06-29-2014, 04:51 PM
(06-29-2014, 01:05 PM)myrddin link Wrote: I now have a extremely responsive laptop, running Linux Lite 2.0.... It could be argued that with the specs on my laptop, that I don't need a "lightweight" installation. My argument for Linux Liite, would be to point out that the applications included with the install, are anything but 'lightweight', and I can add whatever "eye candy" I would like to the desktop, (if I wanted to..which I don't). There is a world of difference between a "Minimalist" installation, and Linux Lite. The former is very fast, because it has very little installed, the latter is also very fast (responsive would be more appropriate.."fast is too subjective) because it was designed to be, and not because it has been just stripped to the bare bones, necessary to boot up. I want a clean uncluttered desktop, in conjunction with a set of quality applications, and a very responsive system. That is what I now have !
Welcome to LL and the forum myrddin,
I agree with everything you just said. Just because a distro is 'lightweight' doesn't mean it's only for use on older machines. I've used Xfce-based Linux distros (LL being the most recent) for the past couple of years on both old and new computers for the same reasons you just gave. They're very responsive, have less bloat, have a relatively intuitive interface, tend to be more stable (in my experience at least) and are highly customizable if you want to add a bit of 'eye candy'. Nice thing about Linux is that there is something that fits most people's tastes. For those who like more, they can choose a distro using one of the 'heavier' desktops -- Cinnamon, KDE or Unity. Those who like minimal can use LXDE, Openbox, etc. A little something for everyone!
Try Linux Beginner Search Engine for answers to Linux questions.