• Shirasho@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not a hot take at all. Asking someone to go from a GUI heavy operating system to a command line heavy one and be just as productive is lunacy. Like all major changes it is important to ween off the old thing.

    My biggest hurdle with the switch has been permission related issues, and you can’t deal with those cleanly with a UI, and every help thread under the sun throws out a bunch of command line commands giving a solution without explaining why those changes are needed. It may seem like Unix 101 to experienced Linux users, but it is really cryptic to newcomers coming from operating systems that are…cough more lenient with their permissions.

    There is also a mentality that UIs are much more idiot proof than command line. UIs are written by people who actually know the OS so we can’t accidentally delete our home folder because of a typo. It is a very legitimate concern.

    • Yesterday morning i installed Mint xfce on an old laptop.

      I wanted to install synaptics drivers for the touchpad because i use the trackball as mouse but need the touchpad for clicking. Something that isnt configureable in the default driver.

      When i copied an example config file and added my line, i rebooted the computer.

      The GUI broke because in the example config file, there were “…” To indicate writing further options, but xorg couldnt interpret or ignore it, so i had to figure out how to edit textfiles in the command line.

      No fun times, and definetely a risk for new users.

  • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Great take. But you know the real sneaky one that trips you up? File system.

    I wouldn’t call myself a beginner, but every time I install a Linux system seriously I see those filesystem choices and have to dig through volumes of turbo-nerd debates on super fine intricacies between them, usually debating their merits in super high-risk critical contexts.

    I still don’t come away with knowing which one will be best for me long-term in a practical sense.

    As well as tons of “It ruined my whole system” or “Wrote my SSD to death” FUD that is usually outdated but nevertheless persists.

    Honestly nowadays I just happily throw BTRFS on there because it’s included on the install and allows snapshots and rollbacks. EZPZ.

    For everything else, EXT4, and for OS-shared storage, NTFS.

    But it took AGES to arrive to this conclusion. Beginners will have their heads spun at this choice, guaranteed. It’s frustrating.

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I did NTFS because both windows and Linux can read it. Do I know literally any other fact about formatting systems? Nope. I’m pretty sure I don’t need to, I’m normie-adjacent. I just want my system to work so I can use the internet, play games, and do word processing.

      • phanto@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I once tried to install my Steam Library in Linux to an NTFS partition so I wouldn’t have to install things twice on a dual boot system. Protip: don’t do that.

        • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Oo! That’s definitely a gotcha. Good tip!

          I once heard that the trick to this is you need to let Steam “update” every game before you switch OSs. If it doesn’t get to finish this, it will bork. That’s also highly impractical I feel though.

          So yeah on my dual boot Linux is for making things and doesn’t see my main Steam library. Win10 is just for games. :p

          EDIT: Win11 or 12 won’t be a problem because I’m confining them to a VM for only the most stubborn situations, and doing everything including gaming with Linux. :D

        • PopMyCop@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          chkdsk -f (or r or whatever the third option is), reboot twice, but do it multiple times because steam on linux asks you to reinstall the games in the exact same spot and you accidentally do it because you’re not paying close attention due to the mild panic windows threw at you?

          • phanto@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            https://github.com/ValveSoftware/Proton/wiki/Using-a-NTFS-disk-with-Linux-and-Windows

            There is a guide here that says you can do it, but my experience was that I installed the games in Windows on my D drive, mounted the drive in Linux (Mint, I think), and when I tried to play them The system locked up. Rebooting into windows, Steam said the game files were corrupt and I had to reinstall them. I’ve always just kept two separate game libraries on any dual boot systems ever since.

            • PopMyCop@iusearchlinux.fyi
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Interesting. I was able to use the files perfectly fine from linux, but windows threw a tantrum when I tried to boot and removed everything linux had touched.

    • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly, I’d say the defaults most distros use will be fine for most users… If they don’t know why they should use one filesystem over another, then it’s almost certainly not going to matter for them

    • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m still figuring it out. I know ExFAT works across all desktop OS’s, NTFS works with Linux and Windows, and ext4 only works with Linux.

      But it took a half hour of googling to figure out you can’t install Linux on NTFS. I planned to do that to ease cross platform compatibility. Oops. I’m also attempting a RAID 1 array using NTFS. It seems to work, but I’m not sure how to automatically mount it on boot. I feel like I might have picked the wrong filesystem.

      • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hey there friend! Sorry to hear about your woes. From my understanding in practice, ExFAT is usually better as more of a universally readable storage system for external drives. Think, using the same portable drive between your PS5, friend’s mac, and whatever else. Great for large files and backups! Maybe not as much for running your OS from.

        My approach and recommendation would be that you don’t want OS’s seeing each others’ important business anyway. Permissions and stuff can get wonky for instance.

        So your core Linux install can be something like EXT4 or BTRFS. I like BTRFS personally because you can set up recovery snapshots without taking tons of space. It does require a little extra understanding and tooling though, but it’s worth looking into. (There’s GUI based BTRFS tools now though. Yay!)

        EXT4 is nice and reliable and basic. Not much to say, really! Both can do RAID 1.

        Next, a /home mounted separately, this COULD be NTFS if you really wanted that sharing. (BTW there’s some Windows drivers that can read EXT4 I think?)

        BUT I feel more organized using a different way:

        What I do personally is keep an NTFS partition I call something like “DATA” or “MAIN_STORAGE” and I mount this into my /home on Linux. It’s usually a separate, chunky 4TB HDD or something.

        On Windows this is my D:\ drive, and it’s also where I store my project files, media, and whatever else I want easily accessible. Both OSs see those system-agnostic files, but are safely unaware of each other’s core system files.

        In Linux, you can mount any folder anywhere, really! You can mount it on startup by amending your FSTAB on an existing install or setting the option during installs sometimes.

        So the file path looks something like /home/MonkeMischief/DATA/Music

        It’s treated just like any other folder but it’s in fact an entirely separate drive. :)

        I hope this was somewhat helpful and not just confusing. In practice, it’ll start to make more sense I hope! The important thing is to make sure your stuff is backed up.

        … Perhaps to a big chonky brick formatted as ExFAT if you so choose. ;)

        • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am experimenting with Linux on two devices: My daily driver laptop and a desktop.

          The laptop is set on a dual boot from 2 SSDs. The first SSD contains Windows and has one 2TB NTFS partition. The other SSD has a 250GB partition for ext4 where Ubuntu lives and a 750GB partition for ExFAT.

          The desktop has a 500GB SSD with ext4 for the OS, and has two 4 year old 2TB HDDs for data. This is why I’m trying to run them in RAID 1. For cross compatibility (and what they were already formatted as), they are in NTFS.

          What do you think of that? Am I using adequate filesystems?

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, I listened to a podcast about that recently. Linux was far with XFS or something, but then Apple came, improved their HFS and actually made tools for it and it got better.

      BTRFS is just as established as etx4, just not as damn old. It also just works, and it has advanced features that are crucial for backups. But I have no idea how to use btrbk and there is no GUI so nobody uses that.

      But as a filesystem that just works like ext4, plus the automatically configured snapshots in both regular and atomic Fedora systems and OpenSuse, BTRFS is awesome.

      Only outdated Distros that fear change stick with ext4, at least thats my opinion.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lending my voice to this as well for most, my thought is EXT4, without LVM, deferring to the preferred FS for the distro. It is a mature, stable, and reliable choice and logical volumes complicate things too much for beginners.

      If dual-booting, yeah, definitely an NTFS partition for shared storage (just be aware that Windows can be weird with file permissions and ownership).

    • mdurell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ext4 is the safe bet for a beginner. The real question is with or without LVM. Generally I would say with but that abstraction layer between the filesystem and disk can really be confusing if you’ve never dealt with it before. A total beginner should probably go ext4 without LVM and then play around in a VM with the various options to become informed enough to do something less vanilla.

      • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        and then play around in a VM with the various options to become informed enough to do something less vanilla.

        This part is skippable, right? Any reason a user should ever care about this?

        (note: never heard of LVM before this thread)

        • stratosfear@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It makes adding space easier down the road, either by linking disks or if you clone your root drive to a larger drive, which tends to not be something most “end users” (I try not to use that description but you said it heh) would do. Yes, using LVM is optional.

  • Crass Spektakel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    #You are perfectly right.

    All major distributions offer all major Environments. I currently use either Debian or Ubuntu and usually install by booting the Netinstall.iso right from the official Servers which installs just the base system without any GUI at all. Then I use tasksel to select the environment. Ok, not every Environment is part of Tasksel but often it is just adding another Repository and running another apt install operation.

    And yes, on my experimental computer I often install a dozen environments just because I can. Selectable at Login-Screen.

    But now somethings VERY important from someone with 35 years of POSIX experience:

    If you are a newby FOR GODS SAKE USE UBUNTU.

    And if you are a pro… Ubuntu still is a very good option. Only if your have VERY GOOD REASONS which you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, only then use something else. Which is Debian for me.

    • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I use Arch because not only am I into self abuse, I also enjoy being publicly flogged whenever I ask for help, which is never, because anytime I have a problem with it, there’s a pretty good chance someone else has asked before me.

        • kvadd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sort of newbie here as well. Why is it better?

          I used Ubuntu for about 2 years in 2006 to 2008, but have been on Windows since. I like Ubuntu, and looking in to dual booting with Windows now. Should I go for Mint instead of Ubuntu?

          • Moshpirit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Canonical, the company that has been taking care of Ubuntu, has made many bad choices (including Amazon launcher, telemetry, Snap packages…). Linux Mint rises as an alternative because of these bad decisions.

            • kvadd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh damn, I wasn’t aware. Never using Ubuntu again if they try shit like that. But if Canonical goes under, won’t that effect Mint? I mean if it is based on Ubuntu? (If my understand of it is correct)

          • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You should probably go for mint because of the reasons the other person that replied mentioned, but it’s your choice, go with whichever you like (you may also like zorinos)

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you are a newby FOR GODS SAKE USE UBUNTU.

      As an IT professional, I use Ubuntu LTS only because I don’t want to spend my time tinkering around with the OS itself.

      Basically, it’s this comic:

      All my hare-brained development ideas are more or less sandboxed in Docker containers. Rarely I need to schlep out to Sourceforge to get the right app for something. Most of the time there’s an apt or flatpack thing for what I’m up to, but I do go on a spree purging all that from time to time.

      My only complaint is with Nvidia driver support/quality/maintenance, but I get that’s not Canonical’s fault.

      • lefaucet@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Debian’s great too. I find big applications tend to officially support Ubuntu tho, which is a big deal.

        Unreal & Davinci Resolve come to mind.

        I think Mint is great too. Havent actually tried it yet tho. Cant afford the down time to try it yet

    • Ziixe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m a newbie, used a derivative of Ubuntu (xubuntu) since my computer is slow and old as fuck, it ended up somehow breaking my pc into only booting the drive with the Linux install on it and refuse to boot anything else not even live USBs (putting back in my windows drive just shows “success Ubuntu” in the top left corner)

      If you think it’s bios related please tell me, because I tried to mess with every damn setting related to this (I didn’t try resetting the CMOS but I doubt it will do anything)

      If anything it probably made me hate Ubuntu based distros in general (couldn’t try anything else because the pc is fucked)

      • e8d79@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hard to tell from the info you provided. It might be a mixup between legacy MBR and UEFI boot. Try enabling legacy boot in UEFI and make sure the boot order is correct, if your PC is really that old it might just be that your Windows install is still booting from the MBR.

        • Ziixe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ll try that, it’s actually the opposite, it has an uefi switch in the bios since it’s so old it probably was the standard to use legacy boot, guessing by the CPU (core 2 duo, idk what model though) it’s probably a 2007/08 prebuilt (by the weird PSU)

          It would make sense that it would be a problem with windows if it didn’t have the uefi setting on, but it still doesn’t explain the “Ubuntu success” message I got instead (and that was the case when the Linux drive was completely disconnected )

          Will reply after I try it out, if it doesn’t work I’ll try the CMOS instead, if that doesn’t work either then I guess I fucked up my computer beyond repair

          • e8d79@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            guess I fucked up my computer beyond repair

            Unlikely, only misconfigured. The “Ubuntu success” message might show because your PC tries to boot from a GPT partition on a different disk or you have inadvertently overwritten the Windows bootloader. Booting from a live USB should work but it might take a couple of tries depending on what settings you have changed in the UEFI; also check if your flashdrive is working properly. Apps like the Fedora Media Writer or Rufus can check if the image is not corrupted after writing it to the drive.

            • Ziixe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Idk, in Rufus I set it to MBR (well it set to that automatically if I’m not mistaken) since I didn’t know if it would support GPT (it’s an old pc as I said), also I only had a single sata cable available so I installed it without the windows drive connected, the error message popped up only after I replaced the drives and tried to boot to the windows one, which wss supposed to be untouched, also as I said no bootable media (I made with Rufus, I could try balena etcher or what you said) but it just skips the boot media when i turn it on, even if i set it to the highest priority in bios (tried Debian, mint, kubuntu, but I’ll try fedora to see if it’s any different)

              When I was making the drives in Rufus it didn’t say anything when writing to the drive

    • onion@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve had way more issues with Ubuntu than with Fedora.

      Like after multiple updates I was stuck at some initramfs prompt

    • ForgottenUsername@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you are a newby FOR GODS SAKE USE UBUNTU.

      As someone who only a couple of years ago made the jump to linux. I’d also recommend PopOS super easy to start with.

      • Crass Spektakel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        PopOS is a sure way of getting into ten times more problems than Ubuntu.

        Seriously, I know them all. Started with NetBSD in 1991, used pretty much everything.

        If your system isn’t super weird then Ubuntu is the most relaxed experience you will ever have as a newby.

        (And yes, I am not using Ubuntu currently. But then, I hat 35 years of POSIX/Unix/Linux experience)

        • carl://@upload.chat
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Until you use software that without up front notice Ubuntu decides to move from APT to Snap without a migration process in place for your settings or credentials. Like has happened with Telegram and with Chromium. And then stuff breaks in ways where you as a noobie would have no idea how to fix.

          This is exactly what happened with the Ubuntu setup on my parents’ laptop and I’ve since moved everything over to Linux Mint for them so they don’t have to deal with that anymore.

        • ForgottenUsername@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          How?

          I actually had more issues with Ubuntu than popos. And the one audio issue I had, the system76 guys were fantastic.

          Ubuntu is filled with bloat these days, and your actually better off with straight Debian than Ubuntu. Not to mention as a whole Ubuntu has made some ‘questionable’ decisions in recent times

    • Corgana@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you are a newby FOR GODS SAKE USE UBUNTU.

      Absolutely! I actually recommend Ubuntu for people used to MacOS, and Zorin (based on Ubuntu) for those used to Windows. Start simple and learn from there.

      • PurplebeanZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m a long time Linux user 20 years or so and have tried loads of distros in that time. Eventually I got fed up and settled on Mint for quite a few years, but about 6 months ago an old colleague told me about Zorin as he was impressed with how it felt ‘proper’ from a user perspective. I tried it and actually liked it so much I fully switched to it as my main OS. It’s got all the user friendliness for when you just want to use it for work tasks, but still everything else underneath for when you want to experiment etc.

  • normalexit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like the window manager is important, but for newbies I also consider the package manager and overall installation process to be very important.

    I’ve had pretty distros that are basically busted after a package fails to install or video drivers are mucked with. An advanced user could fix most of these issues, but this is usually where a new user may go running back to their previous OS.

    A good computing experience for me is all my hardware working with minimal fuss and all the software I expect to be available being a few terminal commands away (e.g. steam, developer tools, etc.)

    • onion@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve had pretty distros that are basically busted after a package fails to install or video drivers are mucked with.

      Ubuntu?

    • nul9o9@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I start with either xfce or cinnamon for the fam, then install a window manager for me.

  • yetAnotherUser@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I understand the argument being made, but I kind of disagree. Yes, picking a DE in which you’ll be comfortable is really important (and often an undervalued aspect of using Linux for the first time), but I think that the time you need to spend self-maintaining your distro is more important, and is also prone to make-or-break your first-time Linux experience. That’s the most important factor on whether a new user says “I love Linux and want to continue using it” or “I fricking hate Linux, it’s filled with a bunch of problems, I’d rather just use Windows instead”. And that’s why it’s important to recommend beginner-friendly distros, as to avoid frustration of newcomers, because those are more manageable (unless those newcomers want the frustration of managing something that they don’t quite understand :)

    Does it matter which one in specific? No, and it’s probably at this point that the DE and visual looks should kick in.

    • UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Perfect gateway for Windows migrants. This and Mint are excellent starter distros.

      I mean you don’t ever have to switch but many people do, if only to explore their options

  • denast@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Not a hot take, I keep saying the same thing in different threads. I was not able to switch to Linux for years before I understood that I have problems with Gnome not with Linux itself, tried KDE and given I was migrating from Windows it clicked immediately.

    After you gain some experience, DE becomes mostly irrelevant, but it is crucial for starting off in an unfamiliar environment.

    • Urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I switched back to Linux about a year ago after taking about a 10 year break, and I installed gnome without even considering another option (because it’s good enough right?)

      It’s completely different than what I remember and I hate it. I want to switch to something else but that is now a “someday” project.

      I remember when it had a cute footprint where the “start button” used to be. It’s so different. I should have went with xfce or something. Maybe I should try cinnamon.

    • tubaruco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the DE is very important unless you have A LOT of free time and REALLY WANT to see something different from what youre used to.

      my first distro (other than ubuntu in school computers, but we dont talk about those) was fedora server minimal install, where i installed dwm and had fun using it. i had just switched from windows and was happy to have so many options, even though i had (almost) no linux experience before. after trying most of the big DEs and distros, i ended up on arch with xfce, which i have been using for more than a year now.

      most people really should go slower and try things step by step, as what i did would be really weird for anyone that tried it …probably

  • MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think that SteamOS is a great place to start people off with Linux.

    edit: I mean if you plug a steam deck into mouse and keyboard and use it as a linux box.

    it has the support of another company hiding as “games” and can WINE pretty easy with Steam controlling the WINE.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      i would recommend it to gamers but they still dont support it officially outside the steam deck…

      • I don’t think they will officially support it outside of the deck IMO, having used one in the flesh they have hardware optimization down to a tee - which to me really rounds off the deck experience.

        The rapid sleep/wake and some options in the quick access menu would likely need some ironing out on other hardware configs, not sure how nvidia card support would work too…

    • Hellfire103@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ha! Yeah, I remember that phase. I was planning to install LXDE as my first distro, simply because I thought the wallpaper looked cool.