megane-kun

Just for reference.

Can’t really remember much of how it looked out of the box, since I proceeded to customize it quite heavily. However, though my memory is fuzzy, I remember it looking like a combination of Windows XP and mid 2010’s Ubuntu.

Checking with the xfce website, they have this screenshot of one of their latest versions:

KDE has sane defaults when it comes to windows: it opens a window at cursor position and whether or not it’s fullscreen or maximized depends on what it is when you last closed the window.

So for example, if the LibreOffice Calc is maximized when I last closed it, the next time I use it, it’d be maximized.

Window rules, however, can be as fairly simple or as complicated as you want it to be.

For example, this is my settings for discord:

I set it to open horizontally and vertically maximized, on any virtual desktop in the ‘Background’ activity (not really something most KDE Plasma users make use of, but I do).

I had a similar workflow with maximized screens residing on different workspaces. KDE Plasma also have window rules which you can set on a per-program/application or a per-window basis (for example, main window for a program goes fullscreen into one monitor, in a workspace you specify, and the tools window opens in a different monitor in the same workspace you specify).

I used KDE Plasma for a long time ever since I started daily-driving Linux.

I like how KDE Plasma allows quite a surprising amount of customization. I also had some experience with Gnome via Ubuntu, and XFCE. Gnome looks polished, but doesn’t allow for much customization. XFCE is a lot more customizable than Gnome, but getting it to look quite right took a lot of effort.

As far as I understand those selectors work, using shift as the level 3 modifier is a bad idea since …

I suppose customizing the keyboard layout such that SHIFT can be used as L3 modifier can be done. Otherwise, you might want to refer to /usr/share/X11/xkb/rules/evdev.lst.

Here’s the relevant part(s):

Not too sure if they outright lied, but I suppose we can say that they used the change to make their drives seem larger!

That’s why I wished computer people had used a prefix system distinct from the SI ones. If we’re measuring our storage devices in yeetibytes rather than gigabytes, for example, then I suppose there’s less chance that we’ve ended up in this situation.

I realized why I didn’t think of base 2 in my previous reply. For one, hexadecimal (base 16) often used in really low-level programming, as a shorthand for working in base 2 because base 2 is unwieldy. Octal (base 8) was also used, but not so much nowadays. Furthermore, even when working in base 2, they’re often grouped into four bits: a nibble. A nibble corresponds to one hexadecimal digit.

Now, I suppose that we’re just going to use powers of two, not base-2, so maybe it’d help if we do a comparison. Below is a table that compares some powers of two, the binary prefixes, and the system I described earlier:

Each row of the table (except for the rows for 2¹⁰ and 2⁵⁰) would be requiring a new prefix if we’re to be working with powers of 2 (four apart, and more if it’d be three apart instead). Meanwhile, using powers of 16 would require less prefixes, but would require larger numerals before changing over to the next prefix (a maximum of 16⁴ - 1 = 2¹⁶ - 1 = 65 535)

One thing that works to your argument’s favor is the fact that 1024 = 2¹⁰. But I think that’s what caused this entire MiB vs. MB confusion in the first place.

However, having said all that, I would have been happy with just using an entirely different set of prefixes, and kept the values based on 2¹⁰.

I guess? I just pulled that example out of my ass earlier, thinking well, hexadecimal is used heavily in computing, so maybe something with powers of 16 would do just fine.

At any rate, my point is that using a prefix system that is different and easily distinguishable from the metric SI prefixes would have been way better.

I think the biggest mistake there is using SI prefixes (such as kilo, mega, giga, tera) with bytes (or bits) to refer to the power of two near a power of ten in the first place. Had computer people had used other names for 1024 bytes and the like, this confusion between kibibytes and kilobytes could have been avoided. Computer people back then could have come up with a set of base·16 prefixes and used that for measuring data.

Maybe something like 65,536 bytes = 1,0000 (base 16) = 1 myri·byte; ‭4,294,967,296 bytes = 1,0000,0000 (base 16) = dyri·byte; and so on in groups of four hex digits instead of three decimal digits (16¹² = tryri·byte, 16¹⁶ = tesri·byte, etc). That’s just one system I pulled out of my ass (based on the myriad, and using Greek numbers to count groups of digits), and surely one can come up with a better system.

Anyways, while it’d take me a while to recognize one kilobyte as 1000 bytes and not as 1024 bytes, I think it’s better that ‘kilo’ always means 1000 times something in as many situations as possible.

If the earliest sports were a way to practice skills needed for hunting or warfare, then making an e-sport out of spreadsheets is going back to the roots of sports. It’s practicing skills needed for your daily job.

I’ve used Librewolf until pretty recently and I say it’s not for everyone. It’s hardened Firefox made into its own thing for people who want the benefits of hardened Firefox but don’t want to go through the effort of hardening their Firefox install.

There are some sites that wouldn’t work in the strictest settings. As far as I remember, the most problematic sites with Librewolf are those that demand way too much in terms of privacy and security, so I took it as a given that if a site doesn’t work with Librewolf (with me using the default settings), it’s not worth it to enter to begin with.

I’m with you on liking multi-monitor set-ups. I also have several workspaces and activities (a KDE thing—you can think of it as another set of workspaces accessible via a shortcut key), which means I’ve got tons of “space” to play around with.

I‌ could have my e-mail program run on one workspace, then switch to my main workspace with one screen for VSCode (or whatever) and another for the browser window with lots of tabs that I can just refer to while doing work. And then in a different activity, a multi-media program might be playing a podcast or just some music to help me focus.

My discord is usually on the same activity as my multi-media program though, as I don’t really need to refer to it as often. If there’s a new message for me, my system gives me a notification and an icon in my system tray lights up or something, indicating a new message.

But yeah! You do you with your preferred workflow!

Yeah, using Arch is a commitment. On top of having to keep your system relatively up-to-date (this is probably the easiest part though), you also have to be ready to do some work in resolving problems when they do crop up (usually after an update, lol).

However, I think most of the work in using Arch is the installation process, making sure things run smoothly after installation, and hammering out the kinks that may arise. After that, so long as you keep your system relatively up-to-date (and having resolved any issues resulting from updates), it’s mostly hassle-free.

The only other distro (or rather, OS) that I think has as wide a source for installable software is NixOS, but not only I haven’t any experience with it, it’s still relatively new and wouldn’t recommend it for daily-driving, much less gaming.

But yeah, Arch is definitely not for the faint nor half-hearted, but it might just work out for you. Good luck and may you be able to find a Linux distro that works with your hardware.

I can’t really give you advice but maybe my current set-up can give you some ideas.

My desktop has an AMD Ryzen 5 3500 for my CPU and an AMD‌ Radeon RX 7600 for the GPU and some 16GB of RAM. I have two cheap monitors both connected via HDMI and are 1080p 75Hz. My desktop runs Arch Linux with KDE Plasma 6 Wayland, and aside from some minor keyboard-related issues, it’s running fine. My desktop set-up could be just bog-standard that things just work, but there ya go.

I am not telling you to install Arch Linux, not unless you’re willing to dive into the Arch Wiki, lots of forum posts and the occasional Stack Overflow thread whenever you’ve got a problem—not to mention dive into the command line and read lots of arcane logs to even start to know what to search for online. However, if your problems are due to lack of software support or something similar, then with Arch (or really, Arch-based distros, just stay away from Manjaro) and its wide array of packages, you might just be able to make things work for your hardware.

I switched to Wayland the moment my distro went moved to KDE Plasma 6 because according to my logic: if things are going to be broken and I’m going to adjust to them anyways, I might as well do it all at once: shock therapy style.

Plasma 6 broke a lot of my desktop customization, but that is to be expected. And Wayland? It has been surprisingly okay. I am experiencing some keyboard-related problems that I can’t even begin to track down (sometimes the keyboard flat out refuses to work for certain programs, sometimes it’s the numpad). However, I am not sure if it’s really related to Wayland, so I’m withholding judgement.

I actually have some plans (no timeline though, it’s basically just a wishlist item as of now) of making my own NAS, so there’s that opportunity. And of course, yeah, getting an old machine is also an option. Who knows, maybe I’d get my hands on another old laptop that could very well be my way to testing Linux distros.

That sounds amazing, to be honest. One major concern I’ve got is the initial setting up. That same friend of mine (the one who exorcised my system) already has a NixOS system for their NAS, and seeing the config files kinda scared me. However, as far as I’ve understood their explanation, it’s basically a “set-up once and forget about it” affair. It’s still quite a departure from the way I’ve learned to do things though, so it’s still intimidating.

To be honest, maybe I’m just waiting for that friend to be somewhat of an expert in NixOS, so that they can push me into using it, lol!

Initially, I chose Linux for it being gratis, but as I’ve used it more and more, I started to appreciate its freedom. It’s really kinda moot though since I first gotten exposed to Linux because I had to. Our uni adopted Linux (some faculties used Linux Mint, others used Ubuntu) for their school computer laboratories after they couldn’t pay for their Windows licenses. In a way, I indeed got into Linux because it is gratis.

I started daily-driving Linux when my Win7 desktop broke, and had to use an ancient, hand-me-down, laptop. It can barely run Win7, and so I tried installing Ubuntu on it (funny in hindsight though, I should have used a lightweight Linux distro). Then a friend of mine introduced me to Manjaro. It worked well for quite a while, until the HDD finally croaked (it’s had a long life of nearly a decade). I stuck with Manjaro when I got my present desktop, but that same friend of mine who introduced me to Manjaro pushed me to using Arch despite my protests. I would have wanted to switch to Endeavour instead since I was intimidated by pure Arch. But since they offered to do the “installation and set-up process” with me, I relented. (The scare quotes are there because it was not an ordinary installation process: my friend basically exorcised the Manjaro out of my system.)

I have a few distros I would like to try, off the top of my head: EndeavourOS, Fedora Silverblue, and NixOS. However, I don’t think I’m a distro hopper. I would prefer that I stay with a distro unless I get pushed off it for one reason or another. Perhaps, if I’ve got an extra computer to test things out, I might be a bit more adventurous and go distro-hopping using that extra machine.

To date, I’ve only had a bit of experience with Linux Mint and Ubuntu, and a bit more experience with Manjaro and Arch Linux. I don’t think fairly limited experience with those allows me to pick a favorite, but I suppose despite its reputation for being hard to use, I quite like Arch Linux. Its package manager as well its repositories really does it for me. It’s changed the way I think about installing programs, as well as updating them.

Currently, I use Arch and Win10 in a dual-boot system. After I’ve gotten myself an AMD graphics card, I spend my time on my Arch system almost exclusively.

I’ve switched to Linux as my daily driver sometime late 2019, and initially went with Manjaro (with XFCE, because I was using an ancient laptop back then) after it was recommended to me. The installation and set-up process was pretty quick and painless.

When I got my current desktop, I stayed with Manjaro. However, I got some problems with my NVIDIA video card’s drivers. Proprietary support for it was dropped shortly after I got my system. Nouveau was decent. I can use my system at the very least, but gaming was a lot iffy. I didn’t mind since I don’t really do gaming, however. Since then, I’ve moved on to Arch, btw. Also since then, I’ve got an AMD‌ card. Neither of them gave me much problems. A lot of my problems with Arch deal with the changes I’ve made to my configuration.

This is basically my Linux experience: when it works, which is 90% of the time, it’s excellent. When I do have some problems, 90% of the time (9% overall), I can get by with a few internet searches. That remaining 10% of the time (so, 1% overall), I feel that I’m just too smooth-brained to resolve it, and even attempting to resolve it seems to be a foolish errand.

While lot of help is out there online, I don’t appreciate the elitist tone of some of the more Arch-specific fora—they’re helpful, but I’ll never want to put myself to the position of asking those people for help, not with how newbs are treated. That is basically why I said earlier that I have no confidence that Linux will soon be able to shed its “for advanced users” image. Newbs to Linux don’t have the knowledge to “properly ask questions” required by a lot of those online fora. IMO, they only resort to asking questions online when they’re knee-deep in shit and are desperate for an answer. Being faced with an “elitist RTFM attitude” when one’s already desperate for help doesn’t alleviate that “Linux is too hard for me” image.

So, yeah, there’s that.

90% of the time, Linux works swimmingly fine. 9% of the time, some problems might arise, but an online search (Arch Wiki is very helpful in this regard) and digging around some fora would resolve it. 1% of the time is where you’d find yourself wondering if you’re smart enough for Linux. Unfortunately, it only takes a handful of (second-hand) bad interactions (thread closed with no answers, being told to RTFM, being told that the query is too vague without any helpful nudge towards a refinement of the query, etc.) to sour a user’s impression of Linux as a whole.

I must admit that newbs not knowing how to ask questions isn’t a problem exclusive to Linux alone. However, Windows and even Mac have the luxury of larger user numbers, and more importantly, paid staff to address user queries. With Linux, as a rule, the ones answering user questions are but other users volunteering their time and effort to answer questions. It’s understandable that facing the same malformed question again and again is infuriating. However, I think it takes time and effort to be rude. IMO, it’s just better to walk away from a possible unpleasant interaction. Of course, this wouldn’t help the user at all, but I’d rather see a thread with no replies than someone telling me to shut up and read the fucking manual. Perhaps there’d be someone more helpful who’d step in before the thread inevitably gets locked due to inactivity.

I don’t want to be negative about Linux, but if the “year of the Linux desktop” is to happen, this is one crucial thing that we (and I count myself in being a Linux user myself) must address. Every Linux user is, whether we like it or not, an ambassador, and how we deal with newbs/noobs asking questions will shape their impression of not just us, but Linux as a whole. I think there are a lot of people who are still on the fence, not because of Linux’s capabilities, but because of a pre-concieved notion of what a Linux user must be: tech-savvy and above all, willing to devote the time to learning about their machine and OS. A‌ lot of people aren’t like that. Moreover, I think there are some people using Linux (even Arch, btw) who aren’t like that, but … yeah.

At any rate, I agree with you that a lot more people will be able to get by with a pre-installed Linux system. I think Linux is ready for being a mainstream daily driver.

Oh, yeah, I don’t think not having native MS Office apps isn’t that much of a deal-breaker. I personally use Libre Office, and despite some hiccups (their documentation do have a lot of problems IMO), it’s got a decent amount of feature-parity with MS Office. For almost all of what I want to use an office suite, Libre Office would suffice. For the exceptions, I can usually find a workaround.

Overall, I’m happy with my Linux system—to the point I barely even touch Windows anymore (my SO installed Win10 on a separate SSD for me so that I can dual-boot), but I’ve got no reason to log on Windows. I might have had some problems (mostly of my own making), but with that small exception of times that made me wonder if I’m smart enough for Linux (or yeah, basically Arch), I’m more than content a huge majority of the time.

I’m sorry for the rambling wall of text, and I hope I’ve put my message across clearly.