Linux which Distro?

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

In my case, I have a late 2015 27" iMac.
I use both Linux Mint and Ubuntu.
With each, I can boot with 'nomodeset', it boots quickly, but I can't change the resolution or screen brightness.
Or, I can boot without 'nomodeset', it takes over a minute to boot, but I have full control over my monitor.

Depending on your model of mac, YMMV.

Or, you can use VMware, which is now free for personal use.

 

[MacBH928]

In my case, I have a late 2015 27" iMac.
I use both Linux Mint and Ubuntu.
With each, I can boot with 'nomodeset', it boots quickly, but I can't change the resolution or screen brightness.
Or, I can boot without 'nomodeset', it takes over a minute to boot, but I have full control over my monitor.

Depending on your model of mac, YMMV.

I am looking for a Linux DE that is most like MacOS + the workflow. So far I found Zorin and Ubuntu Unity to be the closest possible, but I saw an earlier post of yours recommending Mate with Plank. Mate looks like just KDE with the panel on top and the GUI button is so primitive like pre-win3.1 ones.

They say they are all different but so far I found mate, KDE, Cinnamon, XFCE, and budgie all different varieties of the same thing; Windows like GUI. GNOME is the real different one.

Do you know if Linux can have a dock with window previews like on Macos like this 👇🏼 . I don't like all the windows grouped within in the app's icon.

btw, is there a reason you made the 2015 iMac into a Linux machine? I have macbook 2015 and pretty much its flying for daily tasks. Could buy it as the current model and be just as happy with it.

Or, you can use VMware, which is now free for personal use.

Neat! Is there any reason to pay Parallels $80 on yearly basis now?

 

[Romain_H]

Neat! Is there any reason to pay Parallels $80 on yearly basis now?

On Intel Macs: nope!
The Arm version of VMware is in a rather early version which is not as polished as Parallels

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

...
btw, is there a reason you made the 2015 iMac into a Linux machine? I have macbook 2015 and pretty much its flying for daily tasks. Could buy it as the current model and be just as happy with it.


...

I have external SSDs that have Linux and Windows on them, so, with the one machine, I can run MacOS, Linux (Mint and Ubuntu) and Windows, and switch between them as appropriate.

The reason for running Linux (especially a Ubuntu-based one (I haven't tried the others)) is that it is over 30% faster for many operations than MacOS, and more than twice as fast as Windows, on the same hardware (my late 2015 iMac).

For example, compiling a particular LaTeX document, using TeXLive on Linux, MacOS and Windows --

• Linux -- 20 seconds
• MacOS -- 30 seconds
• Windows -- 1 minute.

Why do I run Windows? First, just to see what it is like, and to run tests like above. Second, because sometimes you just have to have a Word document that was saved under Word for Windows.

 

[MacBH928]

I have external SSDs that have Linux and Windows on them, so, with the one machine, I can run MacOS, Linux (Mint and Ubuntu) and Windows, and switch between them as appropriate.

The reason for running Linux (especially a Ubuntu-based one (I haven't tried the others)) is that it is over 30% faster for many operations than MacOS, and more than twice as fast as Windows, on the same hardware (my late 2015 iMac).

For example, compiling a particular LaTeX document, using TeXLive on Linux, MacOS and Windows --

• Linux -- 20 seconds
• MacOS -- 30 seconds
• Windows -- 1 minute.

Why do I run Windows? First, just to see what it is like, and to run tests like above. Second, because sometimes you just have to have a Word document that was saved under Word for Windows.

interesting approach. Does an OS that run from an SSD run as good as native? I wonder if I can run full OS (not live) from a usb drive. Its all usb3 after all right?

as for linux faster, thats interesting too. I imagined speed is tied to software but 30% faster is significant

 

[millerj123]

I am looking for a Linux DE that is most like MacOS + the workflow.

Why?

Serious question. If you have a computer that already runs MacOS, why not just use that?

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

interesting approach. Does an OS that run from an SSD run as good as native? I wonder if I can run full OS (not live) from a usb drive. Its all usb3 after all right?

as for linux faster, thats interesting too. I imagined speed is tied to software but 30% faster is significant

For speed, you have to look at where the bottlenecks are, ie, what is the slowest part of the system.
For general work in a computer, it is the CPU, and the tasks that it is performing. It doesn't matter if your storage has read/write speeds of 120 Mbytes/sec, or 250, or 6,0000. If your CPU can only process data at 80 Mbytes/sec, you won't see any significant difference between the three drives.

My iMac can read/write to/from a USB3 SSD drive at up to 400 Mbytes/sec. That is faster than the CPU can process a LaTeX file.

Most Linux distros take about 25 Gbytes on installation. They will fit onto, and run, any external drive that is at least 32 Gytes, although I prefer to use a drive that is at least 64 GB to give me room for other software, data files, etc.

 

[MacBH928]

Why?

Serious question. If you have a computer that already runs MacOS, why not just use that?

I do but for future proofing, privacy reasons, and support competition.

Corporates are more and more controlling and spying on us. Now you have to register with email to use devices. Do not want to give absolute monopoly to any one. We do not want to go back to Windows+IE in 1998.

 

[it wasnt me]

support competition.

I would like to point out that it does not necessarily promote competition to build up a Linux monoculture away from the corporations. We should establish more BSD, Haiku, perhaps also Plan 9.

Now you have to register with email to use devices.

Depends on the device.

 

[Romain_H]

We should establish more BSD, Haiku, perhaps also Plan 9.

Unfortunately, these aren't necessarily stable enough to serve as daily drivers (BSD lacking CUDA. Too bad). But yes, I'd love to have choices.
So perhaps what we need are communities developing systems like Haiku, Aros, MorphOS, etc. Just dreaming, I know

 

[millerj123]

I do but for future proofing, privacy reasons, and support competition.

Corporates are more and more controlling and spying on us. Now you have to register with email to use devices. Do not want to give absolute monopoly to any one. We do not want to go back to Windows+IE in 1998.

This pretty much makes no sense.

No OS will future proof your existing hardware.

What are the "privacy reasons"?

And, what possible way does you picking a Linux distribution help support competition?

Supporting a distro would mean either helping pay for it, or actively working in that community. Are you willing to do that?

 

[it wasnt me]

these aren't necessarily stable enough to serve as daily drivers (BSD lacking CUDA. Too bad).

True, each operating system has its own set of features (and lack thereof). Luckily, one size does not fit all.

 

[MacBH928]

I would like to point out that it does not necessarily promote competition to build up a Linux monoculture away from the corporations. We should establish more BSD, Haiku, perhaps also Plan 9.

Not sure if you are trolling, but BSD Haiku and whatever Plan9 is do not replace Windows/MacOS as a daily driver. There is no backing to it and hardly any software. Meanwhile linux has the linux foundation sponsored by corporates, many distros also supported by corporates (Suse, RedHat) , and big enough user base and community.

I tried Zorin , Mint, ubuntu and they all can replace Windows/macos now ready with all the software.

 

[MacBH928]

No OS will future proof your existing hardware.

I am not talking future proofing existing software. I am talking future proofing my options software wise. I have seen where software monopolies go and I do not like it.

What are the "privacy reasons"?

And, what possible way does you picking a Linux distribution help support competition?

more user base -> better app support -> more apps -> compete against corporates -> causes snowball effect of even more new users.

Supporting a distro would mean either helping pay for it, or actively working in that community. Are you willing to do that?

I don't code but I am willing to pay. In fact I already donated to FOSS apps including: Joplin, Handbrake, VLC, PiHole, Subscribed to Brave Search Premium. Currently I am not a Linux user, but I may have donated to Linux Mint can't remember.

 

[it wasnt me]

Not sure if you are trolling

Not at all.

but BSD Haiku and whatever Plan9 is do not replace Windows/MacOS as a daily driver.

I know people who use a BSD, Haiku and/or a variant of Plan 9 - the successor of Unix, originally developed by the same people - as their daily drivers. It might be a wise decision not to declare your own preferences regarding computer use as a general rule.

There is no backing to it

Except that two of the three oldest BSDs alone, OpenBSD and FreeBSD, are being backed by Microsoft, Google, Apple, Juniper, AMD, Netflix and other companies which use and/or contribute to them.

Sources:
- https://freebsdfoundation.org/our-donors/donors/
- https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html

and hardly any software.

Here's a list of Hardly Any Software for OpenBSD, here's the FreeBSD list. Note that those are only the official repositories, third-party software can usually be compiled from GitHub or whatever, and the numbers are misleading, as OpenBSD, for example, comes with a complete graphical desktop out of the box.

Please name at least three pieces of software which you, personally, can't live without and which aren't available in one of these lists. (Yes, I know, gaming over Steam is not a crucial part of a BSD installation. However, "future-proof" systems - i.e. outdated ones - probably won't work well for contemporary games anyway, and no sane person would downgrade from Windows to a free operating system just to play a game. YMMV. That said, even Steam could work.)

Meanwhile linux has the linux foundation sponsored by corporates, many distros also supported by corporates (Suse, RedHat) , and big enough user base and community.

Still waiting for the huge difference.

 

[it wasnt me]

more user base -> better app support -> more apps

One of the reasons to use more systems that aren't Linux.

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

One of the reasons to use more systems that aren't Linux.

Windows might have more apps than Linux, but the vast majority of them are not useful.
If you take them out of the mix, then Mac, Windows and Linux have roughly equal numbers of useful, practical, productive apps.

 

[it wasnt me]

Linux - like the BSDs (and Plan 9...), sadly - lacks a good alternative to the Affinity (or Adobe) suite. GIMP and Inkscape are a joke.

 

[MacBH928]

Windows might have more apps than Linux, but the vast majority of them are not useful.
If you take them out of the mix, then Mac, Windows and Linux have roughly equal numbers of useful, practical, productive apps.

the problem seems to be the "polished" aspect, as nice as developers giving free apps , it lacks in the "user friendliness" department. I would like to reach a point where someone says "the linux version is the better one" but are we there yet?

Some apps are on par like Browsers, LibreOffice (actually better than MacOS one) , VLC and I hear Da Vinci resolve.

 

[MacBH928]

I know people who use a BSD, Haiku and/or a variant of Plan 9 - the successor of Unix, originally developed by the same people - as their daily drivers. It might be a wise decision not to declare your own preferences regarding computer use as a general rule.

I am speaking for the majority of users who are home users or business operation. Could you in good conscience recommend Haiku or Plan9 for a business or home user as the better option of Windows/Mac ?

Except that two of the three oldest BSDs alone, OpenBSD and FreeBSD, are being backed by Microsoft, Google, Apple, Juniper, AMD, Netflix and other companies which use and/or contribute to them.

Sources:
- https://freebsdfoundation.org/our-donors/donors/
- https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html

Those are joke donations to maintain an OS ($25k-$50K) . I don't believe that budget is enough to create an OS that goes head to head with Windows.

Here's a list of Hardly Any Software for OpenBSD, here's the FreeBSD list. Note that those are only the official repositories, third-party software can usually be compiled from GitHub or whatever, and the numbers are misleading, as OpenBSD, for example, comes with a complete graphical desktop out of the box.

Please name at least three pieces of software which you, personally, can't live without and which aren't available in one of these lists.

I couldn't find Joplin, Standard Notes, Mullvad VPN, Redact (niche) , Protonmail Bridge in the Freshports.org . There may be obtainable from else where or have alternatives.

Still waiting for the huge difference.

Well you tell me. I have been trying to research this and could not figure it out. All I found out is that FreeBSD is built as one whole OS meanwhile Linux is a collection of software tied together to create a full OS. FreeBSD you have to fight with it more as it is harder to install with less driver support and less user friendliness.

From the perspective of the average user, why would I want to use FreeBSD over Linux Mint? Why are 96% of web servers run Linux and not FreeBSD (albeit FreeBSD has less restrictive license) ?

 

[it wasnt me]

I am speaking for the majority of users who are home users or business operation.

You certainly are not speaking for anyone but yourself. Neither am I.

Could you in good conscience recommend Haiku or Plan9 for a business or home user as the better option of Windows/Mac ?

This entirely depends on what exactly the business or home user is planning to do. If one size would fit all, nobody would need a second operating system. So yes, I can imagine how (especially) Plan 9 could solve business and/or home user problems with Windows/Mac.

I don't believe that budget is enough to create an OS that goes head to head with Windows.

Unlike Linux, BSD predates Windows by quite a few years.

I couldn't find Joplin, Standard Notes, Mullvad VPN, Redact (niche) , Protonmail Bridge in the Freshports.org .

Mullvad VPN is proprietary software which requires active work from Mullvad to run on "unofficial" platforms. I mean, nothing's wrong with proprietary software per se... that said, on FreeBSD, most "Linux-only" software works just well, either with the built-in Linux emulator (basically, "reverse Wine", but baked into the regular kernel) or by compiling it yourself. (E.g. Joplin is not much more than a simple web application running on a headless Chrome = Electron, should be able to compile without any issues. At least not more issues than Electron usually has.)

FreeBSD you have to fight with it more as it is harder to install

Depends on the comparison. FreeBSD is notably easier to install than Gentoo - and even in direct comparison to "easier" Linux distributions, I fail to see what could be "hard to install". Mind to elaborate?

less driver support and less user friendliness.

Depends on your hardware and the user. If your goal is to have as many exotic drivers as possible, use Windows. "Less drivers" does not necessarily mean "less support for the hardware you actually use".

From the perspective of the average user, why would I want to use FreeBSD over Linux Mint?

For this specific question, it might be useful to understand the fundamental differences between "the BSDs" and "a Linux":

BSD For Linux Users :: Intro

www.over-yonder.net

I - personally - have migrated away from Free- to OpenBSD a few years ago, for a variety of reasons. (None of which were missing features or other annoying issues with FreeBSD.) However, FreeBSD was my entry point after a few years of trying a few Linux distributions just because I was bored, so here's my very personal opinion:

1. As you already found out, FreeBSD is a complete, coherent system, made by one team. A Linux distribution is always made by a variety of teams which don't optimize their stuff for each other (the kernel team, the init software team, the bootloader team, the userland team [which usually is GNU these days, GNU is not = Linux], the driver teams and the desktop team, to name the most obvious ones), and that shows.
2. Mostly a matter of taste: FreeBSD does not have systemd (Linux's variant of Windows's svchost.exe; just use the original...).
3. FreeBSD is closer to Unix, closer following the POSIX standards. The Linux community made their own standard, the Linux Standard Base, quite a while ago to "overcome" the problem of missing standardization among the distributions; and yet, most of them (including Mint) don't even use RPM, the Linux standard package format...

Apart from what I personally like or dislike, FreeBSD has the major advantage of being a stable (as in "no crashes" as well as in "no surprises") daily driver. Linux distributions tend to break stuff. Even the "stable" ones (I had a Debian server once, I moved it to FreeBSD after a simple dist-upgrade killed the bootloader).

Why are 96% of web servers run Linux

I recommend to ignore "statistics" like these. I don't know how they "measured" them, but detecting server operating systems is not quite as easy as you would think. However, assuming that at least 51% of all web servers (which is probably closer to the truth) run Linux and you really want an answer, I would say: For the same reason why Windows still dominates the desktop market. Worse is better.

(albeit FreeBSD has less restrictive license)

The license of a software which you don't want to modify does not matter as much as you would think.

 

[MacBH928]

Depends on the comparison. FreeBSD is notably easier to install than Gentoo - and even in direct comparison to "easier" Linux distributions, I fail to see what could be "hard to install". Mind to elaborate?

Yes. I tried to install it gave me trouble. If Linus Trovalds had trouble installing Debian I wouldn't trouble myself and the average user to attempt installing FreeBSD.

I - personally - have migrated away from Free- to OpenBSD a few years ago, for a variety of reasons. (None of which were missing features or other annoying issues with FreeBSD.) However, FreeBSD was my entry point after a few years of trying a few Linux distributions just because I was bored, so here's my very personal opinion:

1. As you already found out, FreeBSD is a complete, coherent system, made by one team. A Linux distribution is always made by a variety of teams which don't optimize their stuff for each other (the kernel team, the init software team, the bootloader team, the userland team [which usually is GNU these days, GNU is not = Linux], the driver teams and the desktop team, to name the most obvious ones), and that shows.
2. Mostly a matter of taste: FreeBSD does not have systemd (Linux's variant of Windows's svchost.exe; just use the original...).
3. FreeBSD is closer to Unix, closer following the POSIX standards. The Linux community made their own standard, the Linux Standard Base, quite a while ago to "overcome" the problem of missing standardization among the distributions; and yet, most of them (including Mint) don't even use RPM, the Linux standard package format...

Apart from what I personally like or dislike, FreeBSD has the major advantage of being a stable (as in "no crashes" as well as in "no surprises") daily driver. Linux distributions tend to break stuff. Even the "stable" ones (I had a Debian server once, I moved it to FreeBSD after a simple dist-upgrade killed the bootloader).

So honest question, when you use OpenBSD, do you like just use the CLI or do you have a DE that is running modern browser and apps?

I am considering FreeBSD in the future as I believe in the idea that a one whole system will work better than a Frankenstein of software but if that means CLI life for me I will have to skip on it.

 

[it wasnt me]

when you use OpenBSD, do you like just use the CLI or do you have a DE that is running modern browser and apps?

Both, actually.

 

[mortlocli]

new beta for Haiku_os:

R1/beta 5 now available.

no - I have not tried it yet but will do. Theres been quite a few improvements.

 

[splifingate]

FreeBSD is notably easier to install than Gentoo

Hmm . . . I can not say that I've performed many BSD installs, but--having installed Gentoo/Funtoo/et. al. each many hundreds of times, I've come to find that {Gentoo&ilk} are not really that difficult to get installed . . .

. . . as long as I correctly differentiate my $TERM when cheroot'ing, that is

I've been meaning to do a series of deep-dives into raw BSD, but other things have held my captive.