A little clarification please.

Dreadhead

Dreadhead

Dreadhead

Associate
Joined
1 Apr 2009
Posts
429
Hello there.

I have been trying to get my head around some of the underlying principals regarding linux, however this has left me a little confused.

I understand that 'linux' refers to the kernel.

I understand that there are many flavours of operating systems built on this kernel- refered to as 'distributions' or 'distro's'.

I am also aware that distro's tend to use different desktop environments such as GNOME or KDE.

What confuses me is the use of desktop environments between different distro's.

If two different distro's use the same desktop environment, what makes them different. Is it a discernable visual difference, or is it more to do with the underlying functionality of the OS?

Does it matter which distro I use if I end up installing a desktop environment?

Also can a desktop enironment be installed on more simplistic distro's, or are they only loaded on the bigger players?

Thanks in advance for any corrections/explainations.
 
They're different in that the desktop environments are modified by most distributions; tweaked for appearance, functionality, integration with the rest of the programs provided, or other similar things.

Since Linux is just the kernel the distribution packagers have a lot of things they can change. The different flavors of Linux have very different "personalities," if you will. A big part of that is the package/installation method used. There's a huge difference between the "feel" of Slackware, Debian, and CentOS, for instance.

The best way to get an idea of what I'm rambling about is to pick a couple of distros and try them. Most Linux users have tried many distros, either hopping around for "home" or just to see what's out there.
 
Last edited:
If you were to boot into a Fedora with Gnome environment and then Ubuntu then you wouldn't see any difference.

When you start to administer the system is when things go off on a tangent
 
Thanks for the responses so far :-)

So if I were to take a distro and load a different desktop environment onto it, then it could end up looking like a completely different distro?

I have been planning on running a dual-boot with windows, but would like to get the concepts a little clearer in my head before I settle on the particulars of which distro to install.

I tried running Ubuntu after installing it through Windows, but could not get my Creative Xfi fatality sound card working. This was a little while ago, and I am hoping the driver issues may have ironed themselves out. I may try Fedora as I have heared that this is a good distro to get started with. Others have recommended CentOS- apparently it is similar to Fedora (not sure how).
 
Its difficult to say which is a good place to start, you may click with ubuntu, debian, opensuse.

Hell you may like arch/gentoo/slackware more.

In my mind Arch is the most logical.

EDIT: If ubuntu followed the traditional way linx should administered, i.e. no sudo, or su -s tricks it would be good, it has fantastic community with a lot of docs all over the web, it just seems a little bloated. half the stuff it comes installed with I don't even need.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if Creative have done anything about their horrid drivers, though the horrid ones are better than the non-existant ones we had for a decade or more.

Red Hat is a big company that sells Linux and support for servers. They test new concepts before rolling them out in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) on a distro they call Fedora. Fedora is usually among the first to try new and exciting things and as a result they sometimes have problems with stability and integration. There's some history to it, but that description will suffice for now.

Since almost all of RHEL is covered under the GPL the code is freely available for anybody to take and use for any purpose. Some folks decided they didn't want to pay for RHEL and its expensive support contract, so they tool the source code for RHEL and compiled it themselves. They called it CentOS. Thusly CentOS is the tried-and-true, stable code base of RHEL for free.
 
I wouldn't recommend Arch as a starter! Ubuntu is a better choice at the beginning then you can enjoy the delights of Arch when you get to grips with how it all works.
 
@ Dreadhead - Its not the best starting point, learn "what linux is" with ubuntu/opensuse/mandriva.

When your confortable with the file structure, a few terminal commands and a knowledge of some applications, then you may wanna try arch/gentoo.

Arch is a rolling release distro, that means there is never a new CD like XP > vista or say ubuntu 8.10 > 9.04.

You build Arch from the ground up, you start in terminal (dos prompt for a windows comparison) and then you install everything *you want* by hand, using temrinal commands.

Arch linux taught me much, its how I understand the terminal much more now. By know means do I know as much as .walls, tntcoder, pingwig or billytheimpaler for example, but it has improved my knoweldge 10 folder. So much so that I do a lot of my work using the terminal and don't think to even use a GUI much anymore.

Why do I find arch logical? Hard to say, something just clicked in my head. I know where all the config files are stored for arch, stuff like that. Arch also has the best wiki pages of any distro I have used. Everything you will need to install has a guide in the wiki pages.

AJUK is right, its not a good place to start, it will probably make you run back to windows for good lol. As I say get familiar with ubuntu/opensuse/mandriva maybe fedora, not used it much tbh, then when you understand the basics you may wanna try something more "hands on". You may similarly decide that ubuntu is great and you simply cba wasting time manually setting up a distro like arch/gentoo/slackware.

Why did I try Arch? 50% for willy waving purposes innitially 50% to explore, now I'm sticking with it.

I'm running ubuntu server on my home server simply because it's stable and has massive supporting documentation. I suppose I could have used arch linux, I may well connvert it to arch I dunno yet :p

PS: I have a lot of pacience when learming, I spend a lot of timing reading and wanting to make it work at all costs :p. If this isn't you and you don't wanna be a slave to your comp for a few days setting up a distro then ubuntu/mandriva/opensuse is the one for you.

I strongly beleive you should try a lot of distro's dont just try ubuntu, you may find you like say pardus, dreamlinux, centos etc etc etc more, but how are you going to know unless you try it yourself?

Just don't get to fed up distro hopping and give up and go back to windows full time.
 
Last edited:
Ah cheers for the tips. Will probably give Ubuntu another shot then.

I have no real reason to use Linux other than to sate my curiousity, and to enhance my computer skills.

The idea of building the OS to my specification sounds great, and if I make headway with Ubuntu I may well give that a try.
 
Dreadhead said:
Ah cheers for the tips. Will probably give Ubuntu another shot then.

I have no real reason to use Linux other than to sate my curiousity, and to enhance my computer skills.

The idea of building the OS to my specification sounds great, and if I make headway with Ubuntu I may well give that a try.
Click to expand...

yeh you got it!! Please for the love of god please also try other "starter distro's" you may prefer kde mint, opensuse kde/gnome or summit.

ITs only a couple of cd's wasted or none if you boot from usb stick ;)
 
Dreadhead said:
I have no real reason to use Linux other than to sate my curiousity, and to enhance my computer skills.

The idea of building the OS to my specification sounds great, and if I make headway with Ubuntu I may well give that a try.
Click to expand...
That sounds like the perfect reason to try Linux. I'm confident that it will sate your curiosity and it will definitely enhance your IT skills.

All too often people try Linux just because it's free (as in cost) without understanding that it's not Windows nor does it pretend to be. Those are the guys who are most likely to return to Microsoft's products when something doesn't work. I find that the people who are up for a challenge and really want to learn are the ones that make the shift and tend to stick with it, even when it gets tough.

Hope you enjoy your experiences with Linux, and "welcome to the real world".
 
GarethDW said:
That sounds like the perfect reason to try Linux. I'm confident that it will sate your curiosity and it will definitely enhance your IT skills.

All too often people try Linux just because it's free (as in cost) without understanding that it's not Windows nor does it pretend to be. Those are the guys who are most likely to return to Microsoft's products when something doesn't work. I find that the people who are up for a challenge and really want to learn are the ones that make the shift and tend to stick with it, even when it gets tough.

Hope you enjoy your experiences with Linux, and "welcome to the real world".
Click to expand...

Ameeen brudda. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom