AntiX Not Pretty but Highly Functional.

Forum Forums News News AntiX Not Pretty but Highly Functional.

  • This topic has 48 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated Dec 21-3:08 pm by Brian Masinick.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47620
    Moderator
    ModdIt

    Review by Jack Germain 07.12 2020

    Have not found a mention to this review here in the forum.

    Only real critic points, appearance and only two desktops.
    Hope so much that changes next release. First impression means so much.

    https://linuxinsider.com/story/antix-linux-not-pretty-but-highly-functional-86942.html

    • This topic was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by anticapitalista. Reason: fixed link
    #47621
    Moderator
    christophe
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    That review was just perfect. He had loads of good things to say, and nothing bad. Even the appearance comments were good:

    That does not mean antiX is not appealing visually. This distro has a no-nonsense appearance.

    confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2018

    #47622
    Moderator
    ModdIt
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    @ christophe please read the review carefuly,

    Jack Germain wrote following in his review.
    Running antiX on newer machines with souped-up RAM and modern video cards do little to spruce up its appearance.
    In fact, I consider antiX ugly in comparison with most other Linux desktop appearances. But it is highly functional.
    That is what matters most. So you must be willing to accept that tradeoff.

    I am not knocking antiX neither is the reviewer he does make a statement regarding appearance which is what I mentioned.
    And regarding the present scheme I have not one user who has liked wanted or kept it. Humans are fickle, first appearance
    often counts more than anything else. The distro is fantastic but undersells on impression.

    #47625
    Forum Admin
    SamK
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    The reviewer clearly goes to some lengths to indicate the presentation of antiX is not detrimental to the distro, rather the design reflects its underlying philosophies. He also grasped the idea that antiX is highly configurable to empower the user to configure it to their own requirements. antiX does not aim to look like a myriad of other distros, it is comfortable being unique.

    Abstracts from review
    https://linuxinsider.com/story/antix-linux-not-pretty-but-highly-functional-86942.html

    The antiX distro offers a solid operating system that many other Linux communities fail to deliver. It is unassuming, but reliable, and focuses on performance rather than prettiness.

    That last element goes a long way to giving users distraction-free computing power. That does not mean antiX is not appealing visually. This distro has a no-nonsense appearance.
    […]
    I consider antiX ugly in comparison with most other Linux desktop appearances. But it is highly functional. That is what matters most. So you must be willing to accept that tradeoff.
    […]
    The control center and numerous settings panels let you put your own personal appearance to the desktop display and functionality.

    #47626
    Moderator
    christophe
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    So you must be willing to accept that tradeoff.

    OK. I guess I do remember reading that bit, and it actually did “rub me the wrong way” when I read it. I don’t consider antiX ugly. I always change up the appearance, so I don’t “accept that tradeoff.”

    But it may have just been his turn-of-phrase. (Or maybe he never changes the theme or wallpaper?)

    But I get it: many people want artsy/beauty in appearance (which is always subjective).

    IDEA:
    If anyone here is good at photograpy (hint – I know at least a few of us are), then perhaps a cool antiX logo on the lower-right corner of some nice landscape MIGHT make it into the distro, if submitted… (you never know!)

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by christophe.

    confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2018

    #47628
    Member
    andyprough
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    @ christophe please read the review carefuly,

    Jack Germain wrote following in his review.
    Running antiX on newer machines with souped-up RAM and modern video cards do little to spruce up its appearance.
    In fact, I consider antiX ugly in comparison with most other Linux desktop appearances. But it is highly functional.
    That is what matters most. So you must be willing to accept that tradeoff.

    I am not knocking antiX neither is the reviewer he does make a statement regarding appearance which is what I mentioned.
    And regarding the present scheme I have not one user who has liked wanted or kept it. Humans are fickle, first appearance
    often counts more than anything else. The distro is fantastic but undersells on impression.

    I always change the wallpaper, but who doesn’t? Otherwise, antiX’s graceful beauty shines through brilliantly throughout. What I find hideously ugly are the bloated monstrosities like Ubuntu and Fedora, who aren’t satisfied with regular bloat, they have to stuff it into their init system and even their oddball package managers.

    #47630
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    discrepancy(ies):

    https://linuxinsider.com/story/antix-linux-not-pretty-but-highly-functional-86942.html
    You need at least 256 MB RAM, and the installer needs a minimum 2.7 GB hard disk size.

    vs

    http://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-19/FAQ/index.html#_system_requirements

    So what are the minimum and suggested requirements to run antiX?
    antiX should run on most computers, ranging from 192MB old PII systems with pre-configured 128MB swap to the latest powerful boxes.
    antiX-core and antiX-net will run with 128MB RAM plus swap, but don’t expect miracles!
    192MB RAM is the recommended minimum for antiX. 256MB RAM and above is preferred especially for antiX-full.
    antiX-full needs a 5GB minimum hard disk size. antiX-base needs 3GB and antiX-core needs 1GB. antiX-net needs 0.7GB.

    vs

    https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=antix

    …should run on most computers, ranging from 256 MB old PIII systems with pre-configured swap to the latest powerful boxes. 256 MB RAM is recommended minimum for antiX. The installer needs minimum 2.7 GB hard disk size.

    vs

    https://gitlab.com/antiX-Linux/cli-installer-antix/-/blob/master/cli-installer

    echo $"Requirements for minimum installation:"
    echo $"antiX-full: hard-disk 5.0GB  RAM 64MB"
    echo $"antiX-base: hard-disk 3.5GB  RAM 48MB"
    echo $"antiX-core: hard-disk 1.0GB  RAM 48MB"
    echo $"antiX-net:  hard-disk 0.7GB  RAM 48MB"

    vs

    https://gitlab.com/antiX-Linux/gazelle-installer-data-antix/-/blob/master/gazelle-installer-data/installer.conf

    default smallest size to search for installable partitions
    MIN_ROOT_DRIVE_SIZE=4000
    
    #Variables that affect installer help text, but may vary by iso
    MIN_INSTALL_SIZE=3.5 GB
    PREFERRED_MIN_INSTALL_SIZE=5 GB
    #47631
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    So you must be willing to accept that tradeoff.

    OK. I guess I do remember reading that bit, and it actually did “rub me the wrong way” when I read it. I don’t consider antiX ugly. I always change up the appearance, so I don’t “accept that tradeoff.”

    But it may have just been his turn-of-phrase. (Or maybe he never changes the theme or wallpaper?)

    But I get it: many people want artsy/beauty in appearance (which is always subjective).

    IDEA:
    If anyone here is good at photography (hint – I know at least a few of us are), then perhaps a cool antiX logo on the lower-right corner of some nice landscape MIGHT make it into the distro, if submitted… (you never know!)

    I’m pretty much in agreement. The overall review was very positive. If I were to suggest anything, I’d only suggest a few nature scenes or night sky with a small, subtle antiX logo. I was considering writing to the author, but his overall review was so positive and accurate that I didn’t want to pick at his writing. I think that it is easy to change appearance anyway, and I usually change to my own images, but I did like the recent comments in our forum advocating a return to the Metro wallpaper; I also liked the dark one that had a subtle “space theme” with a small antiX logo. That kind of image gets across our identity without being either “ugly” or outlandish in any way, especially considering that so many people put in their own art. My main interests are to make the first impression a positive one without having to devote a full-time artist, and that’s why a subtle antiX graphic, relatively small in size, but easy to spot, coupled with some visuals that we may already have in our art library would be a win for most people and reduce the number of negative comments. I do not know if there is a clever way to connect to libraries of great wallpaper for those who would like them, maybe it won’t take much more than a link from the customization section of our menu. While not “mandatory”, that might be a very easy way to satisfy a large percentage of our total population without incurring a huge development effort in new art, documentation and considerable testing.

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by Brian Masinick.
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by Brian Masinick.

    Brian Masinick

    #47638
    Member
    manyroads
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    @christophe I agree with you. Jack clearly recognizes that antiX is unique, innovative, intelligent, well designed “if even plain looking”. It matches exactly with the comments people here in the forums make… “keep it extra skinny, quick, light and functional”. Don’t waste cycles on beauty and the like. (btw. I do that all the time… ’cause I like eye-candy.)

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by manyroads.

    Pax vobiscum,
    Mark Rabideau - http://many-roads.com
    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken
    dwm & i3wm ~Reg. Linux User #449130
    20 Jan 2021 ~ "End of an Error"

    #47641
    Moderator
    christophe
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    Alright, guys. I don’t know if any of you like this picture as much as I do, but I’ve used this in my timed wallpaper rotation for a while now.
    It’s from linuxdaddy. Posted to the wallpaper forum. I added the antiX logo. I challenge others to add pictures. If anti thinks one fits… well, who knows. It probably should be an original composition, like this one.

    NOTE: a smaller image may need to be posted, depending on the size, but if he likes it, he knows who to ask for the high-quality image…

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by christophe. Reason: uploaded smaller image
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by christophe.
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by christophe.

    confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2018

    #47646
    Member
    olsztyn
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    I’m pretty much in agreement. The overall review was very positive. If I were to suggest anything, I’d only suggest a few nature scenes or night sky with a small, subtle antiX logo. I was considering writing to the author, but his overall review was so positive and accurate that I didn’t want to pick at his writing. I think that it is easy to change appearance anyway, and I usually change to my own images,

    As a user I also agree with Christophe and the above statement from masinick. The review was uncharacteristically even handed and knowledgeably highlighting strengths of antiX.
    The minor presentation deficiencies mentioned and labeled as relative ‘ugliness’ as tradeoff of antiX’ efficiency and power is an insignificant counterweight.
    Just on the side and unrelated to the review, a bit of aesthetic touch to default presentation can be easily implemented in order to enhance initial impression. The current default IceWM theme is emphasizing simplicity and crudeness of menu text unnecessarily, as there are much better themes that look very aesthetic and make menu font look smooth, good colors and nicely highlighting menu selections. In addition a better default wallpaper, a subtle and simple beauty, none of the fancy and busy ones that other distros are using… Presentation should be consistent with the intent of antiX, representing simplicity, efficiency and finesse as opposite to the common mindless bloat.
    Just my two cents…

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 1 week ago by olsztyn.
    #47648
    Moderator
    christophe
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    Well said, olsztyn!

    confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2018

    #47652
    Member
    Robin
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    Next charge.

    #47656
    Member
    Robin
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    ok, once again. There are 9 pictures alltogether for now. My first posting with some explaining words seems to hang in spam filter, so I’ll wait if it comes free, before reposting it.

    Attachments:
    #47658
    Moderator
    BobC
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    Hmmmm, its not a bad review, but what would it take to make it a really good review?

    I suppose it would be ok just to leave everything as it is if everyone is truly happy with the visual status quo, but it’s also not that hard to see things in each of the legit reviews we read that could be considered opportunities for improvement, and of those, ones that would actually take little effort for the amount of improvement.

    There were clues even the oblivious like me can see. Two desktops? Did he mean the workspaces? How hard would it be to make it four? Why did he call it “dark”? Why is antiX always dark? My wallpaper always needs to be dark to contrast with the light colored conky texts. How difficult would that be to change? Could we easily provide a couple conky color themes? We could go light colored with a dark conky? In keeping with antiX tradition, could it even be made easily configurable? Provide a reasonable default and easy way to change it. The DW guy was wishing/hoping Ctrl+T would fire up a terminal. Is that a normal expectation that Linux people would be comfortable with? Comfortable and easy on the eyes right out of the box are really nice to find (and rare). Maybe ask Manyroads (because he has great visual taste) could help pick an awesome default wallpaper, and of course in keeping with antiX norms, make it efficient somehow.

    First impressions really do count. If the people interested by the blazing speed and ability to run on almost any computer go no further than the first screens for lack of a good first impression, they miss way to much of what’s taken everyone here a lots of their time and effort to create. Us tinkerers are always changing everything, but I know so many people that never change anything because they are afraid it will get screwed up. They probably learned that the hard way, LOL. We could be nice and try hard to provide a better looking (but still super efficient) default look, and knowing the most common things they would like to change, make it easy to change those. We maybe already do that, but maybe they didn’t stay long enough to figure that out…

    Just my 2 cents worth of opinion…

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.