot about this convo. Anyway.
>Seriously though, what kind of bug? When you installed Mint, the upstream maybe has fixed it.
Some xorg crashes and glitches I only observed on *buntus, and I can confirm they still exist in 15.04, so no, not fixed by upstream, but they were never in Mint. They are in stock Ubuntu and Xubuntu.
>Anaconda is a piece of shit - I agree, Cnchi however also frequently breaks from that link I provide, we can't really sure that any installer would do fine -- so whenever I recommend an Arch(-based) distro, I always root for Architect instead.
I don't mind recommending Architect, however, what I am *STRONGLY* opposing is placing anything with *buntu written on it on the recommended for newbies list, I believe I have provided enough reasons (other than the ubuntu-specific bugs I encountered.) for the removal, Debian is a more-than-sufficient alternative with many technical superiorities over *buntu
Sadly, indeed they don't seem to include them by default. I suppose maybe add them with a warning that they don't support broadcom wifi out of the box, but that can be enabled after installation?
--Topcuck1337 at blahblah date.
