Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place! |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 10:24 AM
|
#31
|
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,022
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Interesting, johnsfine. Although please note ~ I put in a Seagate 320 GB 7200rpm HDD instaed of the factory 160 GB 5400rpm one; and have 2 GB's of ram instead of its factory 1 GB.
Anyways, I'm formatting a CD and getting it ready for Debian! Excited!
I'm considering using KDE because of what Eric said; I mean if it gives me a performance boost/less bloated then I'm all for it. Plus, Linus criticized GNOME for being too idiotic...and I'm trying to steer clear of that. Is KDE the better choice? I'm not very familiar with it. (Only used it twice...Slackware and VMed BackTrack)
Last edited by lupusarcanus; 12-14-2009 at 10:32 AM.
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 10:43 AM
|
#32
|
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,022
Original Poster
Rep:
|
malekmustaq, I just read your post ~ (it snuck in) and I must say you make a good case for slack. I have been told by many people Slackware is the best. But; for now I'm going to try Debian -- from what everyone said it matches my needs. Plus I'm familiar with the way it works. Thanks, though, every point was valid and on the mark.
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 10:49 AM
|
#33
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Distribution: Aptosid
Posts: 148
Rep:
|
KDE is even more Windows-like than Gnome. If you want to try for new ways of desktop handling, try the ever-popular Blackbox (or Fluxbox) for lightning speed. crystal-fvwm and enlightenment (dr17) are other excellent choices, the latter even features 3d effects (with ecomorph) that integrate seamlessly into its sleek design.
But don't even try WMs apart from the mainstream unless you want to experiment with the way you use your computer - if you need a task bar and a menu, you should maybe stick with Gnome. e17, in comparison, has completely eliminated the need for any kind of interface for me (except for a battery and temperature monitor).
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 12:36 PM
|
#34
|
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: USA
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,022
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Hey guys...me again...
Well, the drivers have killed me again. Debian 'detects' wlan0 (wireless) but when it scans for networks it shows nothing (there should be at least one albeit weak). Well, I decided to proceed by entering my ESSID and password (hidden network) and sitting here on Windows, I'm pretty sure I/my ISP uses DHCP. Well, that was a no-go. So I manually put in my info (IP, subnet mask, sgateway, servers) and Debian gave me no error. Then it took forever to set the system clock, and finally, after installing the core system and selecting mirrors, did I only realize that I'm not connected; my Wireless card (it didn't detect my wired Ethernt for some reason) is not supported by Debian. Every mirror led to an error. So now I'm left with the basic, core system. How, oh how, do I fix this mess?
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 01:08 PM
|
#35
|
LQ 5k Club
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Tamil Nadu, India
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 8,578
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinter
if you need a task bar and a menu, you should maybe stick with Gnome.
|
Xfce has a task bar and a menu (see attachment).
|
|
|
12-14-2009, 01:30 PM
|
#36
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Reading, UK
Distribution: Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 5
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leopard
Hey guys...me again...
Well, the drivers have killed me again. Debian 'detects' wlan0 (wireless) but when it scans for networks it shows nothing (there should be at least one albeit weak). Well, I decided to proceed by entering my ESSID and password (hidden network) and sitting here on Windows, I'm pretty sure I/my ISP uses DHCP. Well, that was a no-go. So I manually put in my info (IP, subnet mask, sgateway, servers) and Debian gave me no error. Then it took forever to set the system clock, and finally, after installing the core system and selecting mirrors, did I only realize that I'm not connected; my Wireless card (it didn't detect my wired Ethernt for some reason) is not supported by Debian. Every mirror led to an error. So now I'm left with the basic, core system. How, oh how, do I fix this mess?
|
Well, you can try ndiswrapper but my advice is re-install Ubuntu or maybe Mint. Here's why:
I moved from Suse to Ubuntu at release 7.04. Been a happy customer ever since.
I have an early, like 5 years old, 64bit computer at home running Ubuntu Studio 64bit 9.10 and, aside from a few sound issues with 9.10 (e.g. disable pulseaudio) it's fine. Boots like greased lightening.
My 2-year old Toshiba labtop (work), 32bit, runs Ubuntu 9.10 straight; boots up so quickly that I'm working (having also logged in) while my desktop, running XP, hasn't even got to the login screen yet. And the desktop computer is some mega dual core intel thing.
Installs and upgrades are a doddle, finds the wireless OK, normally everything works, with maybe just a few tweaks. E.g. big issues with ATI Radeon card on my Tosh when going 9.04 -> 9.10 for a while but got it sorted. (Default drivers aren't always the best.)
So the slowness to boot is not a general Ubuntu problem and it's not a bloatware problem either. I'm not rushing to defend Ubuntu (I couldn't care less what people use) but I have seen several threads in the Ubuntu fora about 9.10 and slow boot up. The X11 service, I think, is partly to blame but if I recall correctly it's completely solvable. Maybe if you can't get your computer to boot up quickly, you should figure out why *before* distro hopping?
The problems you're having with debian suggests that you've still got some learning to do. I'm sure you'll get there in the end but it might have been quicker to sort out your problems with Ubuntu.
Personally, I use Ubuntu as a means to an end. The last thing I want to do is to spend hours manually installing/deinstalling/configuring stuff. I can happily accept that Debian/Centos/Gentoo/SL/Suse/Mandriva/Puppy god knows what else are all better in some way but I'll tell you this: Ubuntu 9.10 boots fast.
Bloatware? That's Windoze.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:56 AM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|