User Feedback :: Another Live CD Article on OS News



Quote
I haven't seen such a mishmash of interfaces and programs since my old DOS computer

I wonder what the author expects from a linux system....Should all the applications be KDE, or Gtk, or some other uniform interface, regardless of whether the apps are not all the best for the job?  Personally, I don't really care what the individual applications look like, as long as they do the job and they don't waste space.
Quote
What goes into DSL is clearly governed by these two rules alone: it's fast, and it fits

Sounds good to me.
I don't take someone's opinion seriously when they rank look and feel above functionality, especially when we are talking about an OS that runs from a CD drive.

In one paragraph, the author stresses the importance of a "get down to business" approach in a livecd vs. a "demo cd" approach.  Then a couple paragraphs later, he is slamming all of these good livecds because they don't look the way his favorite Gnome 2.8 does.  You can't have it both ways.  Either functionality is more important, or style is more important.

Some of his favorites had a great look and feel but are all but unusable (from CDROM) on anything but the newest hardware.

Call me crazy, but I actually LIKED my old DOS computer  (and FYI it now runs DSL :D )

Oh well.
I'd have to side up with cbagger01 on this one....
( usually a smart move anyway...  that's another story.. )

For me, learning to command a dos environment from a dos prompt,
or even better, configuring "norton commander" to handle batch files and
filename extension execution activity was a great stepping stone to linux.

All the good viewers, players, and apps were run from cli at a dos prompt.

So on, and so forth, with xtree gold, and many other tools to help
with file management in a dos world.

DOS was my friend, not something to be feared..

Many of the things I see happening here in linux with
hardware configurations, IRQ's and IO's,  bash scripts,
or the familiar /opt/bootlocal.sh filetypes,
are so similar and familiar to the " batch" files from the ol' dos days.

DSL has the norton knockoff,  'MC'... ,
but as I use and customize emelfm more and more each day,
it feels very much like my old NC buddy ..

My old 286-12 ( turbo! ) , and my first 386-16DX,
would have never run DSL , but with a whopping 40MB Seagate HD,
and a VGA monitor , they were the stuff of legends....
( could you imagine back then, filling up a few gigabytes of HD space? )

73
ke4nt
Yeah, I'm not putting much stock in reviews. Many of us have tried alot of distros that are much "prettier" than DSL but this is where we return. I admit that I sometimes get caught up in the look of the latest Mepis release because it is familiar to XP and it really is just a pretty darn nice distro for full features. But, when I open the menu and have to search and search and search and search for an app, I appreciate the clean efficiency of a distro like DSL.

I can't ignore the fact that sometimes I have to check my PC to make sure my CPU fan is still working because my system fan is running 1200-1300rpm's SLOWER running DSL than when I am booted into XP.   :D

That tells me I have a cooler and happier PC. Since I rely on her for alot of important stuff, I prefer to use what makes her the happiest!

I sound like a broken record but I am not sure why you would go to a distro just for Gnome or KDE. I know there are some things that appear to setup easier with those WM's but are they really worth all the bloat associated? I have come to really appreciate fluxbox and how it doesn't get in my way. With wmdrawer added, it gives me everything I need with single-click and runs just like KDE.

Funny to think a year ago I was telling myself, "man, this Linux stuff is a real pain in the butt!"  :p
Next Page...
original here.