+- Linux Lite Forums (https://www.freecinema2022.gq/forums)
+-- Forum: General (https://www.freecinema2022.gq/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Off Topic (https://www.freecinema2022.gq/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Thread: Linux Lite Future (/showthread.php?tid=4730)
Re: Linux Lite Future - Valtam - 12-07-2017
Out of that 50% how many of those are 32bit only capable cpus?
Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk
Re: Linux Lite Future - bermudalite - 12-07-2017
I appreciate the explanation Jerry.
I really like what you guys have created and respect your goals.
Even if you are not competing or collaborating with other distros, I would still like to see LL adoption rates rise. I think some of the "big" distros are a bit bloated and/or less than user friendly. LL is such a great balance for making the transition.
Thank you.
Re: Linux Lite Future - penglezos - 12-07-2017
(12-06-2017, 10:16 PM)Coastie link Wrote: Just wondering, why was originally Ubuntu instead of Debian chosen for the base of Linux Lite?
Always wondering the same thing, any information about this [member=2]Jerry[/member] ?
Re: Linux Lite Future - Valtam - 12-07-2017
(12-07-2017, 10:30 AM)penglezos link Wrote: [quote author=Coastie link=topic=4895.msg37169#msg37169 date=1512598585]
Just wondering, why was originally Ubuntu instead of Debian chosen for the base of Linux Lite?
Always wondering the same thing, any information about this [member=2]Jerry[/member] ?
[/quote]
Primarily it has an easier installer to use than the Debian installer for first time linux users. It was also what I have mostly used, so users benefit directly from my experience with it. There are a ton of other reasons, but those are 2 of the main ones.
Re: Linux Lite Future - newtusmaximus - 12-07-2017
(12-07-2017, 12:14 AM)Jerry link Wrote: Out of that 50% how many of those are 32bit only capable cpus?
Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk
Those with more knowledge than I might be able to crunch the databse entries to answer that question.. If the result is that the majority have 64 bit processors, then I understand your reasoning.
However, if the result is that a high % of those on 32bit LL are stuck with 32 bit, then the question is still valid ??
Is there a list of 32bit motherboards or cpus for example minimum XP capable??
As an aside - I tried Point Linix (https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=point ) last year and got it to run ( with some sound card fiddling) on my old Toshiba A10. However the forum help was non existent . However it did show me that it was possible to have the 2003 Tosh perform as well as any current tablet ( except touch screen). The feel of the XCFE distro was similar to LL. i.e "familiar" enough for me ( a real novice) to get around. It was also "fast" and the installer straight forward. Sadly the distro has faded as only one developer.
What is does demonstrate is that it can be done on debian.
Re: Linux Lite Future - br1anstorm - 12-07-2017
Interesting discussion in this thread, especially on the likely demise of 32-bit versions. The march of tech progress is remorseless, but I'm sure I am not the only person who regrets the fact that so many old(er) computers are discarded so quickly in the quest for faster and more glitzy systems.
I still have a couple of old laptops and a couple of old desktops with modest CPUs (one a non-pae processor) and not a lot of RAM, which originally had WinXP installed. The shift to Linux has enabled me to keep them in use, and useful. But the decision by Ubuntu to abandon 32-bit affects Linux Lite, Mint and other derivatives; and PCLinuxOS has stopped 32-bit too as it requires too much work from their small dev team.
So like newtusmaximus and others, I've been having a look around. I found MX-16 (the result of AntiX and Mepis convergence). It's based on Debian, uses the XFCE desktop, is fairly lightweight, and still offers 32-bit in two versions (pae and non-pae) as well as 64-bit. Installation smooth and straightforward, updating a breeze. Runs on several of my older machines with no hiccups - wifi works, multimedia is fine, browsing speedy enough.
I'm not about to abandon Lite, or Mint. But I have to say I am impressed by MX-16.
Re: Linux Lite Future - newtusmaximus - 12-07-2017
br1anstorm, THkans for the info.
I am sure there are other distros around. The difference her is that LL has an active and successful support forum. Members, for the most part, are linux newbies and as a result their transition has been made possible by J & the team's philosophy.
My concern is that, because of the diktat of others, LL broad appeal might be curtailed.
What is unique about LL is their approach, and the very "audience" the aim to attract/support are likely to be turned away because of the whim of others.
There is a reason there was a vast following of XP. - It worked, and the hardware needed was modest, reliably built for the most part, and effective. for example, I was at a UK supermarket ATM ( cash machine / "hole in the wall" ) the other day when it had a fault and rebooted. To my surprise it went through an XP boot procedure!!
Vista, thank heavens, is gone.
Windows 7 is coming to the end of its life. Not sure whether there are any records of what % of installs were 32bit. Take the point that a fair number of 32 bit might have been habbit, although I seem to remember that there were 64 bit driver issues for some older periphery hardware.
An interesting Info site https://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp for schools. Linux is gradually gaining hold.
Re: Linux Lite Future - trinidad - 12-07-2017
"To my surprise it went through an XP boot procedure!!"
The base system MBR bootloader for Windows 7,8 and 10 is still from XP. Technically there's only ever been three, 3.1, 95, and XP.
Also there is a general torch passing going on in Linux concerning 32bit, but as long as there are working 32bit machines there will be Linux 32bit OSs to run on them, though I suspect the focus of such OSs will slowly narrow finally settling on niche user tasks. I think some devs of OSs like Knoppix will stay to the end, and hobbyists (I still have a working i486 Compaq running Dos) will keep 32bit around for a long time to come, and some Windows programs will lag behind the curve until there are 64bit replacements.
The US will soon be starting up its 200 petaflop supercomputer. The march forward in computer technology relentlessly compounds itself. New mathematics causes new mathematics. Consider the last of the Unix mainframe/workstation OSs circa late eighties and early nineties facing the Windows 95 network/PC changeover. The speed of the changes in the last 30 years is mind boggling. People dream things and then build them but in computing things are built that generate new dreams with each innovation. Dreams come true and spawn more dreams. We still build houses and cars about the same and arguments could be made for older building methods making better product but computing is not like that. It exponentially compounds its possibilliity for innovation as it goes forward, so yes the pace is awfully fast. LL will be far better off relieved of the maintainence burden of the 32bit version. It's just the nature of things.
TC
Re: Linux Lite Future - bermudalite - 12-07-2017
Regarding the 32-bit discussion:
I think Jerry's stated goal..."to show Windows users that Linux is not the hard OS they thought or heard it was"...pretty much sums up why the support for 32-bit processors is disappearing.
The focus is on transitioning current Windows users who are considering test driving Linux for the first time. My guess is the vast majority of that audience probably have machines built in the last decade running Windows 7, 8 or 10 (or God forbid Vista). If so, those machines pretty much all have 64-bit processors, right?
Therefore continuing support for 32-bit really does not advance the mission.
The goal is not to keep old machines alive. Actually the goal is not even to create a distro that will attract users of other Linux distros. The goal is to dispel myths about the the complexity of Linux and to ease the transition from Windows. A simple goal which I respect and appreciate.
What I find ironic as I read these forums is the number of semi-experienced Linux noobs (as I think of myself) or even mature Linux users who have migrated to Linux Lite from other more popular (and presumably better funded) distros.
Since Jerry is not attempting to create a one-size-fits-all distro, I think a fascinating question would be what is the natural progression after the LL goal is accomplished IF the converted user matures into a Linux expert? Do they stick with LL as their daily driver or would they seek a familiar but more robust alternative? If so, what distro is similar to LL but offers something more for advanced users???
Forgive my digression.
Thanks again Jerry et al.
Re: Linux Lite Future - br1anstorm - 12-07-2017
Some pretty profound questions are surfacing as this thread continues.
There's an interesting assumption - probably well founded - that most people prefer the familiar devil they know (Windows) to the unfamiliar one which they don't (Linux). Hence Jerry's mission to make Linux (Lite) reassuringly easy for Windows converts. I recall when I first dipped my toe in the Linux water, I was attracted by Zorin which had a similar aim, and explicitly claimed to look, feel and function like Windows XP.
The paradox is that having made the transition to Linux, there is a constant tension between wanting to stick with what's reliable, effective and easy to use, and being tempted into something shinier, faster, glitzier and more complex. Thus the enduring attachment of so many Windows users to XP. I'd guess that a lot of Linux users are the same: once they have found a distro that works well and looks good, they are less keen to push boundaries and try more exotic variations.
The recent challenges for Linux developers emerge from the nature and pace of technical change which is being forced upon them. Not just the shift from 32-bit to 64. Even more of a headache (in my view) is the move from what's now called 'legacy' partitioning and boot procedure, to the new-fangled UEFI (which I still find complex, strange and intimidating).
Personally I'd be happy to stick with Linux Lite (or my equal favourite, Mint) and not think about upgrading or changing for another five years or more. But then I'm also happy to drive a ten-year old car and wear shoes that are worn-in enough to be comfortable, rather than going for the latest style in the showroom or shopfront!
So maybe the challenge in terms of this thread's title, is whether Linux Lite's future is to push boundaries, become more sophisticated and (probably) more complex; or to give priority to refining, polishing and maybe even simplifying (!) what already exists. I'm sure we'll all watch and follow with interest!