My Ideal Linux Distribution

Linux is my favorite OS. When compared to the only other OS I've ever used (Windows) Linux wins hands-down in most departments (not counting gaming support - though I hate saying this, I don't think Linux will ever get far in that regard).

One problem I have with Linux, though, is also one of it's strengths - choice.

I occasionally start distro-hopping (a term used by many Linux-knowledgeable people to describe moving between distros) after a few months of using various distributions, even when I feel fairly happy with them.

My most recent distro I called home was Arch Linux. I stayed with it for a while, and recently decided to try openSUSE again, after having annoyances with support for Adobe AIR (Adobe only provides the technology to distros such as Ubuntu and openSUSE).

As I write this, I'm currently using openSUSE. However, I'm not entirely happy with it. Though I've found I really like it, almost enough to use it as my main distro, I don't like that Novell modifies packages such as KTorrent, legal reasons or no (they removed DHT support). True, I could always build the package myself. But I don't like that I have to. Also, after using Arch, using a 'stable' distro such as SUSE is annoying, because I miss all the bleeding-edge software (such as KDE 4.1.3, and the applications that are a part of it, such as Amarok 2).

So, I decided to put together a list describing my ideal Linux distro - what would be, for me, the perfect Linux.

The latest bleeding edge software

I can't stand using out-of-date software - even if it's considered 'buggy'. I like to be on top of things. This is one of the reasons I liked Arch - as soon as a new version of KDE, or Amarok, or some other software I use, was released, it was available to be installed in Arch, easily. No messing around with repositories, either. One thing I don't like about openSUSE is that I often have to hunt down another repo just to install something not deemed supported yet, among other things. Despite what you may think, having to use the Packman repo is not comparable to installing packages via Yaourt. As far as I'm concerned, Yaourt is part of Arch, Packman is not part of SUSE.

No modified packages

One problem I had with openSUSE was that Novell removed DHT from KTorrent, due to legal reasons, I'm guessing. To me, this is absolutely unacceptable. KTorrent should be easily available from SUSE's repos, unmodified. I shouldn't have to build it myself or add a different repo (I'm looking at you, Packman) to install it.

Arch also modifies Firefox for some reason. I don't know what they did, but whatever it was certainly annoyed Mozilla, because any modifications done to Firefox result in the branding needing to be removed. I don't mind using 'Gran Paradiso' with the little globe option /too/ much, but come on, must I really have to compile it myself/install user-made unbranded package or modify Firefox's internal settings just to browse the way I should be able to? I think not.

I do, however, like the modified KDE environment that openSUSE ships out, and KDEmod available to Arch users (which I used myself). What I'm mainly talking about here is removing features.

I should also mention that, for whatever reason, Kubuntu does not include kwrite by default, and openSUSE does not include kate by default. I think both should be installed - this is what I'm accustomed to with Arch, at any rate.

Easily Installable Packages

Packages should always be easy to install. Never mind having to compile them yourself or hunt down repos (I've already mentioned these above, several times).

I like Arch's package system. Pacman makes package installation very easy, and usually, if I need something I can find it in the AUR and install it via Yaourt. Not once have I had to go dependency-hunting for something with Arch.

My one complaint with Arch's system is that when I wanted to install Adobe AIR (so I could use Tweetdeck), I found Adobe only provides packages for RPM- and Debian-based distros - Arch not being one of them. This is primarily why I started using openSUSE. Although I realize the fault lies primarily with Adobe, I could not install it from the AUR, either. If Arch supported popular package formats such as these, it would be even more awesome than it is already.

No 'restricted' packages

I always hate it when a distribution won't let me use certain things, such as DHT (in SUSE's case), or MP3 support (I think it was Mandriva that wanted me to purchase some sort of subscription for that). Let's get this straight, I don't /care/ if some countries have laws prohibiting things. It doesn't mean you have to make it hard for people who live in countries with less-strict laws (or people like me who simply don't care). Ubuntu is great in this regard. As soon as I open a restricted file format in Amarok, Ubuntu asks if I'd like to install the restricted format, though it does warn me about possible legal issues. Ubuntu isn't going to stop me. And no distro should.

Excellent out-of-the-box hardware support

This one's pretty obvious, and is one area where (most) distros are getting better in all the time. I have yet to find something Ubuntu doesn't work with, and so far, the same with openSUSE. But in Arch (and I think this is probably due to the large configurability of the distro), my touchpad doesn't work 'out-of-the-box'. While I don't use it often, it's great when I'm not situated at a desk (my laptop is my only computer, so it's almost always stationary, unless I take it somewhere, which is somewhat rare). This is the only thing I can think of, off the top of my head, that is supported by most distros I've tried, but not Arch.

Another thing is multi-monitor support. I have yet to find a distro that allows me to use it right from the start, without having to do a bunch of command-prompt-kung-fu. I don't mind using the console - in fact, I find Ubuntu's too user-friendly in that regard (more on that below) - but Linux should be mature in this regard. Not once have I managed to get multiple monitors working within Linux, not even in popular distros such as Ubuntu or openSUSE.

Also - hibernation and standby. This has never worked in any distro for me, until I tried openSUSE again. Could be a fixed kernel bug, as I have not tried using it until now, but for now I will assume openSUSE was superior in this regard.

Ability to turn off ipv6 (and other features) off before install

One thing I find incredibly annoying is ipv6. For some reason, it slows my network speed down considerably. When Vista first came out (and I don't know if this is still true) ipv6 was enabled by default, and users had to turn it off to restore normal speed. Ubuntu is currently plagued with this problem as well, and I have yet to find a way (that works) to turn it off.

OpenSUSE gives you the option to turn it off before/during install. This is something I think Ubuntu should allow, as well as other distros. I don't know if SUSE lets you turn it on/off from the desktop environment, though, but I'm sure Ubuntu does not - Ubuntu's community (which is excellent, more on that below) seems to recommend modifying a system file - I tried this, but did not notice any speed improvements.

Minimal installation

I like my Linux install to be on the small side. This means not taking up more than a couple gigabytes, at the most.

Many distributions allow you to choose what programs you want installed. I like this. My ideal installation would install all the environment's (KDE, GNOME) applications by default (such as kate, kwrite, kcalc, etc.), as well as install the necessary drivers for your system. The user is then free to customize this, by adding applications such as SMPlayer. This way the user gets only what he/she needs, nothing more, nothing less.

I recognize that Arch does this, to an extent. The problem with Arch's way is that the user must know the names of the packages he/she wants to install. The user is left to install drivers and such on his own. While most Arch users know what they're doing here, I usually have to install everything (with some exceptions, when I know what something is). Arch, however, is great in that the only applications installed are those that come default with your desktop environment. As I said above, the user then gets to install any other desired applications.

Greatly-polished desktop environments, not 'tacked on'

One thing I dislike about Kubuntu, and this is something I've talked about before, is that it feels almost as though Canonical just added it in as an afterthought. It doesn't feel quite as 'polished' as the flagship Ubuntu does. Even the website looks less-professional.

Although I never really used Fedora, unless you really did some digging, you'd probably never know that they offer a KDE desktop just by looking at their site. And, as far as I can tell, their KDE offering is plain vanilla - no customizations at all, compared to their fruit-and-nut GNOME environment, which is nicely decked out in the Fedora blue-and-white.

openSUSE, on the other hand, really pays attention to detail. Both their GNOME and KDE environments look great. They tweaked both to have their own unique look and feel. Neither feels more important than the other. They make no effort to hide that they have both available, and screenshots of both are available on their site (unlike Fedora). This is the kind of thing I want to see. Personally, I prefer KDE, but a distribution should either be fully for a specific environment, or put equal effort into both offerings. Otherwise, one of the desktop environments will feel 'tacked on', like a side-project that never really gets much attention.

Note that distros such as Arch don't really count here. Since Arch is so customizable, you basically get the vanilla environment of your choice, unless you go with KDEmod, which is a community effort anyway.

Something that is related to this, but not going with the above text, is that I've noticed that my most recent Arch install had horribly ugly fonts. I don't know why, as I did not change anything. I installed as usual. They were all blocky, or something.

When I installed openSUSE, the fonts were beautiful, soft. The way they should be. And, they were the exact same fonts as I had in Arch. I have no idea what was wrong, and I can't really complain - probably a misconfiguration somewhere on my part - but it was annoying, and hard on the eyes.

Firefox, by default, also looks horribly ugly in KDE. It does in Kubuntu. It did, and probably still does, in Fedora, and I think it did in Mandriva as well.

But by default, openSUSE includes support for GTK themes in KDE. I think all distros should do this. If Linux ever wants a reputation as a beautiful OS, right up there with Mac OS X, widely used applications such as Firefox should look good, integrated with the environment, by default, without tinkering. Without this, it alienates the user.

User-friendly, but not mind-numbingly simple

Recently, I've come to despise Ubuntu and its variants for one reason: it's too easy.

Computing should be user-friendly, yes, but not to the point where you don't even have to think to get stuff done. I used to love Ubuntu. But that was when I actually had to open the terminal to do some things (or at least had an incentive to). Ubuntu has become more like Windows. I love it when I can do everything via a GUI, but Ubuntu makes it all too simple. There's something about it that I just don't like. Something that reeks of Microsoft's 'user-friendly' OS.

So when I started using openSUSE again, I was pleasantly surprised. I expected to get the same feeling of mind-numbing easiness from Novell's distro. But I didn't. Even though I (almost) never once had to open a terminal, it didn't feel too 'hand-holding'. I don't know what's different, but I just know something definitely is.

Excellent Community Support

Let's face it. Ubuntu has /the/ best Linux community. Although I've found Arch's forums and wiki extremely helpful, I still think Ubuntu's forum community is the most friendly, helpful community I've gone to help for. It may just be nostalgia kicking in from all those times in my Linux newbie days running to them for help whenever X decided to shut down or Ubuntu wouldn't boot. But I don't care - in my mind, they are the best.

And I think that every Linux distro community should follow their example. While it's true that every forum will have some real idiots, I've found that the Ubuntu forum has the least of them. They're the only forum I've gone to where I almost always receive help. On others, my posts are usually ignored (and no, it's not because I might be coming off as a whiny arrogant jerk :P). I think it's because Ubuntu is the most popular Linux distro, so that's where most people go to get help, and thus, where most people are to give help.

Conclusion

And that's really about all I can think of, at the moment (in no particular order). In a nutshell, my ideal distribution has:

• The latest 'bleeding-edge' software
• No packages modified for 'legal' reasons, 'restricted' packages available and easily installable
• Excellent out-of-the-box hardware support
• Minimal install - only what's default and required
  
• Equal effort put into all available distro flavours (specifically, KDE, GNOME)
• Easy to use, but not 'brainless'
• Helpful, friendly community

If anyone has any recommendations as to what distro fits my description, or wants to add any thoughts, please feel free to do so in the comments. I'm all up for arguing my points, as well; just no flame wars. ;)

Also, I'd like to apologize for the length - I didn't notice it until later. :P

Website grading tool

I recently found a neat little tool to determine your site's 'grade' based on a number of factors includng google page rank, traffic, etc.

The tool is called Website Grader (http://website.grader.com).

All you need to do is enter your site address, email address, and, optionally, the address(es) of your competitor(s).

The site takes between a couple seconds-minutes to calculate your rank, then sends the report to you in an email.

Above is a screenshot of a sample report (click here for the full sample).

The report consists of things such as:

• The number of images on your site
• Your site's 'readability level'
• Domain age, expiration date
• Google PageRank
• Google Indexed Pages
• Last Google Crawl Date
• Inbound Links
• Competitive Info

If you are webmaster, blogger, or site owner, I seriously suggest checking out this tool. Not only does it provide some interesting statistics, but it can prove extremely useful in many situations.

Fallout 3 Banned For 'Drug Use'

Bethesda's highly anticipated FPS/RPG hybrid Fallout 3 has apparently been banned. The reason?Drugs.In the game, the player can use drugs, and get high. Some of these drugs have beneficial properties, while others can harm you.Banning this game because of the drug content doesn't make sense, though. GTA had sex, and now drunk driving. Why ban? Just give it an M rating, and it would have got it anyway.If parents are really worried about their kids playing games like this, why don't they just not let them? Parents, these days, seem to be too busy working to pay attention to their offspring.Nevertheless, I'm sure this will be cleared up. It would suck if they had to completely remove the drugs from the game, though... the concept sounds kind of fun. :P

read more | digg story

Ubuntu Linux goes Retail

In a bold move by Canonical, the developers of Ubuntu, the ever-popular Linux distribution has been put in reach of average consumers, on the shelves of Best Buy.

Ubuntu has been available on Dell PCs for a while now, and users have had the option of downloading or ordering for free, but this is, in my opinion, a step in the right direction. Even though the idea of paying for Linux is, to me, absolutely insane, the price can't be ignored - for only $19.99, you can buy your very own copy of Ubuntu, complete with professional support, not something you get when you download Ubuntu. Heck, with a price like that, I might even go out and buy a copy.

Currently, I'm sure many people, especially the computer illiterate ones, will still buy Vista. The reason? People know Windows. They've used it all their lives. And people tend to associate price with quality - if something has a low price ($19.99 is nothing compared to Vista's price tag), they see it as low quality. But a few will be curious when they see the beige-and-orange box sitting next to those shiny cases. And those few will hopefully go home and install the better computing experience they've ever had.

While it's true that said computer illiterates probably have less problems than those who know their stuff, some people (like my mom, how about yours?) often inadvertently install malware on their computer, thinking it to be a harmless game, or a cute cursor.

It will be these people that will most likely have a better time with Ubuntu. With almost no viruses or malware (there are some viruses in existance for linux, but these are few and far between, and targeted toward servers), users won't even need to install and anti-virus, and with the professional support from Canconical, if something does go wrong, they're sure to have help.

Ubuntu is quickly becoming Windows Vista's superior in many ways. Dell is offering it on their PCs, it's available for free or in stores, professional support is available, and you can run virtually any Windows App.

Microsoft, look out. The African wildfire is spreading.

Which Distro to Choose, Part 2

So after my little adventure with openSUSE, I decided to go back to good ol' Ubuntu.

Why? Because it's known territory; I've become as comfortable with Ubuntu as I am with Windows (that is, I know my way around very well). But after a while I felt the urge to go and explore new distros.

So off I went, back to my little thread I had started on the Ubuntu forums regarding recommended KDE distros.

Seeing some new replies, I read them. I was pointed to a survey which was supposed to recommend a good distro for me. I tried it. Of the choices I got, I thought Fedora 9 and Mandriva Spring 2008 looked interesting, so I downloaded both. I used KTorrent to do so, and I marvelled at how beautiful its KDE4 interface was, so I paused my Mandriva download, and finished my Fedora download (Fedora 9 supports KDE4 by default).

Fedora installation went smoothly, but I noticed with great annoyance that I was going to be dumped in Gnome. After looking around, however, I didn't really mind - Fedora's Gnome offering is very fast, and I rather liked it. I still wanted myKDE4, though, so I googled to see what I did wrong.

I discovered that I needed to specify advanced program setup during installation, and choose KDE from there. I think, in future, the Fedora devs should give the users a choice of desktop environment by default, instead of in advanced settings.

Once in KDE4, I felt like my computer was extremely bloated, and I was instantly reminded of Vista. I also found it to be very sluggish, a huge contrast compared to Fedora's Gnome. I still liked the Oxygen theme, though. I guess KDE4 still isn't really ready for everyone.

So I booted back into Ubuntu, and finished my Mandriva download. After burning and booting, I was presented with a surprisingly fast (for a live-cd) desktop. I checked it out for a couple minutes, and decided I definitely wanted to install.

So I launched the installation wizard, which was very nice; the installation only took about what seemed like a few minutes.

Partitioning was interesting; but very easy after I figured out how the partitioner worked. Once I had finished setting up my partitions, installation finished up, and I was told to reboot.

After doing so, I created a new user, configured my time zone, and then a new screen came up, asking me to register and complete an optional survey.

I did so, but after submitting the survey, I was presented with a bunch of russian text. Thinking I had somehow reset my language preferences back on the registration page, I went back a step. This presented me with the survey - in German.

Thoroughly baffled, I went back another page. Now I was at the registration step again, in English. So I tried registering, but was told my account already existed. So I tried logging in, and was told I provided an incorrect password.

I tried every password I could think of, even purposely putting in the wrong combinations, to no avail.

So I tried resetting my password. This seemed to work (I tried logging in from the Mandriva website), but entering my password in the install still didn't work. So I tried resetting one more time, this time using a different password - this worked, oddly enough.

So I finally got past the registration and survey, and the strange language mixup. I have no idea how that happened. O.o

Once in Mandriva's KDE desktop, I started playing around. And now, after a few hours of said playing, I must say I am very pleased. Mandriva is an excellent distro, with MP3 and flash support enabled by default. I have yet to try watching a DVD movie, though.

My quest for distributions hasn't ended here, though. I'll continue to try a few more, but I think I'm happy with Ubuntu and Mandriva. :)

Blizzard hiring; mentions Diablo series - possible Diablo 3?

Blizzard has posted a new job description, and it might be of interest to Diablo fans:

"Blizzard Entertainment, the developer of Diablo and Diablo II, is looking for a lead 3D environment artist skilled at creating models and texture maps for both architectural and natural environments. The ideal candidate has experience modeling and texturing assets for a diverse visual range of environments."

Notice that they only mention the Diablo series. Although this is only speculative guessing, it is possible that Diablo 3, or a similar game is in the works. Of course, that would mean a lot of work, since they're already working on Starcraft 2 (which looks to be about finished), and the new WoW expansion.

What are your thoughts?

(For the job posting, look here: http://www.blizzard.com/us/jobopp/art-lead-3d-environment.html - oddly, the link seems to be broken, however)

Which distro to choose?

I am a Linux fan.

I actively use Linux all the time, except for gaming. I've been switching back and forth between Ubuntu and its KDE flavor, Kubuntu. I've decided I prefer KDE, but I've always found that Ubuntu (the gnome variant) seems more... supported, or something. I'm not sure what it is, but it seems like Kubuntu is more of an afterthought than anything else. One thing that's always bothered me is how hard it is to apply themes - it's a snap with Ubuntu. I'm not sure if that's KDE's fault, or Kubuntu's, though.

But I don't want to give up my KDE. So after doing some research (more simply poking around than research), I decided to try openSUSE.

At first glance, I liked it. But once I started installing my enthusiasm dwindled a bit. The reason?

One word: license agreement.

Not once since I left the world of Windows have I seen a license agreement. But I guess openSUSE is more corporate than Ubuntu?

So I clicked Accept. I didn't really like the install process - somehow it made me feel... confused. I shrugged this off as it simply being a side-effect of changing distros.

After the installation, I explored, and set about customizing. Almost immediately I noticed that my Windows partition wasn't mounted, didn't even show. Running fdisk -l in the Konsole (after some struggle - I'm used to the Debian-based command system) revealed it was still alive and kicking, though.

I ran a Google search and eventually managed to get it mounted (albeit manually). So that's two points for Kubuntu, in that there's no license agreement at install and it automatically mounts my Windows partition. So far SUSE only earned a point for looking sexy and including the kickoff menu and kcontrol by default (Kubuntu doesn't).

After fussing with Yast (package manager), I was getting annoyed. To me, Kubuntu's Adept was so much faster. It would install a selected package right away (after I confirmed I wanted to). Yast, every time, insisted on installing a bunch of other stuff as well. I still haven't figured out what that stuff was, though.

So I had my desktop customized with a new wallpaper and screensaver. But the time had come to see if theming actually /worked/. I had been told it would, but...

I tried out deKorator, which is what I installed via Yast. Just like in Kubuntu, it didn't work.

By this time I was fed up. I immediately uninstalled SUSE, and reinstalled Kubuntu. I realize now I probably should have gave it more time, but the distro oddly reminded me of Vista - shiny on the outside, and clunky on the inside.

I think the reason for this is that Ubuntu is heavily community-driven. The forum's members are very helpful and friendly. In the distro, I sense a strong community presence, but in SUSE, it's mainly corporately developed.

I've decided to install it on my external drive and give it another try (possibly). But I'd also like to find a distro that I can really like. For me, the best I've ever used was Linux Mint. It's based on Ubuntu, has MP3 support and flash installed by default, and is overall easy to use. I almost never had to touch the command line. But I wanted KDE, so I switched back to Kubuntu.

Ultimately, what I want is a distro that is complete and works as well as Ubuntu, but has all the KDE features that SUSE actually utilizes (and good theming support). I'm not sure when I'll find that. But for now, I guess I'm still distro-hopping. :)