Do we REALLY need MINT?

Chat about anything related to Linux Mint
User avatar
Fred Barclay
Level 12
Level 12
Posts: 4204
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:12 am
Location: Bumping around in the bush

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Fred Barclay » Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:38 am

OP: Do we really need Mint?

Well... I don't need Mint. I have no doubt I could get by just fine with Debian Jessie or Fedora.
Mint has some slick themes (that I don't use), some nice icons (that I don't use), a good Update Manager (that I don't have to have), and a great set of tools (that I could replace). Get the picture? :mrgreen:

So what keeps me here?
1. Ease of use. Mint has all the codecs and drivers I need installed OOTB.

2. A small development team and a project head that listens to and values his users. Projects like Ubuntu or Debian have huge dev teams and (esp. Ubuntu) can have a very "corporate" feel, IMHO. The Mint dev team is small and listens to their userbase, and it's never that difficult to get in touch with them, or even Clem if needed.

3. A great community. There's a reason many of us refer to the Mint "family" when welcoming newcomers--we really are!

So no, I don't need Mint, I'd just be really sad if I quit using it!
Image
"Once you can accept the universe as matter expanding into nothing that is something, wearing stripes with plaid comes easy."
- Albert Einstein

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:53 am

don250r wrote:Or we could use archLinux and Cinnamon as the DE.
Or better yet, start with the linux kernel and build your own distro. :P
Yeah, Arch Linux. There's a smooth transition upgrade path. :lol: I haven't even noticed for a while that I don't miss Arch at all. I've been too busy not fixing the OS because of a wonky update. :wink:

To the OP: The Mint folks have taken a well thought out distro and made it even more stable and easy to use.
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:58 am

Lucap wrote:OMG! , What a mean Mod. :shock:

Just Joking...... :D :wink:

Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.
NO! Please, God, NO!!!!

If you want a rolling release, head over to Arch. That'll keep you busy until you reinstall Mint (or Lubuntu).

Don't get me wrong, I loved Arch...until that 5th update. Then it's either half an hour with the command line or let's just avoid the pain and reinstall. Fine if you're doing computing only as a hobby, but when it's work as well it's just too frustrating.

I would get Arch humming along just as I wanted it, and then THE update would come out, I'd go Hmmmm...click update and lose the great system I had spent weeks building.

No thanks.
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

User avatar
sphyrth
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:14 am

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by sphyrth » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:31 am

Want a rolling release kind of Mint? I can only suggest Ubuntu. It rolls regularly, even though it's slower compared to the likes of Arch. You can enjoy as much hit-or-miss as you want.
Mint, however, likes to prioritize more on stability while trying to stay up-to-date. You can even tell because her beta releases are quite stable.
I have a favorite game. It's on my Youtube Channel.

User avatar
MintBean
Level 9
Level 9
Posts: 2968
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:54 am
Location: Blighty

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by MintBean » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:47 am

I'm with Condorman- a fresh install every couple years encourages a nice spring clean and I don't find it too painful. That said, I would never order a triple Istanbul Express.

thom_A
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:26 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by thom_A » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:55 am

venik212 wrote:I have been using (L)ubuntu on several machines for the past several years. I prefer it to plain Ubuntu because of the inefficient, bloated and un-necessary ubuntu interface. In the past 2 years I have been using Lubuntu with Cinnamon, and I love that combination. It is super fast even on old hardware, nicely supports the HiDPI screen of my Yoga 2 Pro, has sensible menus, and is easily upgradable from the update manager of Lubuntu. Mint, on the other hand, prevents me from upgrading smoothly across major releases, and insists on a fresh install, involving backing up my large HOME folder, and the risk of losing some settings and data, despite the (somewhat clumsy) backup app.
So what do I get with MINT that I do not have with Lubuntu + CInnamon?
Cinnamon is Linux Mint's baby.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinnamon_(software)

User avatar
Rosko
Level 3
Level 3
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Rosko » Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 pm

venik212 wrote:...In the past 2 years I have been using Lubuntu with Cinnamon, and I love that combination. It is super fast even on old hardware, ...
Depends on how you define "old hardware." I tried Lubuntu for two weeks installed on my "old hardware" and it was not super fast ... it wasn't even fast, it was decidedly quite slow, slower even than the bloated Windows XP SP3 software it was replacing ... as was Mint XFCE.

I went through 4 distros I'd read were described as "Lite" versions, Mint XFCE, Lubuntu, Zorin Lite & Linux Lite, each faster than the one before. The 5th distro tried, Q4OS, is the only one I found that I'd call "super fast" on my old hardware and it's the one I kept .
venik212 wrote:.So what do I get with MINT that I do not have with Lubuntu + CInnamon?
What do I get with Honda that I do not have with Toyota?

User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
Posts: 2082
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by linuxviolin » Sat Jul 09, 2016 3:49 pm

Condorman wrote:in my case it always encourages me to make sure I understand what I have on the system and to do backups as I know that sooner or later I will be doing a fresh install.
Well, you always must make backups, rolling or not rolling.
Condorman wrote:I've always believed it's good practice for taking care of your hard drives.
Hum...
Condorman wrote:In my defence this was something told to me by the person who recommended I try Linux, and it has stuck with me. I wouldn't change it though. I don't even like to have a separate /home partition, as I don't like how old config files can affect new installs and program updates. I do have a separate partition for my files, but I don't use it as /home.
I use /boot, / and /home partitions. :)
Arch_Enemy wrote:If you want a rolling release, head over to Arch. That'll keep you busy until you reinstall Mint (or Lubuntu).

Don't get me wrong, I loved Arch...until that 5th update. Then it's either half an hour with the command line or let's just avoid the pain and reinstall. Fine if you're doing computing only as a hobby, but when it's work as well it's just too frustrating.

I would get Arch humming along just as I wanted it, and then THE update would come out, I'd go Hmmmm...click update and lose the great system I had spent weeks building.

No thanks.
For a better experience, you should use/try the Arch based Manjaro rather, with the stable repos. :wink:

And about rolling, there are also other distros than Arch. Chakra, PCLinuxOS...
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)

eddier
Level 2
Level 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 6:35 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by eddier » Sat Jul 09, 2016 5:17 pm

I dont understand the OP's reason for posting. If you prefer using "a" over "b" why complain about the latter??

Use whatever floats your boat and stay happy.

deleted

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by deleted » Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:31 pm

Lucap wrote:OMG! , What a mean Mod. :shock:

Just Joking...... :D :wink:

Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.
Use siduction for that http://news.siduction.org.

I rolled for 8 years on it.[a Debian SID variant] And yes, I do need Mint. I like the second set of eyes.
-H

all41
Level 14
Level 14
Posts: 5360
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:12 am
Location: Computer, Car, Cage

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by all41 » Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:28 pm

It's not a matter of life or death--------
it's more important than that.

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:06 pm

linuxviolin wrote:
Condorman wrote:in my case it always encourages me to make sure I understand what I have on the system and to do backups as I know that sooner or later I will be doing a fresh install.
Well, you always must make backups, rolling or not rolling.
Condorman wrote:I've always believed it's good practice for taking care of your hard drives.
Hum...
Condorman wrote:In my defence this was something told to me by the person who recommended I try Linux, and it has stuck with me. I wouldn't change it though. I don't even like to have a separate /home partition, as I don't like how old config files can affect new installs and program updates. I do have a separate partition for my files, but I don't use it as /home.
I use /boot, / and /home partitions. :)
Arch_Enemy wrote:If you want a rolling release, head over to Arch. That'll keep you busy until you reinstall Mint (or Lubuntu).

Don't get me wrong, I loved Arch...until that 5th update. Then it's either half an hour with the command line or let's just avoid the pain and reinstall. Fine if you're doing computing only as a hobby, but when it's work as well it's just too frustrating.

I would get Arch humming along just as I wanted it, and then THE update would come out, I'd go Hmmmm...click update and lose the great system I had spent weeks building.

No thanks.
For a better experience, you should use/try the Arch based Manjaro rather, with the stable repos. :wink:

And about rolling, there are also other distros than Arch. Chakra, PCLinuxOS...
I try a new disrto every month. Chakra for some reason qouldn't load or something, Manjaro is good, I like it and it's on a disk around...here...somewhere...PCLinux is another very good distro but he knocked out all the codecs because of licensing regulations at some point. As far from "rolling" as you can get! (Except, of course, for an abandoned distro! ;) ) As I mentioned somewhere, probably the best Control Panel out there. Used it for three years for work, but the draw of Arch was just too strong...until the day the boss called me up and said "Go on to the website and check out this job" "Uh...sure, Tom, just as soon as I get done reinstalling..." "WHY DON'T YOU JUST USE WINDOWS? IT'S EASIER!" That's when I decided the boredom of Mint would probably work just fine.
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

DeMus
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by DeMus » Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:34 am

Fred Barclay wrote:OP: Do we really need Mint?

Well... I don't need Mint. I have no doubt I could get by just fine with Debian Jessie or Fedora.
Mint has some slick themes (that I don't use), some nice icons (that I don't use), a good Update Manager (that I don't have to have), and a great set of tools (that I could replace). Get the picture? :mrgreen:

So what keeps me here?
1. Ease of use. Mint has all the codecs and drivers I need installed OOTB.

2. A small development team and a project head that listens to and values his users. Projects like Ubuntu or Debian have huge dev teams and (esp. Ubuntu) can have a very "corporate" feel, IMHO. The Mint dev team is small and listens to their userbase, and it's never that difficult to get in touch with them, or even Clem if needed.

3. A great community. There's a reason many of us refer to the Mint "family" when welcoming newcomers--we really are!

So no, I don't need Mint, I'd just be really sad if I quit using it!
That's why I stopped using Mint and went to SolydXK, also based on Debian and therefore rock-solid but without the middle man. I too feel that Mark Shuttleworth is the Bill Gates in Linuxworld. When you look at how Ubuntu has changed Linux over the years then it feels intimidating. Maybe I am completely wrong but it feels as if Linux should be synonymous with Ubuntu. That is not the reason I abandoned Windows.
In my setup I use quite an amount of programs and they all come from the standard repositories supplied with the system. No need for external ppa's which could make the OS less stable.
I could have moved from the standard Mint to LMDE but I am in love with the KDE desktop and LMDE does not have that.
As Fred also wrote, the community is great so I keep hanging around here as well.

Condorman
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:08 am

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Condorman » Sun Jul 10, 2016 8:21 am

I've been round all these other hills before. Manjaro, openSUSE, etc, etc, rolling releases vs so-called stable. I always end up back with Mint.

But if you're off on some travels have fun, and let us know how you get on. :)

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sun Jul 10, 2016 10:01 am

DeMus wrote:
Fred Barclay wrote:OP: Do we really need Mint?

Well... I don't need Mint. I have no doubt I could get by just fine with Debian Jessie or Fedora.
Mint has some slick themes (that I don't use), some nice icons (that I don't use), a good Update Manager (that I don't have to have), and a great set of tools (that I could replace). Get the picture? :mrgreen:

So what keeps me here?
1. Ease of use. Mint has all the codecs and drivers I need installed OOTB.

2. A small development team and a project head that listens to and values his users. Projects like Ubuntu or Debian have huge dev teams and (esp. Ubuntu) can have a very "corporate" feel, IMHO. The Mint dev team is small and listens to their userbase, and it's never that difficult to get in touch with them, or even Clem if needed.

3. A great community. There's a reason many of us refer to the Mint "family" when welcoming newcomers--we really are!

So no, I don't need Mint, I'd just be really sad if I quit using it!
That's why I stopped using Mint and went to SolydXK, also based on Debian and therefore rock-solid but without the middle man. I too feel that Mark Shuttleworth is the Bill Gates in Linuxworld. When you look at how Ubuntu has changed Linux over the years then it feels intimidating. Maybe I am completely wrong but it feels as if Linux should be synonymous with Ubuntu. That is not the reason I abandoned Windows.
In my setup I use quite an amount of programs and they all come from the standard repositories supplied with the system. No need for external ppa's which could make the OS less stable.
I could have moved from the standard Mint to LMDE but I am in love with the KDE desktop and LMDE does not have that.
As Fred also wrote, the community is great so I keep hanging around here as well.
I can't remember why I gave up on SolydX. I tried it when it first came out but there was something about it.

I used to use KDE a while ago, but it is a bloated desktop. Indeed, TOO MANY features! Then Gnome went to those silly tiles long before Micro$oft, and I hated them back then. I would install a new distro and usually break it trying to get good old flat Gnome working. In some cases I succeeded (I think this is why I went to Arch in the first place) but something would break it. I also like older versions of a couple packages, and that is asking for headaches too, esp with Arch and some others. Cinnamon made my heart leap, but it didn't implement correctly at first. Then Mate came out and I'm home again.

On the tiles...I STILL hate them. Ugh. If M$ wanted to steal something from the Linux world, couldn't it have been stability/security? :roll:

PS: What IS it with Gnome? They took out some good features and then locked it so you lose the ability to configure it like you once had...to an extent. It has always been locked up tight. Mate is a bit more open.
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sun Jul 10, 2016 10:05 am

Condorman wrote:I've been round all these other hills before. Manjaro, openSUSE, etc, etc, rolling releases vs so-called stable. I always end up back with Mint.

But if you're off on some travels have fun, and let us know how you get on. :)
I don't have time to play much any more. I have 17.3 on one drive and LMDE on another, and this one used to be the Arch install. Maybe when I retire I'll try setting up and Arch box again.
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

User avatar
BG405
Level 7
Level 7
Posts: 1805
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 3:09 pm
Location: England

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by BG405 » Sun Jul 10, 2016 10:56 am

Mint has created the "need" for it by itself if you get what I mean .. and with its stability, dependability and of course the great community it's probably the only OS I'll be using on "production" machines for the foreseeable future.

As for being good for "old" hardware .. well this machine really flies. It feels faster and more responsive than the quad-core AMD setup I built years ago (stolen) with decent graphics and sound card, running xp pro sp3, although obviously stuff like video rendering won't be as fast. Won't be doing that until Mint 18 KDE comes out anyway as Kdenlive is my video editor of choice.

I set up a few VMs which I use for testing and messing about with other distros, it's the only viable option for a machine with over 99% uptime and reboots only when needed, sometimes weeks apart. Have Arch on one of them but not really done anything with it yet apart from basic configuration, having a look at a few others too but it's all running within a bullet-proof OS so I would say, in my case at least, "Do we really need Mint?" Yes!

Tiles ...? UGH :x
Dell Inspiron 1525 - LM17.3 CE 64-------------------Acer D255E 2GB - Manjaro KDE, LM17.3 KDE 32
Toshiba NB305 - Manjaro KDE------------------------K7S5A AMD 1.2GHz - LM17.3 Xfce 32 & WinXP-Pro
Acer Aspire E11 ES1-111M - LM18.2 KDE 64 ----Dell PII 350 64MB - Puppy 4.3 & Win98-SE

thom_A
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:26 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by thom_A » Sun Jul 10, 2016 11:48 am

Condorman wrote:I've been round all these other hills before. Manjaro, openSUSE, etc, etc, rolling releases vs so-called stable. I always end up back with Mint.
Same here. I never had to delete my Mint partition in my case. If I want to test a distro that piques my interest all I have to do is add a partition. Just the other 2 days or so I tested 4. I deleted them all later, just like tens of distros I've tried previously. Like probably most people, I was looking for lightweight ones with organized, professionally done graphics. Q4OS briefly excited me. It's got an amazing resemblance to Windows XP and it felt light; icons distinguish-ability is there, similar workflow, etc. Until I ran into something unfamiliar. Can't type the same thing in the terminal as in using Mint or Ubuntu-based distros. Can't even find a way to run or execute appimages, which are portable apps. Waste of time looking for solutions. Not to mention the file management system seemed very hard to control, being also an internet browser.

User avatar
InkKnife
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by InkKnife » Sun Jul 10, 2016 3:32 pm

Mint has had good upgrade in place for two years now and Clem promises the update in place for 17 to 18 will be delivered next month.
Why do we Mint?
To make the best response to Gnome available.
To make little apps like the USB image writer and formatter which makes common tasks super easy (Mint tools).
To fix Gnome applications so they can work well on any desktop (Xapps).
To make a stable distro that is not trying to reinvent wheels.
To have a distro that is extremely responsive to community input.
i7 3770, 12GB of ram, 256GB SSD, 64GB SSD, 750GB HDD, 1TB HDD, Cinnamon.

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1352
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Post by Arch_Enemy » Sun Jul 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Indeed. USB writer is fantastic. I download other distros, write them to a USB, try them out, then download another, format the USB, write the new one..repeat as required. :D
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

Post Reply

Return to “Chat about Linux Mint”