Ubuntu is a product of Canonical which are a pretty evil corporation and a submarine of Microsoft. What they don’t leech off Debian is proprietay and lock-in.
As a commercial OS, it’s fine. LTS releases, great headless experience, and dependency graph that is progressive but not as frozen in time as RedHat.
As an end-user OS, the dizzying number of ways to get usable apps into the GUI cut deep against advanced users. Especially when advanced use cases smash into incompatibilities and easy-to-make mistakes that break stuff. But if you’re willing to rock a lot of defaults and just slap things together from the package manager, it works okay.
Not too deep in that conversation but afaik it’s a series of choices that just continuously make Ubuntu less usable.
from what I “know” it seems to be mostly:
the baffling decision to keep riding the dead Snap train instead of the now widespread Flatpak one.
some drama around them switching from Gnome 2 -> Own Desktop -> Gnome 3 and related decisions, not sure what the problems there were but apparently a lot of people didn’t like it.
some stuff about telemetry, not sure how relevant this is currently but I heard some people complain about it.
Again, not really sure that’s it but it’s what I recall hearing here and there.
What distro would you suggest? I abandoned windows 10 for Ubuntu but it didn’t grew on me. I know Linux Mint is friendlier but I thought giving Ubuntu a try
Depends on your use case honestly. Do you play a lot of games? If so I would recommend against stable distros like Mint. Without knowing more I’d probably say:
Mostly Browsing or Work in Office Editors: Linux Mint or Kubuntu since Updates are stable and generally don’t break anything.
A lot of gaming: Arch via Archinstall or ArcoLinux (ArcoLinux is imo a bit more confusing while getting the image file, after it is superior to ArchInstall for newbies because the installer is a bit more familiar) since you’ll benefit from a shortened update cycle. The drawback here is that occasionally (or often depending on what you install) updates break things.
Edit: Also a general recommendation: Stick to Windows-like Desktops for the beginning, these are (to my knowledge) XFCE and more prominently KDE Plasma. It will save you the additional task of getting used to your desktop environment while you get familiar with how Linux “works” as your main OS.
I played around with Kali(I know I know) and raspberry pi for a bit and I got the hang of it a bit. Think I’ll go with Mint on one drive for school and such and on the other drive Arch for gaming. Thank you for your time.
Think I’ll go with Mint on one drive for school and such and on the other drive Arch for gaming
Nothing exactly wrong with that but I don’t think you’ll need the extra layer of separation. Most Apps on Mint should be available Arch as well and run generally as Bug free as on Mint (Edit: a “graphical” representation of what level of Bugginess you can expect: Many Bugs > Some Bugs > Few Bugs > Windows 10 (personal experience) > Arch Linux > Almost no Bugs > Linux Mint > No Bugs). Not splitting the OS would save you some hassle (for example after school work is done you can start gaming faster as well as simpler disk partitioning) on the other hand depending on yourself it might offer advantages (can’t get as easily distracted from schoolwork with games if you have to reboot the PC for it)
I know that you apps are available across distributions but I wanted to use a stable distro for school that I trust not to brake and another one where I can experience and customize without worrying to much about breaking it.
as I said nothing wrong with it, just wanted to add some info in case the decision was made based on some misunderstanding. If you think that’s the best fit for you go for it
Debian sid is just as fresh and a (nearly) rolling release distribution. I game on it with Wine, Cyperpunk, X4, Baldur’s Gate and others are no problem.
100c water, 12g coffee per 200g water, pour 50g water into press then wait 30sec, stir, add the rest, add the press so the water doesnt flow, wait 2 more minutes then press down until hiss.
I doubt it. The moka pot in general is finicky. Unless you put milk or something into the coffee I find it rather harsh and I don’t like milk in coffee.
This is 100 % a matter of technique, I can make a good cup of coffee with it. I just need to dial in grind and ratios right, but even then it’s hard to control the temperature. By the time I go to that sputering hissy phase it becomes harsh and very bitter.
In general it’s hard for me to find the sweet spot between battery acid and coal juice with a moka pot. Pourover is much more forgiving and consistent.
Huh! we definitely don’t have the same taste, as I only ever drink coffee with milk, and as such i don’t care much about the exact taste that comes out of moka pot
I feel like an idiot for taking so long to get one. After i brought it, a friend regifted me a milk frother. Zap the milk for 30 seconds and whip and you’ve got a barista drink at home.
What? Slackware has a menu-driven installer that sets up a usable system out of the box that comes with all the bells and whistles.
Just don’t try to change anything.
Oh, and the bells and whistles are powered by a steam engine, so you better know your way around ancient tech to use them.
Instant, sure, OK, but pick a slightly less evil brand. I'd say Kenco maybe, but that doesn't seem to be as well known outside Britain. Maybe Folgers for the North Americans.
I started with aeropress, but I somehow get more flavorful coffee when I do a pour over. I’m not sure how that happens since I’ve been hearing that it is easier to get good extraction with immersion brewing, but I just keep on doing whatever works best for the most part.
Not even close. French presses are way larger, holding a can instead of a mug, generally glass, and are pure immersion brewers while aeropresses are immersion/infusion hybrids, giving you way more options. The grind sizes you use are also vastly different: French press grind is coarse to survive the long immersion, while people generally grind for aeropress in between filter coffee and espresso fineness – roughly what supermarkets sell as espresso fine (which it isn’t, espresso fine grind is basically the consistency of talcum powder and spoils within minutes).
And while it wouldn’t be right to claim that you can use them to make actual espresso you can use them to make concentrates that come darn close, definitely appropriate for a cappuccino, or tiramisu. You really don’t want to make concentrates with immersion.
Oh and by default aeropresses use paper filters, while French presses use sieves. Preferences differ but as you can get sieves for the aeropress again you have more options.
In short, it’s the brewer for someone who cares about coffee, probably has a (hand) grinder (and a mere chestnut at that), avoids buying any supermarket coffee and knows a source of proper but non-fancy beans, but doesn’t really want to go full nerd about it. Also, isn’t a hipster paying through their nose to get a Hario filter holder and papers in a Melitta region (or the opposite), or gets a ceramic filter holder which only means you have to heat it up… no upsides. Speaking of nerds.
In even shorter, it’s at a very very solid performance vs. fuss sweetspot. At least if you’re making a mug of coffee, if you need to supply a table full of guests… honestly if I had to do it right now I’d throw grinds and water into a pot, wait a bit, then filter the whole thing through an ordinary kitchen sieve followed by an ordinary paper filter holder, and hope for the best.
Funny, I would have said the same about voidlinux.
I think a common misconception about voidlinux is that it’s a distro solely used by people who have made it their lifegoal to tell people about how bad systemd is. I use void because it’s fast, and frankly because I like the way void does stuff. I feel like many people in the community are much more indifferent to systemd than people realize.
Yeah, this is the way, doing it manually is fun and all but its highly unnecessary extra effort as there are very little reasons as all of it is just configuration of the system. Archinstall is just the Text-GUI version that still offers the customize ability of the install. Heck you can load a configuration file that you can make before hand so that you don’t need to babysit the installation and can reproduce it in other systems/PCs.
Add comment