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 - 16 through 30 (of 49 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47659
    Member
    Robin
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    once again #19, freshly repacked since server doesn’t love the original one.
    Ok, again and again. now in even lower resolution, different packing mode. hopefully server likes it that way. File size is bigger now, nevertheless.

    Hey, this is just a landscape view taken in northern Italy, not a top-secret area hidden in the desert!

    Ok, finally there it is. Server didn’t like the original image dimension 3140×2140 px (2,4MB). This is a reduced preview now only. If server comes to its senses again I can upload the correct image file possibly. 🙂

    And finally: antiX at Piccadilly. What a promotion 😉

    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by Robin.
    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by Robin.
    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by Robin.
    #47670
    Member
    Xecure
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    It seems MX wallpapers have made you all forget there are no banded wallpapers in antiX.

    There will be no change to the logo (IIRC we only see it when running snapshot/remaster).
    Even 99% of the wallapers used are de-branded (sort of policy since antiX-13 and onwards).
    There will be no plymouth (it is very buggy, weighs a ton and slows down the boot, clearly noticeable on older hardware)

    #47671
    Moderator
    ModdIt
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Hi all,
    Logo, Our wish please do not change it. That is liked by all I asked.

    SamK posted on a Light theme as being easier on the eyes for those with non perfect vision. Agree.
    Metro, as here in top of forum. I like it, other comments from those I asked positive.

    That is not rying to force it back in the distro as delivered, it will along with auditorio remain on the
    local setup. Our school stick. Our Login/Lock screen is auditorio.
    Futuristic, Simple, Elegant Efficient. Instantly recognised in classes and the school forum.
    Looks ok from a beamer.

    What I hope to see is an attractive and efficient default scheme with a message.
    Efficient, easily readable, easy on visualy impaired persons. Menus looking less clunky, and
    easy to configure.
    One light and dark themeset including a thinnest to make the best possible use of screenspace. Setup
    bobC is working on for 4K so a user is not confronted with microtext.

    As standard no theme changer or other flashy effects, changes in that direction are better left to users.

    Thanks to BobC, PPC, and others easy setup tools are ready or nearly ready.

    AntiX is leader not follower, the best distro I have ever used. There were plenty.

    Myriad further themes are available on box look org. Wallpaper tastes are wide in range, one way might be
    we can upload somewhere in the net.
    I would put a no commercial usage caveat on any of my high res images uploaded. Certain image selling corporations
    are not picky otherwise regarding selling open to use works to customers. Experience.

    #47677
    Member
    marcelocripe
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Hello dear colleagues,

    It is interesting how each one is able to analyze the text of the reporter Jack M. Germain differently.

    I read the entire text with the help of the internet translator in order to try to understand the analysis of each one.

    The first issue I noticed is that the reporter discourages the reader from reading his own story to the last paragraph, which makes no sense at all. What will his real intention be?

    He reinforces the appearance issue several times, as if it was not possible to configure the antiX appearance to your own taste. I didn’t find any mention of the various theme options available in antiX. But what is beautiful for one person is not necessarily ugly for another person and vice versa.

    “Within this bland screen setting is an array of outstanding Linux applications and computing tools.”
    “Within this dull screen configuration, there are a number of excellent Linux applications and computing tools.”

    How can the same system have a “dull screen configuration” and have “excellent Linux applications”?

    He first strongly criticizes the appearance and finally leaves the most relevant information to the user who is eventually looking for information about the antiX operating system and who has found the linux insider website.

    Of the whole story, the part I really couldn’t understand was:

    “Normally, in less lightweight Linux OSes, a full-fledged desktop environment like Xfce or GNOME manages overall desktop display functions with a separate windows manager server within. Instead, antiX uses a windows manager without the larger desktop shell.”

    I am grateful if anyone can explain to me what he meant in this part of the text.

    @Skidoo, very well observed, the system requirements for the installation to run antiX need to be updated, I think it would be interesting to include this information on the official page of https://antixlinux.com/about/ and also in summary format similar to what you presented from gitlab:

    antiX-17.4.1
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-17.4.1-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    antiX-19.3
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-19.3-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    Are the requirements for 64-bit and 32-bit the same? If not, we will need:

    antiX-17.4.1_x386 or 32 bit
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-17.4.1-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    antiX-17.4.1_x64 or 64 bit
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-17.4.1-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-17.4.1-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    antiX-19.3_x386 or 32 bit
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-19.3-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    antiX-19.3_x64 or 64 bit
    Requirements for minimum installation:
    antiX-19.3-full: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-base: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-core: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB
    antiX-19.3-net: hard-disk? GB RAM? MB

    marcelocripe
    (Original text in Brazilian Portuguese)

    ———-

    Olá caros colegas,

    É interessante como cada um consegue analisar de forma diferente o texto do repórter Jack M. Germain.

    Eu li todo o texto com auxilio do tradutor da internet para poder tentar compreender as análises de cada um.

    A primeira questão que eu observei é que o repórter desestimula o leitor a ler até o último parágrafo a sua própria matéria, o que não faz sentido algum. Qual será a real intenção dele?

    Ele reforça por várias vezes a questão da aparência, como se não fosse possível configurar ao seu próprio gosto a aparência do antiX. Eu não encontrei nenhuma menção as várias opções de temas disponíveis no antiX. Mas o que é bonito para uma pessoa não é necessariamente feio para outra pessoa e vice-versa.

    “Within this bland screen setting is an array of outstanding Linux applications and computing tools.”
    “Dentro dessa configuração de tela sem graça, há uma série de excelentes aplicativos Linux e ferramentas de computação.”

    Como pode o mesmo sistema possuir uma “configuração de tela sem graça” e possuir “excelentes aplicativos Linux”?

    Ele primeiro critica fortemente a aparência e deixa por último as informações mais relevante ao usuário que eventualmente esteja procurando informações sobre o sistema operacional antiX e que encontrou o site linux insider.

    De toda a matéria, o trecho que eu realmente não consegui compreender foi:

    “Normally, in less lightweight Linux OSes, a full-fledged desktop environment like Xfce or GNOME manages overall desktop display functions with a separate windows manager server within. Instead, antiX uses a windows manager without the larger desktop shell.”

    Eu agradeço se alguém puder me explicar o que ele quis dizer nesta parte do texto.

    @Skidoo, muito bem observado, os requisitos de sistema para a instalação para executar o antiX precisam ser atualizados, penso eu que seria interessante incluir estas informações na página oficial do https://antixlinux.com/about/ e ainda em formato de resumo semelhante ao que você apresentou do gitlab:

    antiX-17.4.1
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    antiX-19.3
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    São iguais os requisitos para 64 bits e para 32 bits? Caso não sejam precisaremos de:

    antiX-17.4.1_x386 or 32 bit
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    antiX-17.4.1_x64 or 64 bit
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    antiX-19.3_x386 or 32 bit
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    antiX-19.3_x64 or 64 bit
    (Exemplificado no texto traduzido para o idioma inglês)

    marcelocripe
    (Texto original em Português do Brasil)

    #47679
    Moderator
    BobC
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Marcelo, antiX (full) assembles its own “desktop environment” by allowing user to select a “Window manager”, like IceWM or FluxBox or JWM, and different options for the file manager and desktop icons.

    In my opinion, the antiX desktop provides the user the vast majority of normally used things that a Gnome or XFCE or KDE desktop provides, and the user can still add any other programs they want from the repos.

    #47680
    Member
    manyroads
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Hello all…

    Here are several hundred (all nature) wallpaper options. They are all unencumbered (copyright free no attribution required). Use as many or few as you like; you may use them for any purpose.

    https://unsplash.com/@manyroads/collections

    • This reply was modified 6 months 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 ~Reg. Linux User #449130
    20 Jan 2021 ~ "End of an Error"

    #47687
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Hello all…

    Here are several hundred (all nature) wallpaper options. They are all unencumbered (copyright free no attribution required). Use as many or few as you like; you may use them for any purpose.

    https://unsplash.com/@manyroads/collections

    Thanks manyroads!

    I already have a few nature rhemes and one in particular that I usually install. As you have shown, they are not difficult to find or install.

    It’s those who have not yet learned searching and installation of wallpapers and simple applications that we hope to help out, so references like yours are helpful and appreciated.

    Brian Masinick

    #47688
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Marcelo, antiX (full) assembles its own “desktop environment” by allowing user to select a “Window manager”…

    In my opinion, the antiX desktop provides the user the vast majority of normally used things that a Gnome or XFCE or KDE desktop provides, and the user can still add any other programs they want from the repos.

    I agree with you.
    There are enough features available in antiX Full. If we continue as we’re going it is fine.

    We offer various versions that provide a solid foundation for whatever the users want. Foundation is a key. It’s “available”. Not every possible component is “Installed”, yet many are directly accessible and all things are “possible” for those who persevere, read, experiment, and implement.

    Brian Masinick

    #47690
    Member
    PPC
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    I tried to register on linuxinsider.com (no confirmation e-mail ever got to my mail box) just to comment on a part of the article none of you found strange:

    You cannot place application launchers on the panel or on the desktop itself. However, the panel serves as a thumbnail display dock for open windows.

    A lot of effort was made into providing a GUI to add icons to the toolbar / panel – probably the fact that the reviewer did not make the connection that toolbar and panel are, in fact “roses by another name” 🙂
    Why would a distro have icons on the “panel” and not allow the user to add more icons? The same goes for desktop icons…
    True that there is no GUI, out of the box, to add icons to the desktop – dragging .desktop files to the desktop is not what first comes to a regular user’s mind…

    P.

    #47691
    Member
    olsztyn
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    I tried to register on linuxinsider.com (no confirmation e-mail ever got to my mail box) just to comment on a part of the article none of you found strange:

    I did notice this, although I did not mention in my post, as rather incorrect statement considering an existing tool to perform IceWM add/remove apps panel management provided with antiX. I think a gui for such panel management should be added to the antiX Control Center ‘Maintenance’ for visibility and consistency.

    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by olsztyn.
    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by olsztyn.
    #47696
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Rethinking both my own comments and those of others in this topic, I have actually come to prefer our uncommon idea of having light, nimble, resource conserving applications and not much else by default. Only Tiny Core comes to mind as a distribution that has an even leaner setup. If it’s still around, I have not encountered it in my occasional excursions to look at additional distributions. Absolute Linux and Puppy are two other very good distributions too. All three of them have been innovative in one way or another. Absolute Linux produces a rock solid, stable, use it as is system. I have zero issues with the quality and performance. The only feature that I prefer with antiX and Debian-based distributions is that – at least to me – they are easier to update in place and it is not necessary to install other versions (except for curiosity or a desire for a “different appearance” every so often.

    Likewise, Puppy is just as innovative, and may actually be the most creative of the small, modifiable distributions. I’ve used many different versions of Puppy over the years – both the larger and smaller variants and they are all good too.

    I think that my long familiarity with antiX certainly “taints” my bias, as does the .deb package format and ease of installing and updating software weigh heavily in my preferences.

    For a quick install, full-featured distribution that is just the right balance of features, yet “feels” responsive and snappy, MX Linux is one I choose that I don’t mess around with much; I just keep the software up to date and use it. I’ve done this with the MEPIS before it and the MX Linux we have today. Debian Sid has always been my experimental tool, and I’ve used two or more instances of antiX for well over a decade. Because of the previously mentioned interests and biases, when I want a small, fast instance of Debian, sure, I could grab a Debian netinstall, and I’ve done that many times, but antiX makes it really easy to do the same thing, and provides more tools from which to do it straight from the images provided.

    Therefore, I have three distros that are ALWAYS my go-to systems: antiX, light, quick, fast, and these days I can keep a copy of each release on a USB, run them Frugal, and also install a few of them on my hard drive. For the Version 19 updates, I probably have at least 6-7 combinations immediately available. So not only are they fast and efficient, I can make a system with a “different personality” from each of them; all of them are fast and efficient, and super flexible. BIG WIN!

    MX Linux: since I “mess around” with so many of my distributions, though it doesn’t happen very often, there is always the potential that I can break them and mess them up beyond recognition. For that reason, I always keep at least one ordinary, stable distribution. Linux Mint might be a good competitor to MEPIS and MX Linux, but I have always found MX Linux and previous versions to have the right combination of software for my “general purpose” system. Mint has it, but whether it is the graphical tools, beautiful, but resource consuming wallpapers and navigational tools, it’s just not as “responsive”; it works fine, but MX Linux “feels” more responsive, at least to me.

    When I want to install the most current software that still performs as though it is “stable”, I use and experiment with Debian Stable. The only way to get software faster and newer is to grab it directly from the application’s home download page – that puts a large responsibility on me (or the person wanting the latest software, or you choose something like Gentoo Linux or Linux from Scratch do effectively do the same thing. Arch Linux and it’s derivatives provide the equivalent capability, and you can do it with either binary or source forms. Riding on those edges gets you the very latest, but it’s a far cry from the stability of MX Linux and it’s a LOT more work than either antiX or Debian.

    Whether those are the “best” reasons or not for my choices, they are my personal preferences and that’s why I always have antiX, MX Linux and Debian on my systems.\
    Of those three, it’s antiX that is the one I create with the most varieties and experimentation. That, coupled with the lean, efficient performance, are the combinations that keep it perpetually on my systems -and I have the most implementations of antiX for the same reasons.

    Brian Masinick

    #47706
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    A much shorter comment: let’s take what we have, enjoy it, and if we want to add to it in any way, each of us may choose to do so in our own way, responsible for whatever we choose to create, modify, and share.

    Brian Masinick

    #47712
    Member
    olsztyn
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Rethinking both my own comments and those of others in this topic, I have actually come to prefer our uncommon idea of having light, nimble, resource conserving applications and not much else by default.

    I thought that is antiX as it is now. Any enhancements discussed here, such as to make it a bit aesthetically nicer or more user-friendly must not increase antiX’ memory footprint or efficiency.
    – If wallpaper counts to memory footprint then it must be reasonably minimal size, not large and busy in details.
    – The IceWM app add/remove if added to Control Center will not increase memory footprint if I understand.
    – Default theme will not (should not) change memory footprint by selecting a nicer one. The one I selected some time ago was a modified ‘Quiescent-Medium’, I think, and I did not notice an increase in memory footprint but it resulted in more aesthetic desktop. I should admit that even the current default one is pretty good comparing to most others, some other being just horrible quality…
    – IceWM (as well as Fluxbox) is rock-solid after resolving some quirks. After some aesthetic touch is not much different user experience than full DEs such as XFCE, all which introduce inherent bloat.

    These are just a few examples that enhancements to aesthetics and usability do not have to come at the expense of memory footprint or efficiency. antiX can be still as nimble as it is now and be a little bit easier on user experience, which is important for increasing user base.
    Just my opinion…

    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by olsztyn.
    #47714
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    olsztyn said: I thought that is antiX as it is now. Any enhancements discussed here, such as to make it a bit aesthetically nicer or more user-friendly must not increase antiX’ memory footprint or efficiency.

    Precisely! (They also may or may not be directly included in the release; that does not prevent you or me from using whatever tweaks we talk about, or something else altogether).

    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by Brian Masinick.

    Brian Masinick

    #47719
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    https://www.kentuckytourism.com/outdoors/natural-attractions/cumberland-falls is a great site with some beautiful waterfalls. I found a shot, maybe somewhere else, but a picture of the main waterfall nevertheless. If you like nature scenes, there are plenty of good ones to find here.

    https://www.desktopnexus.com/search/cumberland+falls/ – many pages of pictures from Cumberland Falls, Kentucky.

    Here is a 2021 Waterfall Calendar if anyone is interested.

    https://www.desktopnexus.com/groups/beauty-of-nature/

    https://technology.desktopnexus.com/

    Needless to say, desktopnexus.com has many different kinds of images – nothing that we would officially include in our distributiom; these are simply an example of sites that offer free wallpaper; there are many such sites on the Internet.

    Brian Masinick

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 49 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.