Moving to Linux and comparing Archlinux vs Ubuntu
Being an experienced Windows user, I thought about switching to Linux. I often ran across laudatory articles and notes from bloggers. So I decided to experiment and describe my little experience.
I think there’s no point in describing the pros and cons of Linux and Windows, I’ve already discussed it millions of times, I’ll say only for myself, I’m tired of Windows with viruses! Heavy antiviruses are not annoying with their agility, but they make little sense from the lungs. Yes, and the times of simple viruses are gone, when 1 executable killed and live on without straining, now the registry will be killed, and excavated in a hundred different places and more often only manual removal of all this wickedness helps, because Antiviruses are either not removed at all, or they are not completely removed, which is almost the same.
First you need to understand that Linux is not free Windows and if you like to play 3D toys, sculpt in Potoshop and do other highly specialized tasks, then I think there is no sense with these problems and transitions to Linux, only you will lose time Seven / XP and enjoy life.
That is, each product copes well with one set of functions and succumbs to another, and this is the law of our life, unfortunately, there are no ideals!
For a start, I think it is worthwhile to google and find (or not find and think again) all those applications that you use in Windows and without which life at the computer will be a burden.
There are a lot of articles on this subject so there should be no problems. Here, for example a couple ( Communication programs , programs for the Internet ).
After 2 hours of searching in the internet, I realized that Linux has everything I need at all, which could not but rejoice!
Next is to determine the distribution ...
On the one hand, this is the simplest, for most Ubuntu and Linux are inseparable concepts like Xerox and a copy machine, but on the other, everything is not that simple.
')
I would like to note that what turned out to be news for me, it turns out that, in addition to Ubuntu, there is also Kubuntu (there are more Ubuntu-based distributions in general, more detailed information ), this is the same in terms of structure, architecture, etc., and the main difference is in the window manager, Ubuntu has on board Gnome , and Kubuntu has KDE .
No one bothers to read the article, download both and make it in about 10 minutes from Ubuntu Kubuntu, but it seems to me that this is not the best option.
I finally decided to stop at KDE, but Gnome initially seemed more friendly to me, in the dwarf I really didn’t want to reconfigure everything a little different from Windows, but it’s convenient and you get used to it quickly. I liked very much that all the quick access and system tray applications were on one panel (top) and the display of open windows on the other (bottom) was very convenient.
I had to configure KDE ... and I set it up as a method of scientific typing and with the help of Google, since Some moments were strongly annoyed, for example, initially the desktop is somehow a closed space for widgets and you cannot drag your document there or, for example, you cannot drag an application shortcut to the taskbar. By default, the “Start” menu is for a beginner, a nightmare at all ... At first glance, it’s nice and convenient, but when you don’t know in which of the items which program searches slow down ... Fortunately, all this is tuned by having time and desire.
Ubuntu seemed to me much easier to use and to configure up to its ideal than Windows!
All the drivers I got automatic.
In order to install applications / additional drivers, you just need to enter the program to enter the name of the desired application and 80% -90% that it will be found in the repository, then click install and use ... everything! Neither you need to search for installers from debility, in our time, software servers on which to download the application you need to go through 10 links to view a bunch of ads and if you are very lucky to run into a thread of a virus ... You do not need to store all the necessary and unnecessary distributions locally over time, become obsolete as well, no need to look for cracks.
In general, I spent an hour and a half - two hours to install and configure ubunt, 20 minutes of them only set up Firefox with all the plugins I needed.
Well, after 2 hours, I realized that everything seems to be as it is - ICQ works, flac plays, 1080p video shows without problems, and all the docks with pdfs open. And most importantly, I have 8Gb of memory, on a 32 bit ubunt, they can be seen without any dancing with a tambourine. That for desktop Vinda by the way is not at all realistic.
In general, the complete mission!
Everything is good in ubunt, everything is beautiful and simple, but I also wanted to get some kind of brain-nagging sensations from Linux, but here it is cheto ... 10-clicks of the mouse and that's it ... not so interesting :)
And in Ubunt I still didn’t like one moment, everything was decided there for me, all applications are already installed, a lot of things are loaded automatically, the same huge and incomprehensible number of software in the Start menu, I wondered why do I need all this ?? And it is not surprising that Ubunt, with ATI's firewood, immediately after loading, consumed 500-600Mb, and after gatherings in Firefox of the bookmarks 5-10, the amount of memory consumed increased to 1Gb ... I’ll make a reservation that after disconnecting something not clear and apparently, I didn’t need it from autoload, 300-350 on average began to devour memory when loaded, which is not so scary (my w2k3 eats 300 when loaded ...) I actually don’t mind memory, but I like to keep my control under system and understand what for and why. Therefore, the politician did not suit me a little.
Yes, and it immediately became clear why some are unhappy with this OC, such as it slows down more than Windows ... Now I am not surprised if I had on board, for example, 512mb -1Gb of memory, I think I would definitely not like my speed!
As I understand it (this is my IMHO and no more) distributions are divided into 2 main areas: 1) Oriented to a simple user (to whom the subtleties of the OS and the computer as a whole are not interesting) - such as Ubuntu, RH, Suse, etc. 2) Distributions oriented to experienced Linux users who know what they need from the OS and are ready to spend some time fine-tuning and optimizing their OS, such as ArchLinux, Debian, Slackware, Gentoo
Each distribution has its own ideology, so after reading some articles, I came to the conclusion that ArchLinux is something between Ubuntu (where everything is simple) and something like Slackware, Gentoo (where everything is difficult).
I liked that this distribution is sharpened for one architecture - x86, there is a 64-bit, 32-bit distribution, which means that it is already initially optimized for the standard PC platform without anything extra. Just according to the descriptions and as it turned out in practice, ArchLinux is not so scary, it all starts with the command line and the editor nano / vi, but all this is quickly set up and supplemented with everything your heart can pretty easily
The first time is certainly not easy and fast, but Google and excellent materials on the Archlinux site in the base of the Wiki will help you.
Who would not say ArchLinux but really is not for beginners in the sense in which I understand it and the main thing is not for sloths. I dealt with him first in a virtual machine, since Without Ineta, I think this is not at all realistic. There is a lot of documentation, it is chewed very well in both Russian and English, so it only remains to read and tune. Roughly speaking, I won Ubuntu in 2 hours as I wrote above ... C Arch'om is a bit more complicated.
But in the end, sitting at work, practicing on a virtual machine, then quickly setting up everything on my home computer, I quickly did almost everything I wanted for 5 days. And the kernel was reassembled so that my memory was all visible and KDE put on a minimum by complementing it only with what I needed and all the other applications installed.
What I liked, in fact, you spend at least no more than Ubuntu on installing software and updating it. After the actual manual configuration, you know thoroughly what config is responsible for and where to dig if something suddenly falls off, and just have an idea about the system as a whole. The speed of work pleases or does not slow down the memory when the first boot eats about 250mb (by the way, the system loaded 150-170mb without native firewood and a smaller screen resolution)
Time costs are not considered a minus. for which they fought for it and ran into it, but nevertheless it is necessary to note, it will be necessary to spend much more time to set up
There are some things that do not work as they should until you cut them and fix them with a jigsaw. For example, I have 2 network cards on the motherboard ... and after rebooting, they can be swapped in the system, for example, the first time was eth0 one, and after reloading it will be the second, eventually after Google and reading several decisions from the 3rd time everything was done mind Or, by the codecs manual, I set everything up, but I don’t yet show the video files, I don’t see that it’s finished somewhere!
In general, I began to like Linux as an OS for the end user, it becomes more and more complete and convenient to use every year. It is just that each distribution kit has its own chips for optimizing the workspace to which you quickly get used to it from time to time.
This is not the same Linux that was 5 years ago when it was necessary to spend 40 minutes to compile a simple program.
At the moment, I have noted the following pros and cons.
Pros:
Minuses:
I have not yet been able to single out the minuses for myself.
The main idea is that before trying to switch from Windows to Linux and not be disappointed very much and not regret the time spent, you need to collect as much information as possible, what is required from the computer, what applications will be executed, and the most important thing is to decide on for the beginning, the Ubuntu distribution will be the best choice because everything becomes immediately clear what Linux is and what it is eaten with, who wants more thrill, then you can safely look towards Debian, ArchLinux, Gentoo, Slackware, etc.
Thank you all for your attention.
Windows vs Linux
I think there’s no point in describing the pros and cons of Linux and Windows, I’ve already discussed it millions of times, I’ll say only for myself, I’m tired of Windows with viruses! Heavy antiviruses are not annoying with their agility, but they make little sense from the lungs. Yes, and the times of simple viruses are gone, when 1 executable killed and live on without straining, now the registry will be killed, and excavated in a hundred different places and more often only manual removal of all this wickedness helps, because Antiviruses are either not removed at all, or they are not completely removed, which is almost the same.
Platform Positioning
First you need to understand that Linux is not free Windows and if you like to play 3D toys, sculpt in Potoshop and do other highly specialized tasks, then I think there is no sense with these problems and transitions to Linux, only you will lose time Seven / XP and enjoy life.
That is, each product copes well with one set of functions and succumbs to another, and this is the law of our life, unfortunately, there are no ideals!
Conquest plan
For a start, I think it is worthwhile to google and find (or not find and think again) all those applications that you use in Windows and without which life at the computer will be a burden.
There are a lot of articles on this subject so there should be no problems. Here, for example a couple ( Communication programs , programs for the Internet ).
After 2 hours of searching in the internet, I realized that Linux has everything I need at all, which could not but rejoice!
Next is to determine the distribution ...
On the one hand, this is the simplest, for most Ubuntu and Linux are inseparable concepts like Xerox and a copy machine, but on the other, everything is not that simple.
')
Window managers in ubuntu
I would like to note that what turned out to be news for me, it turns out that, in addition to Ubuntu, there is also Kubuntu (there are more Ubuntu-based distributions in general, more detailed information ), this is the same in terms of structure, architecture, etc., and the main difference is in the window manager, Ubuntu has on board Gnome , and Kubuntu has KDE .
No one bothers to read the article, download both and make it in about 10 minutes from Ubuntu Kubuntu, but it seems to me that this is not the best option.
I finally decided to stop at KDE, but Gnome initially seemed more friendly to me, in the dwarf I really didn’t want to reconfigure everything a little different from Windows, but it’s convenient and you get used to it quickly. I liked very much that all the quick access and system tray applications were on one panel (top) and the display of open windows on the other (bottom) was very convenient.
I had to configure KDE ... and I set it up as a method of scientific typing and with the help of Google, since Some moments were strongly annoyed, for example, initially the desktop is somehow a closed space for widgets and you cannot drag your document there or, for example, you cannot drag an application shortcut to the taskbar. By default, the “Start” menu is for a beginner, a nightmare at all ... At first glance, it’s nice and convenient, but when you don’t know in which of the items which program searches slow down ... Fortunately, all this is tuned by having time and desire.
OS K / Ubuntu
Ubuntu seemed to me much easier to use and to configure up to its ideal than Windows!
All the drivers I got automatic.
In order to install applications / additional drivers, you just need to enter the program to enter the name of the desired application and 80% -90% that it will be found in the repository, then click install and use ... everything! Neither you need to search for installers from debility, in our time, software servers on which to download the application you need to go through 10 links to view a bunch of ads and if you are very lucky to run into a thread of a virus ... You do not need to store all the necessary and unnecessary distributions locally over time, become obsolete as well, no need to look for cracks.
In general, I spent an hour and a half - two hours to install and configure ubunt, 20 minutes of them only set up Firefox with all the plugins I needed.
Well, after 2 hours, I realized that everything seems to be as it is - ICQ works, flac plays, 1080p video shows without problems, and all the docks with pdfs open. And most importantly, I have 8Gb of memory, on a 32 bit ubunt, they can be seen without any dancing with a tambourine. That for desktop Vinda by the way is not at all realistic.
In general, the complete mission!
A spoon of tar in ubunt
Everything is good in ubunt, everything is beautiful and simple, but I also wanted to get some kind of brain-nagging sensations from Linux, but here it is cheto ... 10-clicks of the mouse and that's it ... not so interesting :)
And in Ubunt I still didn’t like one moment, everything was decided there for me, all applications are already installed, a lot of things are loaded automatically, the same huge and incomprehensible number of software in the Start menu, I wondered why do I need all this ?? And it is not surprising that Ubunt, with ATI's firewood, immediately after loading, consumed 500-600Mb, and after gatherings in Firefox of the bookmarks 5-10, the amount of memory consumed increased to 1Gb ... I’ll make a reservation that after disconnecting something not clear and apparently, I didn’t need it from autoload, 300-350 on average began to devour memory when loaded, which is not so scary (my w2k3 eats 300 when loaded ...) I actually don’t mind memory, but I like to keep my control under system and understand what for and why. Therefore, the politician did not suit me a little.
Yes, and it immediately became clear why some are unhappy with this OC, such as it slows down more than Windows ... Now I am not surprised if I had on board, for example, 512mb -1Gb of memory, I think I would definitely not like my speed!
Choosing a brain crushing Linux distribution!
As I understand it (this is my IMHO and no more) distributions are divided into 2 main areas: 1) Oriented to a simple user (to whom the subtleties of the OS and the computer as a whole are not interesting) - such as Ubuntu, RH, Suse, etc. 2) Distributions oriented to experienced Linux users who know what they need from the OS and are ready to spend some time fine-tuning and optimizing their OS, such as ArchLinux, Debian, Slackware, Gentoo
Each distribution has its own ideology, so after reading some articles, I came to the conclusion that ArchLinux is something between Ubuntu (where everything is simple) and something like Slackware, Gentoo (where everything is difficult).
Archlinux theory
I liked that this distribution is sharpened for one architecture - x86, there is a 64-bit, 32-bit distribution, which means that it is already initially optimized for the standard PC platform without anything extra. Just according to the descriptions and as it turned out in practice, ArchLinux is not so scary, it all starts with the command line and the editor nano / vi, but all this is quickly set up and supplemented with everything your heart can pretty easily
The first time is certainly not easy and fast, but Google and excellent materials on the Archlinux site in the base of the Wiki will help you.
ArchLinux practice
Who would not say ArchLinux but really is not for beginners in the sense in which I understand it and the main thing is not for sloths. I dealt with him first in a virtual machine, since Without Ineta, I think this is not at all realistic. There is a lot of documentation, it is chewed very well in both Russian and English, so it only remains to read and tune. Roughly speaking, I won Ubuntu in 2 hours as I wrote above ... C Arch'om is a bit more complicated.
But in the end, sitting at work, practicing on a virtual machine, then quickly setting up everything on my home computer, I quickly did almost everything I wanted for 5 days. And the kernel was reassembled so that my memory was all visible and KDE put on a minimum by complementing it only with what I needed and all the other applications installed.
What I liked, in fact, you spend at least no more than Ubuntu on installing software and updating it. After the actual manual configuration, you know thoroughly what config is responsible for and where to dig if something suddenly falls off, and just have an idea about the system as a whole. The speed of work pleases or does not slow down the memory when the first boot eats about 250mb (by the way, the system loaded 150-170mb without native firewood and a smaller screen resolution)
There is certainly a fly in the ointment
Time costs are not considered a minus. for which they fought for it and ran into it, but nevertheless it is necessary to note, it will be necessary to spend much more time to set up
There are some things that do not work as they should until you cut them and fix them with a jigsaw. For example, I have 2 network cards on the motherboard ... and after rebooting, they can be swapped in the system, for example, the first time was eth0 one, and after reloading it will be the second, eventually after Google and reading several decisions from the 3rd time everything was done mind Or, by the codecs manual, I set everything up, but I don’t yet show the video files, I don’t see that it’s finished somewhere!
Conclusion
In general, I began to like Linux as an OS for the end user, it becomes more and more complete and convenient to use every year. It is just that each distribution kit has its own chips for optimizing the workspace to which you quickly get used to it from time to time.
This is not the same Linux that was 5 years ago when it was necessary to spend 40 minutes to compile a simple program.
At the moment, I have noted the following pros and cons.
Pros:
- Comfortable working with applications, several teams can download and put almost any application.
- Visually more beautiful and more importantly more options for fine tuning.
- Beautiful does not mean it is inhibited, everything can be done, the main thing is to have a desire. It will work as an empty XP and visually give a head start to the seven.
- Security. I can't even write better security or just a different world improved here. You can hack Linux of course, but it must be done pointwise, that is, on a specific computer, and who needs a simple user?
- Competent work with memory !!! For all the time I use my swap file has not increased by either a kilobyte. That's why Firefox with 10-20 windows is rolled up / turned around to / from the tray like a bullet. I achieved this effect on Windows with the swap disabled and with the transfer of tmp files to the RAM disk.
Minuses:
- The fat minus is that some Windows analogs of programs that facilitate everyday life, for example: RoboForm, Punto Switcher, a music player who can normally open cue files - do not work as they should, and as we would like, there are some glitches, bugs and minor but annoying flaws.
I have not yet been able to single out the minuses for myself.
The main idea is that before trying to switch from Windows to Linux and not be disappointed very much and not regret the time spent, you need to collect as much information as possible, what is required from the computer, what applications will be executed, and the most important thing is to decide on for the beginning, the Ubuntu distribution will be the best choice because everything becomes immediately clear what Linux is and what it is eaten with, who wants more thrill, then you can safely look towards Debian, ArchLinux, Gentoo, Slackware, etc.
Thank you all for your attention.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/102446/
All Articles