PcLinuxOS - best Linux desktop ever

The friend of mine recommended this distro and as soon as I installed it I got mesmorised how stable and fast it was.
Everything worked out of the box and with new KDE and Plasma (panels and widgets), 3D desktop and the rest of the eye candy looks and works great.
It was the first distro for which I didn't need any console intervention. All can be done safely in GUI. There are tons of themes and widgets and they all can be ultra easy to install just by clicking. So far...I had no issues...none! With all effects enabled, it's ultra fast even on my pretty crappy notebook.

This is mine desktop after few minutes of tweaking ( I haven't been using KDE for ages):
Imageshack - snapshot3m.png

Give it a try! For me...this is the future of Linux Desktop.

Funny, I always found PcLinuxOS to be craptacular. I didn't know it used KDE, that's probably why. KDE is a resource hog. Also, it looks like a Windows clone with those desktop icons. How much RAM is that using while idle?

KDE looks great, better than GNOME IMO, but I never really got the hang of it, so I'm staying with Ubuntu (not my favorite distro, but well...). Else I'd choose Knoppix. Too bad I don't know how to reflect changes onto a writable CD.

Also, it looks like a Windows clone with those desktop icons.

Maybe, but most users don't want anything brand-new & different and there are not many good possibilities to display a network or a trash bin. I like it.

Originally Posted by Epy

Funny, I always found PcLinuxOS to be craptacular. I didn't know it used KDE, that's probably why. KDE is a resource hog. Also, it looks like a Windows clone with those desktop icons. How much RAM is that using while idle?

Having used both Linux and Windows, I don't really understand blind windows bashing. What is so wrong with having some easy to use tools? Not everything has to be hard and unique. The desktop GUI doesn't have to look alien in order to be good. I'm not saying Windows is the best operating system out there, but they definitely have Linux beat when it comes to usability. I know I don't want to have to go into a Bash shell to do every little thing.


With that said...this thread feels like an advertisement.

Originally Posted by Epy

KDE is a resource hog.

C++ will do that! KDE uses Qt, so they are up a creek, since the underlying GNU/linux uses virtually no fat C++ libs. All the DE's inc. GNOME are resource hogs anyway, which paved the way for KDE to take it to the next level of foolishness perhaps. You don't need them. All you need is X and a decent window manager.

Originally Posted by lpaulgib

The desktop GUI doesn't have to look alien in order to be good.

Alien to whom? I'm a long time linux user, barely touch windows, and I'll admit I resent the attempts to make the GUI look like windows, esp. to the extent that it reduces the functionality for "power" users like myself in to make it easier for/court MS users.

I'm not referring to GUI vs. console here, as that of course remains the same anyway -- more to do with the look and feel of the GUI. Esp. goofy: Mac-like icon docks. Reminds me of crib toys. How about a nice BLANK desktop, except maybe a pager and resource monitor, and then a pop-up menu for apps. Beyond that, it's pure distraction.

The default installs of different distros actually represent very superficial differences. All the debian derived disto's, inc. Ubuntu, are virtually identical, they just present different PR philosophies.

People should be more careful when they say something's the best ever. In fact, best itself is a horrible superlative word that will eventually fool people into thinking that everything is relative, after "best" isn't best anymore. Can't have that.

Linux is the best (not relatively, absolutely) but the idea of a "best" distro is very relativistic, since they are 99% identical.

If you have been using linux for more than a year and you still feel an attachment to one particular distro, you are not making the most of the system, because the default installs do not. IMO they are just intended as generic multi-purpose front-ends for new users and institutions. Try scratching the surface.

Originally Posted by MK27

Linux is the best (not relatively, absolutely) but the idea of a "best" distro is very relativistic, since they are 99% identical.

If you have been using linux for more than a year and you still feel an attachment to one particular distro, you are not making the most of the system, because the default installs do not. IMO they are just intended as generic multi-purpose front-ends for new users and institutions. Try scratching the surface.

Best for who? 90% of the market has no interest in building an operating system from the ground up. Linux is great if you are technically sound. Linux is NOT best for most computer users who want a desktop that lets them surf the web, watch videos, listen to music, et cetera out of the box. Lets be honest, but Linux is a hassle. Yes it's got a lot more functions available, but how often do you really need to know what your CPU usage is?

There just isn't 1 thing that Linux offers that my Windows 7 PC can't do that I would WANT to do. And as far as security and stability goes, never had my box crash or hacked. Most Microsoft bashing is unfounded, and seems to be done out of the coolness of hating Microsoft and being in the "know" about Linux. I have messed up some settings in Linux before and messed my settings up. I've had compatibility problems.

I'm not running a server. I'm not some uber programmer or elite black hat hacker. Not to mention most programs and support are geared towards Microsoft. Everything is simply more difficult in Linux. Can't think of anything that's easier that makes Windows worth it to me. It's just the sad facts.

Don't confuse me with saying that Linux doesn't have it's uses. Put a linux distro next to Windows, and 90% of America is going to look at you and ask "Why should I bother?"

Originally Posted by lpaulgib

Having used both Linux and Windows, I don't really understand blind windows bashing. What is so wrong with having some easy to use tools? Not everything has to be hard and unique. The desktop GUI doesn't have to look alien in order to be good. I'm not saying Windows is the best operating system out there, but they definitely have Linux beat when it comes to usability. I know I don't want to have to go into a Bash shell to do every little thing.

With that said...this thread feels like an advertisement.

It was a statement of fact, not a bashing. It does look like Windows. I use both Windows and Linux, thanks.

Originally Posted by lpaulgib

Best for who? 90% of the market has no interest in building an operating system from the ground up ... and ask "Why should I bother?"

I couldn't disagree more. I used Windows alone for so many years and had tried Linux several times before fully switching over.

They're both good, but modern distros come with pretty much everything you need out of the box and if they don't, you can keep a single line script to install every extra program you want from repositories. With Windows, you need more programs in general just to get what some would consider base functionality (like Clavier+ for keyboard shortcuts), and every additional program you want requires manual installation and no one wants to do that. Installing Windows applications takes almost as much effort as a manual build does, and that's sad.

Most Linux distros have a fully functional office suite out of the box instead of a 60-day trial of works or office home.

Originally Posted by lpaulgib

What is so wrong with having some easy to use tools?

vim does not ship with Windows. Easy-to-use is in the eyes of the beholder. It is interesting that you step on yourself in the SAME POST.

but how often do you really need to know what your CPU usage is?

So I can tell if a program locked up or just busy.
So I can get a sense of how high I can set the graphics settings in a game.
So I can confirm that my computer is working - the visual feedback is infinitely reassuring.

There just isn't 1 thing that Linux offers that my Windows 7 PC can't do that I would WANT to do.

Agreed - they can both do whatever you want them to do 99.9% of the time. Neither OS can walk your dog, despite what many windows users would like you to believe, and neither is going to magically make you a better person, despite what many linux users would have you think.

Although gamers will tend towards windows because of the enormous hold they have on that particular market, there's really no life-threatening differences between the two. Just a few interface changes here and there, but it all does the same thing in the end.

And as far as security and stability goes, never had my box crash or hacked.

Also agreed - the problem isn't that Windows is bad, it's that it's a big target because it's so widely used. And a vast majority of Windows users don't know how to protect themselves. My biggest peeve is how Mac users say "macs don't get viruses." At least linux users are humble and competent enough to admit they aren't immune.

"Why should I bother?"

I think the thing is that as linux becomes more "accessible" (and I give props to the people at Ubuntu for making it so intuitive for non-technical users) for people who don't understand a thing about computers, there's going to be a great demand for linux. Not because it's inherently better for everyone (Microsoft does spend a ton of time designing their interfaces - just look at MS Office and how everything else tries to mimic that), but simply because it is free.

EDIT: also you can customize virtually any part of linux - the only way to dramatically change windows is to 1) Download a modified (and probably illegal) version of the window manager dll 2) replace explorer.exe with a free (probably one available for linux) or costly shell replacement. That's something that's easier done in linux than in windows.

Originally Posted by Epy

Installing Windows applications takes almost as much effort as a manual build does, and that's sad.

Yes, I can't count the number of times I've installed a Windows app and couldn't figure out which button I should click (Back, Next or Cancel). It's all so confusing.

Originally Posted by cpjust

Yes, I can't count the number of times I've installed a Windows app and couldn't figure out which button I should click (Back, Next or Cancel). It's all so confusing.

I was referring more to the time it takes to open the browser, find the exe, download, run, jump through hoops. Granted there are many applications that take a while to build, the ones I have built lately (gtk-gnutella, DOSBox) have taken under a minute after the download.

Originally Posted by bernt

So I can tell if a program locked up or just busy.
So I can get a sense of how high I can set the graphics settings in a game.
So I can confirm that my computer is working - the visual feedback is infinitely reassuring.

I think the thing is that as linux becomes more "accessible" (and I give props to the people at Ubuntu for making it so intuitive for non-technical users) for people who don't understand a thing about computers, there's going to be a great demand for linux. Not because it's inherently better for everyone (Microsoft does spend a ton of time designing their interfaces - just look at MS Office and how everything else tries to mimic that), but simply because it is free.

EDIT: also you can customize virtually any part of linux - the only way to dramatically change windows is to 1) Download a modified (and probably illegal) version of the window manager dll 2) replace explorer.exe with a free (probably one available for linux) or costly shell replacement. That's something that's easier done in linux than in windows.

Task manager has a performance tab that allows you to check your CPU usage, and you can see what percent each program is taking up. Everything you're talking about can be done with that.

Once again, back to my personal experience, when Redhat FIRST put out Fedora, I couldn't even get wifi support, while Windows ran it fine. Linux is just now catching up to Microsoft on compatibility. As I said, Linux has it's uses, but for the majority of users, it's not worth the effort. If you want to customize everything in your OS, I'd say go with Linux.

I just don't really find too many programs out there that don't have a windows version, or a very similar comparable program. I don't know of any.