Yes, distro-hopping can be addictive. Just wait till you try Manjaro...
My new journey to Ubuntu
- Thread starter Divine_Barakah
- Start date
ChromeOS & Linux
155 Replies
37,913 Views
I install distros directly on my laptop without VM or anything but I will give it a try. Is it based on Ubuntu?
Edit
What about the new profile picture?
What's special about Manjaro? I guess it is geared towards geeks?
B
BVLon
Should be...
Home Clear Linux* Project | Clear Linux* Project
Then again, I haven't tried it.
From their website, it seems that it is not intended to be used at home by consumers (technical details). From a privacy perspective, I don't think it would be very friendly. Will give it a try this weekend.Should be...
Home Clear Linux* Project | Clear Linux* Project
clearlinux.org
Then again, I haven't tried it.
B
BVLon
I've read its performance is actually the best, when compared to all major distros. i don't think it will be very friendly either, but it's optimized for Intel platforms.
Maybe because it is optimised by the manufacturers of the CPU itself huh? Will see about it. Currently I am going to try POPOS and Zorin OS
1 It is a rolling release which means you get up-to-date OS and programs without having to wait for the next release. They try to keep close to the bleeding edge, but not too close.
2 It is the only Arch-based distro that you can use successfully without being a total linux expert. Arch has a vast software base, and the best documentation.
3 It is very well maintained and has many desktop options. For instance, their version of Gnome looks much better than Ubuntu's, in my opinion.
These were the good points. there are also bad points. It's harder to use, and more likely to cause issues because of the constant updating.
I forgot to point out that programmes installed via Snap Store will take more time to launch ( I guess it is related to virtualisation). This happened in Opera and Spotify. Installing Opera and Spotify from their main website is better (in my case) performance-wise
This is actually a problem with Ubuntu -- there are a lot of apps that you used to be able to install the regular way, and now they are offered in the software center only as snaps. For instance, the good old Chromium browser. This is one of the reasons why Canonical gets on people's nerves. They can get a little bit too dictatorial for the hard-core linux guy.
I still do not get what "Snaps" are. Anyway, I have installed Snap Store on Elementary OS and I try to install apps from other sources (Ubuntu Archive and Main Websites). I avoid Snap Store as possible (not sure why but mostly for the launch delay)
Anyway, how is Arch Linux compared to Ubuntu in terms of power consumption?
I think the power consumption depends more on the desktop. AFAIK Arch does not use more or less power than other branches of Linux do.
Then I can safely say that power management on Windows is better than it is in Linux in general.
Maybe I didn't understand your question right -- when you say power consumption, you mean battery life on a laptop? If that is what you meant, I really don't know the answer to your question at all. I run Linux on a desktop, I never pay attention to how much electricity it is using. I was thinking more about RAM and CPU usage.
Yes, I was referring to battery life. I was not clear enough in my post I am sorry. So far I have tried three distros: Ubuntu, Linux Mint and Elementary OS. Out of the three I find Linux Mint to consume less power than the other two.
You said it right. I just wasn't thinking...
Snaps are just self contained apps, that because of their nature are easy to keep up to date across different distro's with different bases. They run in their own kind of sandbox.
So is it sth like Electron?
Recently browsing
Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes
