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 4 posts - 46 through 49 (of 49 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47864
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    If we explain that a “linux distribution” is
    a collection of components which have been tested to (all) work well together…

    we might similarly explain (loosely, without attempting to “define”) that a “(branded) desktop environment” is a collection of components which are intended to, perhaps synergistically, (all) work well together.

    Someone who (na├»vely, IMO) believes that “GNOME Web” (formerly “Epiphany”) is the “bestest web browser” and opines that “GNOME Files” (formerly “Nautilus”) is the superior “desktop linux file manager application” and insists that “GNOME terminal” is a suitably comfortable terminal emulator program… and (do gnomeys still refer to gedit as “gedit”?) rationalize that “gedit” is a fine daily-driver text editor…

    …ultimately, due to their “locked into using GNOME apps” mindset, their satisfaction hinges on the “and“.

    { more to write, will followup in a separate post }

    #47866
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    Just as “Gnome is not suited to everyone”, antiX isn’t suited to, cannot reasonably suit, everyone.

    Along comes a former GnomeDE user, installs antiX, mumbles and stumbles his/her way though the process of installing their cherished “Nautilus” file manager… and at some point, uses its oh-so-familiar “Send To Trash” feature. Uh-oh…

    Even if antiX were to preinstall a “Trash” folder directory, some programs (not just file manager programs) designed for use only in brandX(tm) DesktopEnvironment… some programs will autocreate a trash bin if absent, some will silently falllback to just deleting, some will expect “Trash” to be named “Trash” (i.e. not a localized name) but others will be expecting “Trash-1000” as the name of the intended destination. Hoping to overcome the proprietary-ness, and quirks, of the various branded DEs is a can’t-win scenario, IMO.

    ^— same goes for “Recent” aka “Recent Files”
    Many programs keep their own, internal, list of recently used without consulting or writing to the communal “recently-used.xbel” file. Some do not maintain an internal list and STILL do not write/consult the communal file. This problem, this discrepancy, cannot be adequately solved via reactionary intervention by antiX distroteers (distribution maintainers).

    #47890
    Member
    olsztyn
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    I want to say I do like very much the thoughtful insight skidoo articulated.
    Full DEs and distros adopting complete desktop environment packages force certain collections of apps onto their users, and force their users to put up with their pre-defined selection, unless an unhappy user takes the effort to break out of such ‘integration’.
    Much more flexible approach is a modular architecture of distro, where it is the user, not distro publisher, decides what components to chose and assemble the package to his requirements.
    antiX is in a unique position to be such modular system, and to some degree is already: WM’s choice, FMs choice, etc… With a little (perhaps not so little) effort antiX can be further enhanced in the current framework to be the best such:
    – IceWM has some quirks, which can be configured, otherwise it seems rock-solid and the gui toolbar enhancements developed by antiX team should be visible from the Control Center Maintenance.
    – Fluxbox enhancements (Tint2 perhaps?) could be finished and finalized to provide similar capability with toolbar.
    – Networking support needs to be enhanced and be more user friendly. Connectshares does work well but the configuration and use is not too user friendly and not gui, not speaking of not being integrated with FS… Networking support seems spotty in general, such as e.g. ISO-Snapshot fails when target is on SMB share. I did submit a question to Squashfs forum, but have not seen any response yet…
    – If someone insists on implementing bloat on his antiX installation is free to do it. A selection of DEs, such as KDE is available. Just needs some work to work…

    My point is that antiX can enhanced in its current framework, with (hopefully) little effort and become even more flexible and user friendly without forcing users to put up with a specific collection of ‘integrated’ environment package…
    Just my opinion…

    #47891
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0

    I am, and I always have been, a person who appreciates differences, choices and alternatives, both in loving life and in choices pertaining to computer systems.

    I’m very pleased to see the amount of discussion and interesting comments that have been shared. I just want to make sure that people remember that we have a small development team and that the choice of software included in antiX is is ultimately theirs to make.

    I also will mention yet again that forum members are free to modify antiX themselves and if they want they can share what they produce.

    I have already downloaded two samples of community efforts. They were not a huge departure from the stock distribution but they did include some of the scripts and ideas that have been discussed. This is a great way to share with others while understanding that they are simply free, unsupported ideas.

    Thanks again for discussing and sharing your excellent work.

    Brian Masinick

Viewing 4 posts - 46 through 49 (of 49 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.