Feeling Lost...

[SkittleLinux18]

I'm really glad Jonathan and ozar made those comments. When I first read through this Thread yesterday, so many thoughts and questions came to my mind that I didn't feel it was worth adding my two cents worth. However, that's what it really comes down to.

AluminumSpleen says that he/she has not found the one that is for him/her. However, why was that? Could it have been because:

a) Desktop Manager
b) Window Manager
c) Distro
d) package manager and update method
e) types of apps included out of the box
f) difficulty adding apps from source tarball files
e) differences from Windows
f) look 'n feel customizing
g) personality differences from each tried distro (not a bad thing... it's actually a common factor)
h) all of the above

The list goes on. When I was distro hopping, I just took one thing at a time. Once I decided I liked KDE over Gnome and Xfce, that narrowed it down to KDE distros, and I just went from there.

Hope that helps.

[SkittleLinux18]

Question though: I've done some reading about fluxbox and openbox. Is there a big difference? They look pretty much identical to me.

The biggest differences are resource usages and graphical environment. Fluxbox is extremely light weight as it, but it uses more system resources than openbox, and I that's because it's prettier than openbox. Any *box DM is going to be very lightweight. To my knowledge, the only DM lighterweight than the *box DM's is IceWM; and that is only because IceWM is not a Desktop Manager, just a Window Manager. After that, it's CLI (command line interface).

Out of all the *box DM's, Fluxbox is my favorite. If you want to try that out, I suggest Fluxbuntu or Linux Mint Fluxbox Edition.

[aluminumspleen]

thanks Skittle, I've been kinda doing what you said. I liked Gnome over KDE, but i also like the *boxs, and I'd like to try getting those up and running to see if I like it as a defaut DE (also to prove to myself that I can do it). I also really like .deb and Synaptic, so I've been leaning towards that.

Actually, with all that said, it sounds like i'd like Fluxbuntu or Mint Fluxbox. But I guess another one of my problems is I like to do things different. I can't just settle with an Ubuntu or a Suse. I don't get it, and I guess that's why I'm trying to move towards more controlled distro rolling.

I don't know. I also really like OpenSolaris, but I'd probably dual-boot that on my laptop, not for a default desktop distro.

[jayd512]

Skittle has it right on the money in trying to explain that some of the options are really only WM's, not total DE's. I'm an IceWM advocate. And I happen to like it because it's totally customizable, and very easy to do so. And as far as trying to get something for your folks that's got a look similar to Windows, IceWM has a theme that's modeled after Win98. So... something else to take into consideration.
Really though, I think you already have the right idea...

maybe I should put the articles and books aside, clear up some hard drive space and just go for it.

That's what I did with CRUX, and I think since then, I haven't booted into Fedora maybe 3 or 4 times.
Try some stuff out. You'll love what happens when you finally get a custom look and feel from a distro.

[Jonathan183]

I also really like .deb and Synaptic, so I've been leaning towards that.

... I don't get it, and I guess that's why I'm trying to move towards more controlled distro rolling.

I ended up with Arch as my main distro - the rolling updates means in theory you only install once The installer is text based and gives you a CLI, you put whatever DE or WM on top that you want. I like the package manager - pacman, as a binary distro you don't end up with lots of compile time.

Ed: you will find advantages and disadvantages to all distros depending on what you want to use it for. Source based distros suit some, binary based distros suit others. Some like to try the latest release and don't mind update/reinstall at 6/12/18 month intervals. I like the rolling updates ... its good for me at the moment.

[SkittleLinux18]

I also really like .deb and Synaptic, so I've been leaning towards that.

I like the .deb files, too because I can install programs I download off the internet really easily. I'm able to do that with my Kubuntu and Ubuntu installs (Dual-booting both on my Linux computer). Another option is the wget command in the terminal. That makes installs really easy, too.

I like Synaptic, but I prefer Adept. It has a GUI I can load and use, as well as the apt-get command in the terminal. Adept will also refuse to install a program if it will break a package or dependency already installed on your computer. Synaptic won't, which is why updates have broken previous distro installs of mine.

I don't know. I also really like OpenSolaris, but I'd probably dual-boot that on my laptop, not for a default desktop distro.

OpenSolaris is cool, but bare in mind that you will have significantly less hardware support. It's fun to check out, but keep that in mind when you can't find the drivers you need.

[aluminumspleen]

I was also thinking about trying Arch. Around me, Staples (office supplies store) had a great deal on flash drives, and I got an 8GB Sandisk Cruzer for $12.99 (US)! So, I was thinking about having some fun testing out Arch on that thing. Is this a decent endeavor, or am I getting in over my head? I think it would be neat to have Arch on a flash drive - and with 8 gigs, I could almost use it as a regular distro (unlike Puppy on my 2GB flash - that's mostly for just speed and saving windows when it dies).

Also, I was thinking something like Arch would allow flexibility and the ability to learn more about Linux without completely killing myself, like with LFS. And jayd512, after what you said/what I read about CRUX, it sounds like it's a very similar situation.

[Jonathan183]

8GB is more than enough to try out Arch, especially if you are trying out something like fluxbox as the WM. You should be able to put kdemod on it as well.

You should be able to do a similar thing with Crux as well ... I did download Crux and start an install but ran into problems - can't remember what they were now but I was sold on the rolling updates.

I put Arch on a 4GB flash drive ... but since I only have one PC that supports USB boot I have not really used it & tend to use a live CD to fix system problems. I also read something about not using USB flash drives for temp data because it wears them out ... if I was using the flash drive on a regular basis I would investigate that a bit further