As for Office, you’ll need to use the browser version or use a VM (or container or whatever). Besides that, you can expect like 90% of games to run either via Lutris or by adding them to Steam.
If you want to play around, I recomend to try Garuda Linux Dr460nized Gaming. Yes, it is very bloated and has a very gamery aesthetic, but it comes with a lot of cool software and customizations to explore. I recently started to recreate what I like about it on EndeavourOS and it’s a very good learning exercise :)
Some very neat things like how btrfs works, how you get automatic snapshots going with snapper + snap-pac, that fish is a fantastic shell, how to use libalpm hooks, what tools there are for performance and powersaving tweaks, gaming and probably a few more things.
Then also a lot of silly stuff like the importance of Nerd Fonts, Starship and Fastfetch for being able to brag with your distro without saying anything lol
Linux is the kernel; that is, the core of the operating system, which handles memory, hardware, inputs… Every OS has one. Windows’ is called NT, macOS’ is called Darwin.
You don’t use the kernel, you use the OS. Linux is special because there several operating systems based on Linux; they are called distributions, and they are what you want to use.
You can create your own Linux distribution, by bundling various software packages with the kernel, in a way that caters to specific needs or follows a philosophy (for example, Linux Mint is a distribution focused on ease of use, Archlinux on minimalism…). This is not possible with Windows because their kernel is not licensed under terms which would allow this. It is with Darwin, but unusual.
You can also create your own kernel but this is extremely hard. Getting the computer to boot is easy enough (relatively speaking), but getting programs to run and things to display is much harder. Getting your custom kernel to a usable state is orders of magnitude harder, as it needs to work on and communicate with modern hardware and networks. Linux took more than 30 years of development by thousands of developers (some of them highly talented in a very narrow field of computing) to get to the level it’s at.
It isn’t quite correct. Darwin is actually an open source operating system at the heart of macOS which is based mostly on a bunch of BSD and nextstep stuff. The actual kernel is XNU, based on the Mach kernel.
My question was more about compatibility. Preinstalled Linux is not a must, but would love to know if there are any blockers (bootloader, drivers, etc.).
Gotcha. Different machine and price point, but I’m happy with my X1 Carbon. Battery live is 8-10 hours under light use with screen brightness turned up.
Strictly speaking, Linux is a free, open-source OS kernel originally developed by Linus Torvalds in 1991. (Linus Torvalds still oversees the kernel’s development, but many people now contribute to it.) The Linux kernel needs to be combined with other software to make a working operating system, and that’s what Linux distributions (distros) are. Some of the core software with which the Linux kernel is combined comes from the GNU project, which started before the Linux kernel existed, and had the goal of developing a complete free Unix-like operating system. GNU can be used with other kernels but in practice it is almost always used with the Linux kernel.
“Linux” is the name of the OS kernel — the component that manages hardware drivers, schedules processes, provides basic networking operations, and so on. The project that builds that particular kernel was started in 1991 by Linus Torvalds.
However, that kernel is almost always used with an assortment of libraries, utilities, and user-interfaces (such as the bash shell) which are often expected to be part of a “Linux system”. Many of these come from the GNU project, which began separately from the Linux kernel as an effort to make a free Unix clone.
When the libraries etc. are the ones from the GNU project — e.g. the C library glibc — we can call the system “GNU/Linux” which is a term used by Debian and some other software distributions.
Window management is one of those areas I’m fascinated with because even after 50 years, nobody’s fully cracked it yet
The article begins with a false premise, misrepresenting the capabilities of Windows and macOS in terms of window management. In reality, both operating systems have been offering effective window management features for years, dating back to Apple’s Exposé release with macOS Panther in 2003. On the other hand, current versions of iPadOS, and GNOME are plagued by poor desktop experiences that hinder efficient multitasking.
Most of us simply want a DE that doesn’t get in the way, but the “solutions” proposed by GNOME often create more obstacles, slow down multi-tasking, and obstruct proper window management. Instead of addressing these issues, the GNOME team continues to introduce convoluted features that fail to improve the user experience. For instance, requiring users to switch to a full-screen interface to access other applications is subpar UX design - Windows 8 did this and proved it was the wrong approach. Additionally, GNOME’s lacks a decent notification area / menu bar like Windows and macOS. Where’s a way to control what icons show up and what are hidden? What about reordering them?
The GNOME team’s fixation on their own unique desktop vision holds back the progress of desktop Linux as a whole. With its potential to excel in this space, GNOME has an opportunity to become a top-tier DE, but poor decisions such as removing desktop icons and insisting on subpar window management keep it from reaching its full potential, becoming the face of Linux desktop.
Until you find out that extensions don’t provide the same level of integration as something that comes built in with the DE. A prime example of this was when they dropped desktop icons in GNOME 3.28 and all extensions for that available to this day have issues with drag and drop and other things.
For instance, requiring users to switch to a full-screen interface to access other applications is subpar UX design
no?, it’s simply easier to click and find the app, it’s not like you are looking anywhere ense when you open windows start, and i use KDE with the fullscreen start-menu
His ideas are mostly disjointed. Windows got one thing very right, very fast and snappy multitasking and that’s about it. GNOME adds animations, takes the focus from the applications and the information inside them to become the “center of users attention”. This isn’t good, a DE should be almost invisible, as minimalistic as it can be so the user can quickly switch between Windows and get their job done specially on smaller screens. I guess most people running GNOME that say they enjoy never touched Apple’s old Exposé or the current Windows Task View (Win+Tab) this aren’t aware how far and how productive you can be on a very small screen with a simple way to move around.
it’s not like you are looking anywhere ense when you open windows start
That's just not true, at least in my experience. I typically use the search box to open what I am looking for, and frankly would be very annoyed if I had to switch to something that takes over my entire screen to do that. I don't even have to do that on my phone, and that is my biggest complaint with Gnome is that it looks and feels like they are trying to make a mobile interface first, not a PC interface. And if I have to browse for something, I do still much prefer a small organized menu to something filling my entire screen. I'm on an ultra-wide screen, I don't want to have to physically turn my head to see the entire list. Maybe this makes sense on very small screens but that circles me back around to feeling like Gnome is meant for a tablet and not my desktop PC.
Clearly we all have different ideas and work flows that we like, and that's fine. I'm very happy there are alternatives to Gnome as I've hated it every time I've tried it; but, obviously there are a lot of people that like what they are doing. I just probably won't ever understand those people.
The GNOME team’s fixation on their own unique desktop vision holds back the progress of desktop Linux as a whole.
nah, this is totally wrong, want to have a windows like ui?, switch to every other DE that exist, it’s thwir project, they do what they want, and they can experiment thungs if they want, that’s the beauty of linux
yes, they can take bad decisions sometimes, but don’t act like they are slowing down progreds, because they aren’t, why we want have 200 looklike DEs?
Windows is always one step ahead because they experiment a lot. their experiments may flop, they may face outrage, but they are always trying new things. and when they find something good they stick with it.
Things appearing suddenly on screen is more distracting than 200ms animations. On Gnome you're supposed to click the meta key, type the first 3 letters of the app name, click enter, and the app opens. If you can do it fast enough then you won't even see the animations, if you can't then the animations aren't the problem.
MacOS window management sucks, and Gnome/Plasma are already the face of the Linux desktop.
Those preset layouts you get in Windows 11 when you hover over the maximize button are a huge step forward. Also nice is the way it remembers your window groupings and treats them as a single unit when you hover over the icon of any of the applications involved in the task bar, so you can restore the whole window group with a single click.
That said, on my Linux machines I use Cinnamon and KDE, and I haven’t found either frustrating for window management. Gnome lost me during their first major overhaul.
KDE would’ve been great if they had some sense of design and knew how to properly apply spacing and proportions across the DE. But in terms of pure usability they are orders of magnitude above the crap GNOME is pushing for.
I think the current KDE Plasma looks just as good as many of the alternatives. It’s certainly far from the jarring design mess that KDE was for decades, and for the first time in years I’m actually happy to use it.
Yeah that’s not the greatest. I admit it could still benefit from more tidying up. But it no longer provokes the instant “Oh God no!” reaction that used to send me running for anything but KDE.
The ideal desktop would be something like… KDE’s usability in terms of a bottom bar, notification area and menu + the design consistency of GNOME. I’m currently doing that with ArcMenu and Dash to Panel under GNOME but still get annoyed from time to time with a bunch of details.
The actual use case: I have an emulator that uses a directory as the ‘system disk’ of the computer being emulated, but I have one of these on each of two machines. As I make updates I want to have the proper files updated on the other directory so between changes on the two emulators the most recent is synced to the other directory.
It seems I will need to use 2 rsync commands, one in each direction. Update A from B, then update B from A.
editor + web browser + devtools when working on frontend (workspace 3)
editor + tests + another terminal for whatever when working backend (workspace 2)
server terminal + lazydocker for both (workspace 1)
web browser with work related tabs + todo list + notes app on workspace 9
chat apps and email on workspace 10
long-running jobs and performance monitors on workspace 8
4-7 are used for whatever
music on scratchpad
Tiling (as well as stacking) make it manageable to have a bunch of windows open with a minimum of fuckery. Sure I can only read one at a time, but when coding for example I’m rapidly switching between the code and the result. I can have a text editor, browser, and devtools accessible as fast as I can think, and I spend very little effort arranging windows.
Also, a good tiling window manager replaces the need to learn a bunch of windowing features for other apps. My devtools open in a new window, I don’t use tmux or my terminal’s split features, and I generally have a bunch of browser instances open because my window management handles it all, better.
I’m also a web dev and I have a similar workflow where each workspace has its purpose. Except I never tile anything. I do have shortcuts that switch to specific windows but I never tile anything. That way my eyes are always on the center of the screen.
I very rarely need to tile windows next to eachother. So rarely that I just don’t see the point in making it the main feature of my WM/DE.
Very interesting to read though. Thanks for the thorough example.
¯_(ツ)_/¯ whatever works for you, but that sounds painful to me. Why is only using the center of the screen so important?
I’ll clarify that I only use the more complicated layouts on my big monitor at home; when I am on a laptop it’s single window or side-by-side for the most part.
I am just a regular user but on a smaller screen ie. 13 inch 1440x900 I just have a single maximized window visible even if I have multiple apps open like web browser because I can’t see anything if I have multiple windows.
In my opinion, on a >32 4k or 1440p display, the full screen is just way too big for a single window. Which isn’t a problem, because as easy as it is to switch between two windows, it’s even easier not to. Especially for things like having a web browser and dev tools, switching back and forth every time I tweak a CSS rule would be agonizing.
I like having a big window open. What annoys me with tiles is that the center of my screen which is the most natural to look at is now just a intersection of the other screens so I have to move my eyes over it just feels uncomfortable.
Don’t need the mouse. Nothing ever gets tucked behind anything else. dwm allows you to put one window on multiple tags (desktops) in multiple window arrangements. Also it’s fully scriptable. Why NOT use a tiling WM?
You really hit the nail on the head here. Never having to take take your hands off the keyboard, while always having windows take up exactly the right amount of room, is the main reason I hate having to use non-tiling WM.
And your other point is spot on, too. Any workflow that you use in a standard WM you can also do in a tiling WM, except (imo) more easily. And there are lots of workflows that are agonizing without tiling functionality.
I want to read this book full screen. Hang on, didn’t that other book say something different about this? I want to open it. This is complex, I want to compare side-by-side. Oh, I get it, I should take notes on both of these. Hang on, I need to look at both books while taking notes. Okay I’m done with the second book but I still want to take notes on the first.
Slogging a mouse around to click, drag, click, drag, double click, drag, all while repositioning your hands to type, sucks so bad.
The case is even more clear when you consider that the concept of tiling WMs is just an extension of the game-changing paradigm behind terminal multiplexers and IDE splits.
It’s just better. There’s probably a bit of an adjustment when you’re first adapting to it, especially if they’re really used to a mouse-centric, window-draggy workflow, which is likely the only reason that people think they don’t like them.
You don’t really get my point though. I am fully on board with using keybinds and using the mouse as little as possible. I just mean why tile windows at all. I just can’t focus on anything other than one window if I need the other program I have a shortcut that brings it forward. I keep my eyes mostly in the same position this way.
Anyway this is just a matter of workflow that’s what it comes down to. I may just have to accept that it’s not for me.
Yeah, definitely a matter of workflow and personal preference. Nobody wants to convert anyone else, you just ask why people use tiling WM, and people are answering.
why tile windows at all
I can answer that pretty comfortably. There are two main reasons, the first is that it’s very common to have to look at two things at once. If I’m taking notes while reading something complicated, or writing some complex code while referencing the documentation, or tweaking CSS rules while looking at the page I’m working on, it’s just way too disruptive to constantly have to switch windows.
The second main reason (for me) is that a lot of the time, the content of a single window is too small to make use of the space on your monitor. In those cases, if I have something else I’m working on and it’s also small, I’ll tile them. It might be easy to toggle between windows with a hotkey, but it’s strictly easier to not have to toggle, and just move your eyes over. Peripheral vision means that you don’t entirely lose the context of either window. When you’re ready to switch back to the one you just left, you don’t have to touch anything, and you don’t have to wait for the window to render to visually locate where you left off.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.