Switching to Ubuntu
support.system76.com
support.system76.com
But then, out of chance installing on a laptop that wasn't sure it was UEFI or BIOS (yes, BIOS in UEFI mode), lacking much in terms of storage media, plus a weak internet connection, knew Ubuntu had a mini install, not server install, but mini install, but had never used before. Not so well linked to on the website but for benefit of all here's the link: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD about 40MB.
Fantastic. Complete Ubuntu ecosystem underpinned by Debian solidness. And straight-up GNOME environment (or GUI of choosing, or lack of, selectable on install). No cruft, but as full featured as any Ubuntu can be. And lets GNOME actually be enjoyed with customisation, but also allows the focus and productivity that GNOME esp. GNOME3 offer.
The OP is about OSX to Mac. Completely support Ubuntu/GNOME. Absolutely suggest straight OSX > GNOME and it/general Ubuntu ecosystem. Avoids messing with Unity or any 'Ubuntu minus Unity' system reinvention, and lets one enjoy using a computer, not being frustrated by it.
EDIT: Oh, and I almost forgot. The fact that the little 'x' close button of maximized windows cannot be clicked if a smaller window is active and in the foreground. That drives me nuts.
I don't understand: That's default GTK/win behaviour when the smaller window is part of the background window (like LO prompting for closing/saving/cancelling the document you are editing when you click the close button of LO). It's a pop up.
However, it does not make sense that if I have a small console window in the foreground and my word processor in the back, that I cannot close my word processor with one click - but I can't. That's default behaviour in Unity.
These small but idiosyncratic behaviors in Unity that probably drive so many people away. It is long time sine I used Unity last, but there was enough of these quirks that made it unpleasant to use.
The fact that you are slow with the mouse is not something that can be generalized to all the population.
Yes, I know I always get down-votes whenever I mention this.
It also depends on the task.
I can select and move a piece of text from one place to another faster with the mouse than with any way of keyboard shortcuts.
For example, using vim shortcuts I have to count the number of lines I need to move the cursor before typing the order and it is always faster for me to just move the mouse cursor than to count the lines.
But there's always one guy to say "Hey, I like Unity, plus you can always configure Gnome or get Kubuntu if you like" and the mere doubt of a debate dillutes the elephant in the room, which is that Unity wasn't capable of generating massive adoption, as opposed to most other DEs. Yep, some people liked Unity, but it's only some people, that's the problem.
I love it, and wouldn't switch back. But everyone has their preference, I find this very usable and out of your way
It's nice and fast, no bells as whistles.
I saw the GUI of that era as something without character, only copying XP and later trying to copy OS X, but in an incomplete way, and mainly, without something that can be perceived as original.
In fact, the Ubuntu I saw before Unity was almost a carbon copy of OSX. Macbuntu 10.04 was a thing. And it was a thing because of the lack of identity the Linux DEs had before Unity.
I read about Ubuntu, and decided to try again, and this time I forced myself to learn the keyboard shortcuts. That's the main difference and what made me swear this is the DE for me.
The HUD is a game changer. The keyboard shortcuts to switch between virtual desktops, and to move windows between them are second nature now. The same to maximize or half-screen maximize them.
I went back to using Linux full time, because of Unity. I have changed some of the default keyboard shortcuts, and enabled virtual desktops but otherwise it is the vanilla experience.
It helps me work faster and better. And it really feels like its own thing. I know it is not Windows and I know it is not OS X. I understand you got used to the previous thing, but Unity is better for me and for many others.
I always miss the Unity keyboard shortcuts whenever I'm using any other DE, including when I use Windows.
* Stability: I consider Debian testing/unstable more stable than Ubuntu stable (Try updating an ubuntu with lots of package installed).
* Privacy: Debian is more concerned about User's privacy then Ubuntu. If your iceweasel (now firefox) automatically connects to internet to load some data against your wish, you can consider this as a bug in Debian (and several other examples).
* Community support: You get community support from both Ubuntu and Debian communities.
* Truely free software 0: No non-free software by default. No binary blobs. But you may choose to have, if you wish to.
* Truely free software 1: In Debian, if you solely install packages from 'main' repo, you can safely use it, even in commercial setup. But in ubuntu, there can be packages that may commercially have several restrictions (and those repos are enabled by default).
Everything is from upstream: GNOME, wayland, flatpak ...
For some while I have been trying to write some hacky scripts[0] that would help users to configure their Debian systems really easily (consider the script as pre-alpha).
Always do and don't remember any issues.
Mostly, Ubuntu is Debian with some niceties thrown in like AskUbuntu, Unity, PPAs, or a release schedule.
Have you ever tried updating an old Ubuntu (say, 14.04 LTS) with lots of -dev packages installed?
I have had this issue several times, which made me force to switch one of my client's system to Debian.
And well mint works well enouth for my needs.
That's a pretty debatable paragraph, and one with which most serious Photoshop and Illustrator users would really struggle.
Anyone have experience with System76 laptops recently? How is the build quality, battery life, service? There are not many reviews about the laptops.
It does use Nvidia graphics, for which driver support is crap. And unlike previous machines, the issues haven't disappeared with upgrades. A failure to resume is the most common bug.
A special award goes to Chrome, which likes to use the acceleration and will leave the main Chrome window on top of the screen after the application is hidden. (Using a nonstandard manager such as Xmonad or ratpoison.)
It took quite a bit of effort and the details were hard to understand. There are a lot of conflicting info in stack overflow threads and such. Like I found out after the first try that there are multiple configuration paths that are merged. Don't remember the details now. It was confusing anyhow.
Yes, disabling cursor acceleration requires some CLI fiddling and adding that to the autorun login scripts.
Also rotating the screen is not automatic in tablet mode.
(but yes using Ubuntu MATE is a perfectly viable option)
ftfy
I appreciate that Canonical spends a lot of cash developing and hosting Ubuntu but if this is the only way that they can do it then thanks but no thanks.
My last experience with Unity was that it just lagged lagged on a machine that could handle windows seven with no hiccups.
Most people with whom I talked about this seemed to have had similar experiences. In truth I've never heard anyone defend Unity.
I have never met a person who called unity slow and unresponsive, but I always read that complaint online.
My dad uses it full time at home and consider it just as user friendly as the windows he uses at work.
I used it on my laptop 7 years ago, and every other update had hardware compatibility quirks. But unless I used the XP that came with that laptop, Windows also didn't have full compatibility.
Well everything is relative I guess. Compared to Windows Vista, Unity is rocket fast. On older machines MATE is much more responsive then Unity without suffering the tweak-ability issues of Lubuntu.
Unity has been responsive for me on a variety of hardware over the past three years. I'd say anything with Intel Graphics or better would be fine. As a generic user experience I think it's better than Windows 7, worse than Windows 10 [for people who like Windows 10]. On Linux, I prefer Unity to Gnome and Xmonad to everything.
No. Still slow and unresponsive, more or less works responsively after reboot and if you kill the hud-service and disable some other stuff, but starts to get to barely working after a bit.
Lubuntu is the most responsive one from the Ubuntu family I think.
Although, no Google Drive... no Evernote...
The only Linux Laptop I know that could be sort of compared to a macbook pro. But still from my point of view not even close to the asethetics of a mbpro.
With a bit of effort, Unity could look much better.
It's a matter of personal taste, but does anyone honestly look at the default Ubuntu desktop and think "Well, that's just the pretties desktop I've ever seen".
Logically it shouldn't matter, the look has little influence on the functionality, but I really think the orange, black, and purple look has turned people away from, if not Linux, then certainly from Ubuntu.
Data point of one, but yes, I have — I genuinely think that Unity (>=12.04) looks better than any of Windows 7, Windows XP, and KDE4 (all of which I had used extensively), MacOS and Gnome-3 (which I had used sporadically) and Windows 8 and 10, (which I've only seen but not used). IMO it's also at least as functional as any of the above.
I particularly liked the fact that they "got" the fact that one can have limited vertical screen space and for example the menus of a maximized window merge with the top status bar.
Tastes obviously differ widely.
Yes, in fact that dull gray is the only ugly thing. The launcher bar on the left is very good looking by itself.
Time saved: priceless.
I see you and I have had different experiences with Apple laptops.
Ubuntu offers a lot of niceties, and the DE is definitely not a deal breaker since you can install GNOME/MATE/KDE with a couple of terminal commands anyway.