PDA

View Full Version : So I'm finally going Linux only but need to sort some things out



Algus
October 12th, 2009, 05:49 PM
This is sort of a combination help/advice type thread.

The plan was to try out Arch Linux and hopefully learn a bit more about OSes.

Studied partition tables, thought I had them figured out. Went to set up my partitions. Accidently deleted Vista. Oops lol.

Instead of restoring from my backups, I've decided I'm just going to go full Linux on my notebook. Wanted to get back to something I knew, so I've installed Ubuntu.

If it's going to be my main OS though, there's a couple areas I need some help in.

GNOME vs. KDE - I've read all kinds of stuff about the differences. I was leaning towards GNOME in that it apparently boots faster. Is the desktop environment decision not as big an issue as I'm thinking? KDE Progs are not a huge plus for me as I will probably be using a combination of Google Docs and Abiword for productivity.

Whilst on desktop environments-

Enlightenment - I think it's pretty. I thought about going with OpenGEU but I think I want to stick with Ubuntu as the underlying system. How tough is it going to be to get this running on Ubuntu?

32 vs 64

I have a 64 bit processor, though only 3GB of RAM. Should I go 64? Will it be more efficient (in terms of boot speed and other things) than the 32?

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 05:55 PM
If you want a lighter one, look into lxde or xfce. Otherwise, I'd go with gnome. But some people would prefer kde. It's up to you really, but I'd use gnome, to me it just makes sense and loads faster.

64 bit. Always go with 64 on Linux. This isn't Windows now, where nothing is supported properly.

It's easy peasy to get enlightenment on ubuntu - sudo apt-get install enlightenment

Algus
October 12th, 2009, 06:02 PM
I tried xfce on an old laptop a year or so ago. I liked it but didn't see any advantage to it over Gnome since my computer is new enough that it isn't bogged down.

Sounds like I'm getting ready to reinstall since I've got 32-bit going now lol. I'll DL the ISO then and try it out after I give Arch another spin in a couple days (I actually need to buy an ethernet cable...)

Thanks for speedy reply, as well as the command to get enlightenment going. I'll play around with it today.

Much appreciated!

starcannon
October 12th, 2009, 07:33 PM
GNOME vs. KDE - I've read all kinds of stuff about the differences. I was leaning towards GNOME in that it apparently boots faster. Is the desktop environment decision not as big an issue as I'm thinking? KDE Progs are not a huge plus for me as I will probably be using a combination of Google Docs and Abiword for productivity.

Whilst on desktop environments-

Enlightenment - I think it's pretty. I thought about going with OpenGEU but I think I want to stick with Ubuntu as the underlying system. How tough is it going to be to get this running on Ubuntu?

32 vs 64

I have a 64 bit processor, though only 3GB of RAM. Should I go 64? Will it be more efficient (in terms of boot speed and other things) than the 32?
Most everything on your list is really a matter of personal preference; particularly concerning Desktop Environments. I think the only way to sort that out reliably is to try each of the ones that interest you in turn, give them a month each, and then make your favorite your default.

32 vs 64, I understand that 64bit Ubuntu has gotten better within the last couple years, but my experience last summer was that it still required me to do a lot more tuning than 32bit does, and that many of the apps I run were still only available in 32bit packages anyway. I also did not personally see a great increase in performance, am am only running 2gb of ram though. I would recommend again, trying it for a bit before you decide, thats really the only way to make up your mind adequately.

GL and HF

jeremyswalker
October 12th, 2009, 07:42 PM
It's easy peasy to get enlightenment on ubuntu - sudo apt-get install enlightenment

Not exactly the case if he wants what OpenGeu has. Installing from the repos will get you the stable e16 version of Enlightenment. The newer, prettier one that most Enlightenment distros use (including OpenGeu) is DR17, which is not in the repos. However, I believe you can find packages for it through the Enlightenment site.

keiichidono
October 12th, 2009, 07:49 PM
Most everything on your list is really a matter of personal preference; particularly concerning Desktop Environments. I think the only way to sort that out reliably is to try each of the ones that interest you in turn, give them a month each, and then make your favorite your default.

GL and HF
This is true. But 64bit Ubuntu works fine for me and it uses more of my resources and makes my system feel a smidgen snappier and my 720p HD anime play better. No reason to stick with 32bit unless you don't like change or don't like your system using what's available to it.

Exodist
October 12th, 2009, 08:07 PM
This is sort of a combination help/advice type thread.

The plan was to try out Arch Linux and hopefully learn a bit more about OSes.

Studied partition tables, thought I had them figured out. Went to set up my partitions. Accidently deleted Vista. Oops lol.

Instead of restoring from my backups, I've decided I'm just going to go full Linux on my notebook. Wanted to get back to something I knew, so I've installed Ubuntu.

If it's going to be my main OS though, there's a couple areas I need some help in.

GNOME vs. KDE - I've read all kinds of stuff about the differences. I was leaning towards GNOME in that it apparently boots faster. Is the desktop environment decision not as big an issue as I'm thinking? KDE Progs are not a huge plus for me as I will probably be using a combination of Google Docs and Abiword for productivity.

Whilst on desktop environments-

Enlightenment - I think it's pretty. I thought about going with OpenGEU but I think I want to stick with Ubuntu as the underlying system. How tough is it going to be to get this running on Ubuntu?

32 vs 64

I have a 64 bit processor, though only 3GB of RAM. Should I go 64? Will it be more efficient (in terms of boot speed and other things) than the 32?


Arch is good distro, but for new users I really recommend *Ubuntu. Its super easy to install and sets most everything up for the user by default making the users first experience a easier one.

Go 64bit, in addition the 3GB of RAM is excellent and should run great.

Also there is also OpenOffice.org if you have not tried it for productivity. Tho I do like Abi word better.

KDE, GNOME or XFCE: XFCE is more less a lighter version of GNOME, although lately I been leaning more towards XFCE in terms of simplicity and efficiency. KDE is a little more robust desktop then the other two, but last version or two has speed it up so its not feeling heavy at all to run.

Exodist
October 12th, 2009, 08:08 PM
this is true. But 64bit ubuntu works fine for me and it uses more of my resources and makes my system feel a smidgen snappier and my 720p hd anime play better. No reason to stick with 32bit unless you don't like change or don't like your system using what's available to it.

+1

ViperChief
October 12th, 2009, 08:11 PM
If you want a lighter one, look into lxde or xfce. Otherwise, I'd go with gnome. But some people would prefer kde. It's up to you really, but I'd use gnome, to me it just makes sense and loads faster.

64 bit. Always go with 64 on Linux. This isn't Windows now, where nothing is supported properly.

It's easy peasy to get enlightenment on ubuntu - sudo apt-get install enlightenment

I would say 32-bit, especially with Arch. Under 4GB, he doesn't need 64-bit and Arch doesn't do multilib without some tinkering and if he ends up wanting something that's 32-bit, it'll just be frustrating. Now, if he had 4GB, I'd say go for it. But right now, the pros do not outweigh the cons.

BTW, Have you even used Windows x64? It supports everything perfectly, unless it's 16-bit. No one likes FUD, no matter where it's coming from.

Warpnow
October 12th, 2009, 08:18 PM
You can easily install multiple Desktop environments and use the one you want to. Don't swear the small stuff.

Enlightment's website has an ubuntu ppa. Add that to the end of the file /etc/apt/sources.list and ubuntu will keep your enlightenment up to date for you.

Its no secret I'm not a fan of KDE, but that doesn't mean I cannot be objective. I've reccomended KDE to multiple people who I thought it would be best for. Its all an issue of preference. I find gnome easier to multitask in, and more efficient. KDE obviously has a different desktop experience, and you may prefer it. Don't hesitate to try them both out.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:19 PM
Then ViperChief, you're behind with the times. Get with the times, and get some speed in your install!
Yes, I've used Windows 64 bit, and yes, it sucks.

ViperChief
October 12th, 2009, 08:20 PM
Then ViperChief, you're behind with the times. Get with the times, and get some speed in your install!
Yes, I've used Windows 64 bit, and yes, it sucks.

Speed in my install? What are you talking about?

NormanFLinux
October 12th, 2009, 08:23 PM
Kubuntu Netbook Edition offers another flavor of KDE to be run on netbooks and on very old computers.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:23 PM
Speed up your install. 64 is ALWAYS the better choice. Always. No matter how much ram you have. Always.

Norman : He has neither a netbook, nor a old computer (from what I can tell) . Saying that doesn't help.

Jesus_Valdez
October 12th, 2009, 08:26 PM
OMG!

32 vs 64
KDE vs Gnome
Arch vs Ubuntu

This thread is made of awesome!!!

Let the flame-WARRRR begins.

On the subjetcs, I have beeen using Ubunt 64 bit and without a single problem.

ViperChief
October 12th, 2009, 08:27 PM
Speed up your install. 64 is ALWAYS the better choice. Always. No matter how much ram you have. Always.

Okay. I'm helping the OP to make a good decision. Under 4GB of RAM, he doesn't need 32 bit, for one, and he doesn't really get much of an advantage from using it. Also, Arch doesn't do multilib like Ubuntu and some other distros do. So, when he decides he wants something that is only 32-bit, he's going to get frustrated.

FYI, I've been using 64 bit for years now. Why are people so quick to assume things around here? I've been using Linux for a while. I don't need to get with the times.

I still think that his best bet is 32 bit.

Which Windows was it? I find it ironic that you say that Windows 64-bit sucks on support, yet you have a link on how to install Flash in 64-bit. All I did was click "Download" and install it in my Windows 64-bit. I'm telling you...no one likes MS FUD or Linux FUD.

Warpnow
October 12th, 2009, 08:31 PM
Low ram with 64 bit is bad because booting a 64 bit operating system uses more ram, and you decrease performance. Not paying attention to this thread, but that is true. I would not install 64 bit on 2gbs of ram or less. 64 bit is not "always" the best choice, but it usually is.

And 64 bit is largely bug free now, and 64 bit flash is better than 32 bit flash for linux.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:31 PM
Ehm, he's not installing Arch. He's installed Ubuntu.

Wanted to get back to something I knew, so I've installed Ubuntu.
So it's better for him to install 64 bit. It's faster, and it's going to be more supported in the future - you don't want to have to reinstall because the application you want only works on 64 bit.

And it was vista. I'm not bashing, just saying that for me, it's never worked properly.

Warpnow
October 12th, 2009, 08:32 PM
you don't want to have to reinstall because the application you want only works on 64 bit.

sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture *.deb

Edit: Heh, I'm not even sure what the argument is here, but I've never had trouble installing different architectures via the above command. Though, to be honest, you much more often come across 32 bit only apps than 64 bit only, especially in legacy software.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:34 PM
I know, but it's better to run them natively.

ViperChief
October 12th, 2009, 08:39 PM
Ehm, he's not installing Arch. He's installed Ubuntu.

So it's better for him to install 64 bit. It's faster, and it's going to be more supported in the future - you don't want to have to reinstall because the application you want only works on 64 bit.

And it was vista. I'm not bashing, just saying that for me, it's never worked properly.

I was referring to the OP, before he decided to go to Ubuntu. I was referring to Arch, since that's what you first responded to.



sudo dpkg -i --force-architecture *.deb

Edit: Heh, I'm not even sure what the argument is here, but I've never had trouble installing different architectures via the above command. Though, to be honest, you much more often come across 32 bit only apps than 64 bit only, especially in legacy software.

I was talking about Arch, not Ubuntu. Arch does not support multilib so it will only run 64-bit programs. You can tinker with it, but out of the box, it doesn't do multilib.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:40 PM
I wasn't responding to Arch? I was responding to Ubuntu.

ViperChief
October 12th, 2009, 08:46 PM
I wasn't responding to Arch? I was responding to Ubuntu.

Okay. Should've read my posts. Because I said Arch.

Anyway, this has nothing to do with the topic anymore. So, Yeah.

NoaHall
October 12th, 2009, 08:47 PM
I would say 32-bit, especially with Arch

To me, that means that you apply that to any distro he wants to use. Which isn't true for ubuntu.

vinutux
October 12th, 2009, 08:49 PM
Light desktop X normal desktop -> Based on system resources

Gnome X KDE -> personal choice

32 X 64 -> foolish question

RichardLinx
October 12th, 2009, 09:59 PM
you don't want to have to reinstall because the application you want only works on 64 bit.
I don't think that's going to be an issue for many years yet. Look how long we've stuck to x86...
@OP: Between 32 and 64 Bit Ubuntu (Since, as confusing as this thread is, I think you're going for Ubuntu) I would personally go with 64 Bit. But that's only because If I run into a problem like an application being 32 Bit only or something like that, I don't mind finding a fix/work-around.

If you're the type that just wants to get work done and not bother having to tinker every now and then, then go with 32 Bit.