sidux 2009-01

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by rdsu, Feb 15, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
  2. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    Hi there,

    I did not have to test ... it was simply the latest version when I tested it. A few weeks passed and a new one comes out, that's all.

    My reviews are not about fairness - they are about how I perceive reality in regard to linux versus new users. Experts don't need me. But the average joe does. And for the common man, sidux is too difficult.

    Explaining why distro does not include codecs - not really, Ubuntu does not include them either, but the moment you pop in one such media, you get them in 10 seconds. It's the matter of how easily obstacles are cleared when encountered.

    I'm 100% sure sidux can do anything any other distro can. But if it takes 6 more hours to achieve the same, for someone whom computer is a tool to higher goals, this would be 6 hours too many.

    Cheers,
    Mrk
     
  3. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    But this is not a good way to review an OS/software!

    We just completely disagree on how a review should be made, even if its audience is for newbies...
    It seems that every distro have to have the same purpose and act the same way...

    For me is only about 15/20 min to install it and have it ready for my needs, and I'm not an expert...
     
  4. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    From a sidux team member:
    Link: http://sidux.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=114720#114720
     
  5. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    I guess that if I had been praising the distro, it would have been a useful review.

    If you check my website motto, you'll see it's about being simple, thorough, step-by-step, friendly, user-oriented etc. Some things don't fit that bill, as simple as that. I will not purposefully deceive anyone or try to gain popularity by flattering or lying about my findings. Things are as they are. And if does not work, it does not work.

    Forget about codecs. Why didn't wireless work? Why did Konqueror crash? What about misaligned fonts? What about Samba? Are all these proprietary things?

    What's the purpose of the computer for 99% of people today? Is it watching movies and such - or hacking the terminal. Should I tell my mom, yes, sidux is just for you, all you need to do is chmod the xorg and chattr the /proc?

    Are you going to tell me that's my being "wrong" or perhaps something else?

    I'm sorry if people feel offended, but there's no such thing as one size fits all.

    And I agree with ferrari not being suited for the backroads. I tested sidux for the common backroad guy. It does not fit there, indeed. It's an expert distro.

    Cheers,
    Mrk
     
  6. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    You didn't read what I posted...

    Again, you didn't read what I posted...

    Did I say that you are wrong on this!? NO!

    Why do you not review Protech like this too!!!o_O
    Because it have a different purpose, right!?

    Both!

    I'm not offended, neither the sidux team, we are just comment your review... Or we can't do that?
    Are you offended?
     
  7. Arup

    Arup Guest

    I for one would take a Gelande Wagen over Ferrari anyday and even though Sidux truly is one quick distro and I am sure the benchmarks at Phoronix would be quite interesting to see when compared to Ubuntu or Vista, it just needs to iron out the basic quirks and then we will see a sea of Windows refugees come over to Sidux instead of Ubuntu.
     
  8. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,013
    Indeed, the "quirks" in my experience are what put people off, at least they do for me. I have gotten to the point with distros now where if they don't install and set up pretty much trouble free, then that's the end of it for me. I think you can expect the same attitude for anyone new and/or less familiar with Linux in general. Sidux installed extremely fast, and ran fast, but yes, I experienced some oddities also, and hence moved on for now.
     
  9. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    @Arup and Kerodo,

    You are right, like I already admit here... ;)

    Of course that sidux can't be compared with Ubuntu, and its purpose isn't that, so until we have packages open source for all the matters we will never have all the compatibility and everything installed like Ubuntu...

    That is why I want fair and good reviews, and not this kind of what every distro should do or not.

    To finish, this review lacks a lot of information and is outdated.

    Regards
     
  10. FastGame

    FastGame Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Posts:
    715
    Location:
    Blasters worm farm
    I agree with Mrkvonic's review, after all he does start out with "As always, I approached the distro with the "average Joe" attitude" IMO this type of review reaches a larger (more interested in using Linux) audience. It also saves those types a lot of time and trouble, not to mention the taste Linux might leave in "average Joe" mouth if they choose the wrong Distro.

    Do Linux geek/experts need Mrkvonic's review ? no, they already know whats what, what they want to use, and how to do so.

    Yes, but I would like to know what people mean when they say "fast" I've been on Arch for about 1 month. Arch is said to be fast and it is, but I don't see where its faster than PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, Mepis.....its certainly not as fast as Puppy, TinyMe type of Distro's.

    What does "fast" mean ?
     
  11. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,537
    It means that you have to try it and see if it's fast or not... :p
     
  12. FastGame

    FastGame Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Posts:
    715
    Location:
    Blasters worm farm
    :D

    I'll give Sidux a go :p

    BTW, I did find fault with Mrkvonic's review....he didn't say (or I didn't see) if Sidux was a Rolling Release or not :doubt: I only want the Rolling Release or LTS versions.
     
  13. Arup

    Arup Guest


    In case of Sidux...........super fast install, boot, apps open way fast, everything opens fast, also encoding etc. is a tad faster than Ubuntu at this moment.
     
  14. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,013
    Agreed, I will vouch for all of the above.... :thumb:
     
  15. damentz

    damentz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    The review for this distro was pretty accurate from the perspective of an unfamiliar user, but some clarifications as to obstacles that were encountered along the way, that are fixable, might help too.

    1. Large Fonts
    The screen used by reviewer must be small but the resolution fairly high. The correct DPI of your monitor is used to display text and scales to an accurate representation of whatever point size is used. This allows text to look the same across multiple monitors but all the other graphical aspects remain the same pixel length and width.

    For KDE, you can force the DPI in kcontrol and XFCE's font configuration.

    You can also use the command fix-dpi-kdm <dpi> to set your DPI forcibly for the KDE Display Manager.

    Another method would be to set the DPI through a file in the X11 configuration directory structure.

    echo "Xft.dpi: 96" > /etc/X11/Xresources/dpi

    2. Flash plugin
    Although it's not obvious, the manual includes instructions on adding non-free packages sources. Once that is accomplished, you can simply run apt-get update and apt-get install flashplugin-nonfree to update the package list and install the debianized flash plugin, which doesn't have any of the broken scripts of Adobe's installer.

    3. Undetected Wireless Card
    Most 802.11 capable hardware is still detected even if the firmware is not detected. Your's must be an exception... If you actually tried installing sidux on that laptop, it would have offered to install the firmware through apt-get as long as you could connect to the internet (wired for instance).

    Also, you were running an older version. 2008-04 includes the 2.6.27 kernel while the 2009-01 version includes the 2.6.28 kernel by default. Wireless hardware detection improves rapidly with each kernel release.

    4. Samba Network Scan Failure
    I've never seen a distro do this correctly. Software not on the livecd such as smb4k are able to scan for workgroups and computers far more accurately than konqueror's implementation.

    You can also install the winbind package to capture NETBIOS broadcasts use them for resolveable names. You would also need to modify /etc/nsswitch.conf and add some precedence to wins on the hosts line. This modification would correct konqueror's implementation but add some latency to DNS resolving if in /etc/nsswitch.conf, hosts: files dns is set to hosts: files wins dns.

    5. Feature Packed Live CD... or not?
    sidux' advantage is really only noticeable in an installed form. The Live CD is lite on purpose (thus the 'lite' edition which I hope you read before burning :ouch: ) for the simple reason of being a light distro. sidux is perfect as a base for further customization, not an install it and forget it model which would never make sense and would ruin the advantages of this distribution.

    Fortunately, the live cd takes only about 100mb of volatile RAM to boot up with and should be useful for forensics on older hardware.

    ---

    If you have any other questions, they can be solved via IRC or through the sidux forums at http://sidux.com
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2009
  16. pcalvert

    pcalvert Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Posts:
    237
    Hello Mrkvonic,

    I just finished reading your review of 2008-04 Pontos. Even though I am not a sidux user, I think that your review seems a bit too picky. I also found an error:

    Your interpretation is not correct. Frankly, I am a bit surprised that you reached the conclusion that you did. Please take a look at that screenshot again and study it a little more carefully.

    As for your final conclusion, I have to say that I agree with it. Sidux is not the best distro for a beginner. That's okay, though, because that is not its intended purpose.

    Phil
     
  17. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    10,215
    Hello,

    damentz, you raise some interesting points, here's how I see them:

    1. Fonts, entirely up to the developer to create a superb visual layout. Take Apple as an example of how things ought to be done.

    2. You're correct, apt-get is the thing. If you read my flash tutorial, you'll see I mention this.

    3. sidux is among very few distros that failed wireless on this t42. And it's a 4 year old machine, so the drivers really should be there. It's not like it's anything special.

    4. Samba works flawlessly in numerous distros, including: Ubuntu and derivates, openSUSE, etc. As to nsswitch.conf, this is something no average user will ever do. And no need to support netbios either, as it's a win95 legacy practically. Modern windowses do not need netbios.

    5. I did not complain about the lack of programs. I merely mentioned that. In fact, I wrote that using apt-get you can have anything you want, provided networking works.

    pcalvert, please note that I wrote listed partitions, so this means the ones showing up in the windows below (which contains root and home). So follow the logic, if partitions are listed below, they will be formatted unless the checkbox is checked. See the dilemma? I realize that other partitions can be mounted and won't be formatted - but they are not listed ...

    BTW, the goal is not to be picky - it's about helping people. That's all. If someone reads my review and this makes a better distro, for more people, then I've done my part.

    Cheers,
    Mrk
     
  18. pcalvert

    pcalvert Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Posts:
    237
    That checkbox reads:

    Set mountpoints of other Partitions
    (will not be formatted automatically)


    Its obvious purpose is so you can customize the installation if you want. For example, you might want to put /boot on a separate partition. However, any such partitions the user wants to include must be pre-formatted. If that box isn't checked, that does NOT mean the partitions will be formatted, it simply means that particular feature is not being used.

    Looking at that screenshot, it's easy for me to see that only the "Root-Partition" (the partition sidux will be installed on) will be formatted. That's the case whether the "Set mountpoints of other Partitions" box is checked or not. And if the "format with" checkbox is not checked, then nothing will be formatted.

    Phil
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.