The Well-Tempered Debian desktop

An anonymous reader writes "What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad? How does it turn out? Surprisingly well! The article comprises an entertaining account of the entire process, complete with lots of informative screenshots, from downloading the net-install to tangling with Wi-Fi and modem PCMCIA cards as the last step — and everything in between. A great primer for Debian newbies... Go Debian!"

Any idea...?

[suv4x4]

Any idea why Etch is ripping off the classic Windows GUI? I mean, in a way, all all GUI-s ripp off each other, but look at the chrome of the Windows and the standard controls... ??

On an old laptop?

[Jim Buzbee]

How about installing Debian Etch on an NSLU2? [smallnetbuilder.com]

for Dell Inspiron 1150

[rjdegraaf]

This page describes install of Debian Etch on Dell Inspiron 1150 [rdegraaf.nl], including tweaks for Compiz and Truecrypt encryption.

Not really that old...

[wasted]

His system:

...an IBM ThinkPad 2662-35U, ...with a Pentium III 600MHz processor, 192MB of SDRAM, and a 20GB hard drive.

I read the article on an IBM Thinkpad 560X with a Pentium 200MMX processor, 96MB of EDO RAM, and a 30GB Linux partition, running Debian Sarge. If his laptop is old, is mine an antique?

Re:Any idea...?

[vhogemann]

Well,

The problem is that MacOSX has this "Application Folder" concept, so you can just browse to /Apps in your filesystem and find all of your applications by their name and icon... try doing the same with any Linux distro /usr/bin.

To be able to provide the same simplicity we must change the current layout of the Linux filesystem, I know at least one Linux distro that have done this: GOBO Linux [gobolinux.org].

Gobo use a rather radical approach to the problem, where every application goes under the /Apps folder. MacOSX for instance only keeps the "userland" applications there.

Re:Any idea...?

[slocan]

But the better they get at copying the Windows look and feel, the less reason there is to switch.

So your assumption is that Linux's different UI is one of the reasons which would motivate someone to switch from MS Windows to Linux?

If it has the "same" UI as Windows, then the UI ceases to be a reason to switch?

Well, I did not switch for this reason (and frankly don't think anyone switches to Linux because of it's UI). On the contrary. I thought and felt that the UI differences were more of a challenge against my decision to switch than an incentive. I knew that I would have a lot of learning and readjusting to do, having used Windows and DOS for so long.

At the end, in my case, the UI differences weren't much of a barrier, since I had some experience with an other UI (had used OS/2) and was well motivated by the freemdoms of the GPL and the absence of a license fee. Actually learning a new UI that has it's own virtues was actually fun for me.

Nevertheless, I generally regard UIs that need active learning to use as a barrier to technology adoption. (I.e. except when the challenge is fun.)

Therefore, UI similarities with Windows are not a virtue, but a chosen tactic to lower the difference barrier that can avert switchers. (And that doesn't mean Linux does not have UI features/virtues that I use and I miss when I have to use Windows at work. It has and I do.)

Therefore, having the "same" UI doesn't mean one less reason to switch, nor is it considered a virtue.

____________________

On the other hand, if aliens started mimicking the Windows Start button and UI on their systems, UseIt.com [useit.com] wouldn't have much to "complain" about Usability in the Movies [slashdot.org] and the UIs in the movies would be a lot more dull :-)