That all depends on how much pain you can withstand. There are the flux/openbox things which always look a bit retarded and nerdy to me.
There is windowmaker, which was lightning fast on my olde pentium2 with 256mhz and neomagic craptop gpu.
Then I switched to enlightenment16 because it looked better and had transparent terminals. Now I am using enlightenment17 because it looks even better and has a very low footprint. There should be a PPA for it somewhere, but expect it to be misbehaving. I roll my own on gentoo, almost always works flawless.
So, try e16, if avaiable.
Subject: Small footprint linux and wm/dm
I had never previously heard about these:
moonOS is a complete and fully functional operating system based on the GNOME, LXDE, Enlightenment DR17 window managers and powered by the popular Ubuntu Linux Distribution. moonOS has it own File Hierarchy System and use Appshell Framework. moonOS is perfect for any Desktop, Laptop PC or even for a Virtual Machine. moonOS's focus is on Utter Speed, Low Memory and Great Looks!
(There are three editions, each using one of the abovementioned DMs)
Macpup is a small,light OS. The .Iso is only 164 MB.It runs in ram and is very fast. It is not a striped down,bare bones,basic core OS. Macpup is a full featured systemright out of the box with apps for office,graphics,multimedia,internetand much more.And it looks really cool.
Uses Enlightenment DR17. They have a youtube video preview on their page.
Subject: Lightweight Linux for old Toshiba laptop
Hm, longtime no Citadel. Anyway...
You didn't mention how old your Toshiba laptop is. What vintage are we talking about?
I got a pretty basic $400-$500 Toshiba laptop back in 2007. With only 1 Gb of RAM, it was too weak to run Vista. I loaded ubuntu on it at the time and used it exclusively. The 1 Gb of RAM wasn't an issue. Updated it once in 2008, and steered clear of updating ubuntu with all the unity stuff.
XFCE sounds good in theory, but it really isn't using that much less resources than Gnome.
Know what did it for me? A few months ago, needing a fresh change, I put Linux Mint 11 on it. It runs beautifully. The Gnome interface that attracted so many to unbuntu in the first place, not messed up. Plus, you'll be familiar with everthing if you're used to ubuntu, since it's based on it. I am really enjoying it once again.
Ubuntu dropping support for KDE.
I don't really like KDE, but I dislike Gnmoe3 more than I dislike KDE, I was thinking of switching. Still will most likely go with another distro.
Subject: info: Malware devs embrace open-source
No points for guessing that they're making it easy to disable the universally-hated Unity desktop.
As long as gnome-panel continues to be available, we're ok, and it seems that Ubuntu is *reluctantly* on board with that.
I may have to write a "make it not suck" tool, which automatically does the following to any Ubuntu or Debian build:
1. Make gnome-panel ("classic") the system default
2. Remove the top panel
3. Configure the bottom panel with: launcher, window list, indicators, and clock
4. Restore the file manager icons on the desktop
This is also known as "the way people *expect* a desktop computer to work."
I know how to do all of these things manually and it doesn't take long, but it would be nice to share a one-step script to restore the normal computer behavior.
nodm replaces xdm/gdm/kdm on a computer used by a single person (say, a laptop).
You configure it with the name of a user who is automatically logged in on boot, and the session script to run. It's very nice to avoid the footprint of a full-blown display manager, and if you consider your laptop to be physically secure enough to avoid needing user/password login, it's convenient.
I had mine configured to run /usr/bin/gnome-session-fallback directly. The problem I encountered was that gvfs didn't work properly when I did that; every removable media volume that I attached would appear in the list but when I attempted to open it, permission was denied. I was also presented with the keyring prompt whenever I attempted to open my Chrome browser.
So obviously there's some other step in the login process that was being missed when I called gnome-session-fallback directly from nodm. If anyone has a clue on that I'd be happy to hear it. This is on a standard Debian build.
who needs a desktop (except for the class of machine called like that)
Desktops are usually more powerful less, expensive and easier to install additional hardware in.
I still say that reverting machines to look like windows2k is stupid, it is effectivly as mounting a dialing wheel onto a smartphone, simply because you are used to dial like that.
I abandoned this taskbar approach and all that long ago, it wastes real estate, makes you a "bonus miles" king on mousemovement and doesnt add any usability at all. My desktop looks a bit like the unity approach, but since over 6 years or so.
IG: Your gvfs problem might come from problems with policykit and udisks. This whole replacing of HAL thing made it a paing in the ass for people not using fullblown bloated desktops with proper ?dm login managers. Read a bit here: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-858965.html
If you have set this whole thing up proper (I guess debian does the config stuff for you), you want to put this into .xinitrc and use startx:
exec ck-launch-session dbus-launch --sh-syntax --exit-with-session /usr/bin/enlightenment_start
replace "enlightenment_start" with whatever dm you want to start.
Thanks for the suggestion; that looks like it would work properly but I ended up just switching back to gdm3 and editing /etc/gdm3/daemon.conf to autologin the user. That way I'll be protected the next time they decide to change things around.
So perhaps as a Gentoo user you're familiar enough with system internals to answer this question: *why* did they decide to replace HAL? Did too many people have problems getting their pod bay doors open or something?
Would someone please explain to me why the heir apparent to Steve Jobs is a South African who is trying to turn my desktop into a cellphone?
For extra credit, you can then tell me why he wants to turn my cellphone into a desktop.
While I'm at it, will someone explain why the Stepford Wives of Open Source (refered to hereafter as 'Ubuntu Users' in the interest of brevity) descend upon anyone asking the above questions and hurl abuse? Everytime I seek answers, they storm the castle walls. Sure, their battle cries are muffled owing to their heads being crammed so far up their backsides. They still manage to derail all attempts by sheer weight of numbers.
The closest I could get to an answer was some gum-smacking kid who said, "Cuz Micro$oft". I also heard murmurs that sounded like, "It's progress. Don't be left behind".
Ten years ago, this stuff seemed like it had such promise. What the Hell happened?
Is it just me or does every time Open Source takes aim at, "A Brave New World", it instead nails "Idiocracy" right between the eyes?
Anyway, if the Dear Abby of this place would indulge me with answers, I'd sure appreciate it. In the meantime, I have to get some code written before my CentOS desktop is turned into a teenaged boy's computer science project.
It's no better in Microsoft-land, unfortunately. Microsoft in Windows 8 seems determined to foist a phone experience off on desktop users.
I can only imagine they wish to do that to make it easier to manage their code... instead of maintaining separate code for phones vs. desktops, they will only have the one bit of code to use instead.
Or, maybe, possibly, it has something to do with tablets. Tablets are sorta like desktops and phones combined. They typically have the usage of a phone with the formfactor of a laptop (which we'll think of as a desktop for convenience).
Maybe, if you can nail something that can cater to tablets, you'll have something that can work with both phones and desktop, and thus have that elusive single code base to use.
In the end, I suspect we will need to have different code bases for particular environments. We'll see what wins.
It's no better in Microsoft-land, unfortunately. Microsoft in Windows
Nor in Linux-land; see Unity!
I can only imagine they wish to do that to make it easier to manage
their code... instead of maintaining separate code for phones vs.
desktops, they will only have the one bit of code to use instead.
Apple already tried that with the MacBook Wheel, y'know.
At least in Linux you can change it back ... sadly, both the Microsoft and Apple environments are heading in the direction of making computers look and act like overgrown smartphones.
For some of the upcoming test automation work we're doing, we need to use a tool that, unfortunately, currently only runs under Windows. Instead of dedicating an entire machine to this tool, I've been considering running it in a VM under Linux--in this case, Fedora 11. My first question is, which VM software to use?
I've used VMWare Player before to run a Windows VM, but the host OS was Windows as well. Will VMWare handle a Windows VM under Linux just as easily? Are there any caveats I should be aware of? What about resource footprints?
Just because I'm familiar with VMWare, though, I don't want to automatically rule out other VM solutions. I've heard of KVM/QEMU, VirtualBox, and I've heard IG rave about ProxMox, but never having used any of those, I'm not even sure where to begin when trying to compare all of these.
If I had the time and luxury, I'd just load up a VM in each and see how it all works. No such luck, though.
The other big question I had was concerning how to interface with the VM.
For the most part, I expect that once I set everything up, it shouldn't require any maintenance. However, I still need to be able to access the VM in case there are problems. With VMWare Player, the VM appeared in a window on my desktop. I'm going to be deploying this on a rack-mounted server. Though it is attached to a physical console via a KVM switch, I'd prefer to not have to run a desktop session just to see a VM's display. How is this generally handled in Linux? I figure that in most instances, I'd set up either a VNC server or turn on remote desktop access inside the VM, but, since the VM will be running Windows, I expect that I'll have to access the VM's "console" from time to time.
To simply throw a couple of VM's online on Fedora, the tool you probably want to use is virt-manager.
Depends how mission critical this is going to be. If it's mission critical: VMware. If it's not: anything else. I'm disillusioned with some of the free/cheap/open products after dealing with the endless train of frequently subpar releases that's come out of Virtualbox (which is a nice product once you get it working, just don't upgrade it if it's working fine...)