A small set-top box (essentially a Steam Deck with the screen, controls and batteries removed, and with components that don’t have the space restrictions that come with a mobile device) would still be an interesting proposition. Particularly if they partnered with the main video streaming services to port their apps across, and implemented Chromecast/AirPlay support.

I can see a market for it, as a “Chromecast and Apple TV competitor that also plays all your games”.

It’s a command that pulls a whole bunch of useful system information and sticks it on one page.

Really, the biggest use of it is for showing other people your system- especially showing off. It’s a staple of “look at my system” brag posts.

But to be generous, there are (small) legit use cases for it. If you manage a lot of machines, and you plausibly don’t know the basic system information for whatever you happen to be working on in this instant, it’s a program that will give you most of what you could want to know in a single command. Yes, 100% of the information could be retrieved just as easily using other standard commands, but having it in a single short command, outputting to a single overview page, formatted to be easily readable at a glance, is no bad thing.

I looked at Dino and another one mentioned here and they look dated. Windows 95 feel with better anti-aliasing, rounder corners, but same colors? Gtk 2 or something?

Looks like a standard GTK4 app to me. Whether or not that is to someone’s tastes is obviously subjective, but it uses the same design language as every other GTK app under the sun.

GTK apps always look out of place on Windows though. Looks far more sensible in its native environment (i.e. *nix running GNOME).

If a machine is going to have multiple users (all my computers have multiple profiles for family members) all those users have to be called something, and I’ve not got the energy or the creativity to come up with fun and funky usernames for every system when my actual name is more than good enough.

Simple question: what would your employer say if you asked them?

My contract has a standard “no using company computers for personal business” clause. However I feel entirely confident that my employer doesn’t mind me using it to do personal errands using the web browser (on my own time). And I know they have no problem with me using Zoom or Teams to join meetings for non-work things in the evening. How do I know this? Because I asked them…

I’ve never asked them “can I install a new hard drive in my laptop, install an OS I downloaded off the internet, and boot into that OS to do things which I’d rather you not be able to track like you could on the main OS”. But I’m completely confident I’d know what the answer would be if I did ask.

If you think installing a new SSD etc. is acceptable, ask them. If you’re not asking them because you’re worried they’d say “no”, then don’t do it.

Try asking them instead if you can use your laptop to look up directions to the dentist on Google Maps. See if you get the same answer.

Literally the first paragraph:

The Budgie desktop team announced today the release and general availability of Budgie 10.9 as the latest version of this modern desktop environment for GNU/Linux distributions.

If you need more than “modern desktop environment for GNU/Linux distributions” to figure out what the project is, then you’re probably not the target audience for 9to5Linux.

The Firefox snap is published directly by Mozilla too; it’s not a third party snap.

If you want to announce your disapproval or approval of a certain post, there’s this great mechanism built right in to do so. There are a couple of little arrow buttons; just click the down arrow on anything that you don’t enjoy.

Personally I find it dead easy just to not click on any posts that don’t pique my interest, and it’s not like this community has so much content that “high quality” posts are getting buried under the sheer volume.

If you want to start a new community which is just Linux news aggregation, you go right ahead though.

Valve’s Proton is open source but is it also free to use and distribute in commercial software?

Yes.

Valve’s Proton code is licensed under the BSD licence, which is a “do anything you like with this code” licence.

Wine code is under the LGPL. You can ship this in commercial software as long as you “make the source code available” (which, assuming the distributor isn’t modifying the Wine code further, can be achieved by just linking people back to the main Wine project code repository).

DXVK is licensed under zlib, which is functionally the same as the BSD licence.

What do you need vim for when Emacs has everything (including vim)?

(jk, I don’t care about Emacs or vim; I’m a nano peasant)

What are you doing, step-board?

Star Labs disable IME by default.

Almost two decades ago, as a teenager, I decided to give Linux a try as a bit of fun and as a learning activity. I put Ubuntu 6.06 on an old Windows 95 desktop which was languishing in a cupboard having been long replaced. The install disc was, I’m fairly sure, a freebie that came with a magazine. I was amazed at how easy it was to install and how smoothly it ran, and had lots of fun playing around with it and learning the ropes.

Have had a Linux machine or two on the go ever since. At some point in the last decade I made the switch from using Windows as my main OS to using Linux as my main, and these days I only use Windows on my corporate-provisioned work laptops.

I’m still an Ubuntu user. I’ve distro hopped occasionally, and Debian has a place in my heart, but I always came back to Ubuntu. There’s a lot of meming about Ubuntu being terrible, but the reality is that it remains an incredibly polished, high-quality, “just works” OS which largely keeps out of my way.

Over the last two decades I moved into software engineering as a career, although I’ve since moved out of the industry onto non-techy things. Linux continues to scratch my techy itch in my spare time.

I’ve not used that tablet, but I have a Star Labs laptop and it’s an excellent bit of kit. Would heartily recommend them as a company.

Can’t vouch for the Star Lite tablet specifically, though.

ChromeOS can run native Linux apps, so realistically if Adobe wanted to support ChromeOS they’d probably go for a Linux port anyway. A lot less work than trying to reimplement every single UI from the ground up as a web interface.

Most of the post is an “argument from authority”: Trust me, I have a PhD and maintain my own X server, and I assure you that Wayland is a pile of shit!

It’s amazing that he’s so well qualified, even runs his own X fork, but isn’t volunteering to do any actual work to maintain the project.

Because that’s what this ultimately boils down to, isn’t it. Nobody’s forcing anyone to use Wayland or drop X. But, all the X.org developers have moved on to Wayland and aren’t coming back, and all the major DEs are also migrating to Wayland. So if you want to keep using X, you’re going to need to do the work that other people used to do for you.

For most users that’s a fairly empty statement, as most users don’t have the expertise to maintain X and window managers even if they wanted to. But apparently this guy is hot stuff; a highly qualified, highly experienced king of the display server world. So when are we going to see his X.org fork?

Ultimately one could raise a point that MacOS is also Linux, because it uses Darwin

There’s no basis for calling MacOS Linux. There’s a legitimate basis for calling it BSD, as Darwin was forked from FreeBSD, but BSD and Linux aren’t directly related. Also, Darwin has diverged considerably from FreeBSD, and only a small amount of the stack outside of the kernel shares any code, so it’s not necessarily meaningful to think of it as a “FreeBSD distro” in the same sense as you would ChromeOS a Linux distro (which uses, as I mentioned in my previous comment, a more-or-less standard Linux technology stack).

In the current version of ChromeOS, as far as I know, either you sideload Linux or Google completely controls all app stores

ChromeOS lets you install Linux native applications out of the box, although it does so in containers (Crostini, which I believe is based on LXD, another standard Linux technology stack). Once you enable Linux apps, it automatically hooks you up to the Debian repositories, and you can install using apt like you would on any other Debian install.

Whether you consider Crostini to be “sideloading Linux” is a matter of semantics, but fundamentally it’s no different from installing containerised LXD/LXC apps on Ubuntu or whatever, which is a common use case for developers and production servers.

For me that is a fundamental conflict with the promise of freedom and user control that Linux gives - with a simple sudo you can be lord of the world.

I think you’re making an argument for why it’s a bad Linux distro (from a certain perfectly valid point of view), but not that it’s not a Linux distro.

There are few if any other distros which are as locked down ChromeOS out of the box, but all Linux distros can be locked down, and if you’ve ever used a corporate provisioned machine in a workplace or education setting then odds are you won’t have any admin freedoms regardless of the distro chosen. Sudoer privileges is something you might have on your own home machine, but not something that you can expect on every Linux machine. Even on devices you own, there are devices that you might buy (such as wifi routers, DVD players, smart TVs) which run standard Linux but which are as locked down (and more) than a Chromebook; it’s just that most people don’t expect to have unrestricted sudo privileges on their router in the same way as they do a laptop.

For the record, I am not a Chromebook fan. I owned one once for a few years, and thought it was a disappointing, artificially limited experience, and I don’t intend to have one again. ChromeOS is not my idea of a good Linux distro. But I’ll still argue firmly that it is a Linux distro in all ways that matter.

ChromeOS is as much Linux as anything else is. It’s controlled by a greedy megacorp, but so is Red Hat (IBM) or, idk, Oracle Linux. Yes it’s based on an unusual immutable design, but immutable distros are now cropping up out of lots of projects (Fedora, SUSE, Ubuntu, amongst many others, not to mention the Steam Deck). It avoids using the GNU tool chain, but the alternatives that it uses are already used by other Linux distros (like Alpine). It now uses the standard Wayland graphics stack, and is in the process of moving from upstart (a previously widely used Linux init system) to systemd.

It’s hard to come up with a definition of “Linux distro” that excludes ChromeOS without excluding a bunch of unambiguously Linux distros too.

Yeah, I mean if you want to get picky, the actual i386 processor family hasn’t been supported by the Linux kernel since 2012, and was dropped by Debian in 2007.

Most people were generally not particularly affected by that, seeing as the last i386 chip was released in (I think) 1989!

Debian’s choice to refer to the whole x86-32 line as i386 has always been a weird historical quirk.

No, this is just about the kernel and the installer/images.

You won’t be able to install Debian on an x86-32 computer anymore, but everything you can currently do on an x86-64 install still continue to work.