Linux Lite 6.2: Latest release from distro with a misleading name Linux Lite 6.2 is the latest version of this increasingly inaccurately named distro. In effect, it's a niftily customized remix of Xubuntu 22.04.1. This is the first point-release since Linux Lite 6.0, which we looked at in June – the project eschews odd-numbered minor versions. While 6.0 was based on Ubuntu 22.04, 6.2 is …
It is a laudable ambition in many a new Linux distro to be familiar and easy to use for new users. Obviously most users new to Linux are coming from years of using windows so making things familiar to them can only be a good thing.
Some of the established distros make a claim to be easy for refugees from Redmond, but a significant number of them are not. If people get confused by the installer they probably aren't going to bother to finish up and use the system. Some supposedly newbie friendly distros have over the years assumed as technical knowledge way beyond the average home user's. Remember the laptop or PC is to a lot of home users an appliance just like the TV or microwave. Installing your new microwave is a simple case of taking it out of the box, removing the packing and plugging it in. Installing a new OS shouldn't be much harder, but usually is. With a lot of newbie friendly distros even if the new user completes the installation they will find that the developers seem to set out to hide things from Windows users. I had one friend call me up to ask me how ro change the resolution of their display (their eyesight isn't the best and they prefer a lower resolution) trying to talk her through this unfamiliar distro over the phone proved difficult so I popped rounds and it took me a couple of minutes to track it down three layers deep. I know a lot of others are much better. But consider how easy most users find the transition between Microsoft and Apple desktops. It should be just as easy when moving to Linux.
Some of the other established distros couldn't give a damn about Windows users. They're for Linux users dammit! And that's fine, some folks are much more familiar with Linux than Windows, but that's not going to swell the Linux userbase.
So there's very definitely a place for a distro like Linux Lite since it makes a much better stab at making life easier for MS converts.
Have you ever tried installing Windows? That is pretty difficult, especially as you usually have to go to third-party websites to find drivers.
But the average person doesn't need to do that, as their computer manufacturer does it for them.
Also, I don't think having a different UI is a problem. People managed to adapt to iOS and Android when they got their first devices with those installed on it. See also ChromeOS.
What does matter is the availability of software that does the things they need to do with their computer.
"Have you ever tried installing Windows? That is pretty difficult, especially as you usually have to go to third-party websites to find drivers."
When I built my Windows 8.1 system, that was the case. When I built my Windows 10 system, it was a case of "nexting" through the installer (avoiding the telemetry), and then letting Windows Update run to pull down the nVidia, Realtek, and PCH drivers. It's not quite as slick as my experience of installing Linux Mint (just "nexting" through the installer), but it was close. :)
Well, it's more helpful to people who have sold their online identities to Google.
To the rest of us, Chromium, Vivaldi, Brave, even modern Opera* are better choices.
-A.
Though not much in the case of Opera. There was a time when I freely gave them money for the clearly superior Presto-based program. Last time I looked they're chasing click-bait. A real shame.
[Author here]
> To the rest of us, Chromium, Vivaldi, Brave, even modern Opera* are better choices.
All based on the Chrome engine, though, and so aid Google in controlling the implementation of the WWW.
As such, I recommend a Mozilla-based browser: Firefox, or Waterfox which improves upon it in several ways IMHO, or LibreWolf if you're happy with the feature set of Firefox but want any and all Mozilla telemetry removed.
I keep Chrome around for very intensive Web 2.0 stuff and nothing else. I suggest that this is a good strategy.
> Last time I looked they're chasing click-bait.
Opera the company sold out to a Chinese software vendor.
If you crave the original Opera UI, some of the staff of the original Norwegian company now make Vivaldi.
Vivaldi is indeed my daily driver. It comes close, but it's a real shame that they couldn't have taken Presto with them. It is deeply unhealthy that there are just two usable browser implementations in the wild. (Three if you consider Webkit separately and ignore that it only exists on Apple systems.)
-A.
So it offers to install updates on a live system, which won't work.
Why not? I have regularly updated and added packages to live distros - usually Xubuntu - without any problems. Of course everything you do evaporates at shutdown, but being able to add gparted (for example) to a live booted system can be very useful.
Yes it's a dumb name that stands to alienate two groups of people.
Firstly those who expect it to be a lightweight installation when it very much is not.
And secondly those who consider themselves "power users" (whatever the fuck that means) who will assume from the name that it's not up to their demanding (ahem) standards and therefore won't bother installing it
Our target audience are primarily Windows users. We don't compete with other linux based operating systems, we view that as unhealthy for the free and open source community and would draw our focus away from getting people off of proprietary based operating systems, and into linux, which is what I am most passionate about. If we come in more stable, less resource demanding and with more security and freedom from something like Windows, then we have won already. That is where our battle lies.
Author here, and thanks for visiting and commenting.
I don't normally try to enter into debate with product creators and vendors here in the comments, but since that's how you chose to make contact, all right then.
> Our target audience are primarily Windows users.
That's fair enough. The same is true of Zorin and Mint, I think, and there's nothing wrong with that at all.
> We don't compete with other linux based operating systems
That seems disingenuous to me. You do, inasmuch as LL is a Linux distro and therefore it is competing for mindshare with all other Linux distros. LL can't _not_ compete with other distros: it is a distro.
> we view that as unhealthy for the free and open source community
I am sorry to have to say this, but TBH, I think that bundling Google proprietary freeware is unhealthy for the FOSS community. :-(
There's no debate here, just a forwarding of accurate information in the interests of providing clarity. Picking one package (Chrome) out of 1000's of others is an interesting vector. We need to stay focused on getting people into linux based operating systems, whatever that distro may be. Once they are here, they will experience a freedom of choice, like never before. Trying to impose upon them a specific view in regards to free and open source software will not IMO, help our communities grow, which is I presume, is what we are collectively passionate about. Take care, and good luck in the future.
Better to get the facts from the horses mouth so to speak, than from a poorly researched article online. First of all the name 'Lite' does not infer that it is the lightest linux based operating system in existence, just that it is 'light'. We are light, but there's no claim and never will be, that we are the lightest. There will always be, something lighter than the distro in discussion at the time. Search our Hardware Database and you'll see many examples of dual cores and even single cores that have run Linux Lite.
As for "it's a niftily customized remix of Xubuntu" again, completely incorrect. We start with a netboot ISO image of Ubuntu (approx. 39mb) and build up the operating system from there, one package at a time. We use the Ubuntu package base and follow the LTS, but we are certainly not a remix of Xubuntu, Ubuntu or anything else. Hope this clears things up a little. I see I have a long way to go with getting the correct information out there. Thank you.
Author here, again. There are many incorrect and plain rude claims in this comment which I want to counter.
> than from a poorly researched article online
That is inflammatory and offensive. I installed it, as I also installed the previous version, and I object to "poorly-researched". I have got over 30 years of experience in the commercial UNIX industry and over 25 years experience in Linux. I have been writing about it since the 1990s, and I have been worked for two of the three major enterprise Linux vendors.
"Poorly researched" is unfair, unreasonable, and needlessly confrontational. "Online" is also clearly intended to be pejorative. The Register is an online publication, but I would be more than happy to make the same comments in print: I have in the past written for PC Pro, PC Magazine, Personal Computer World, PC @uthority, PC Advisor, MacUser, Custom PC, Network News, and other print publications, and I would have been more than happy to say the same on paper, if that were to carry more weight somehow.
I entirely stand by my comments and my assessments.
> First of all the name 'Lite' does not infer
You mean "imply". The word "infer" means something else.
> that it is the lightest linux based operating system in existence, just that it is 'light'.
It is not. That is the point. It is not lightweight compared to other Linuxes. Indeed, it is quite heavyweight as Linux distros go: although it uses a relatively lightweight desktop, it contains many bundled apps and needs more disk space than the parent distro from which it is derived.
> We are light
This is not true.
> but there's no claim and never will be, that we are the lightest.
I see no other interpretation of the name than that it's _a_ lightweight Linux, and it is not a particularly lightweight distro.
> As for "it's a niftily customized remix of Xubuntu" again, completely incorrect. We start with a netboot ISO image of Ubuntu (approx. 39mb) and build up the operating system from there, one package at a time. We use the Ubuntu package base and follow the LTS, but we are certainly not a remix of Xubuntu, Ubuntu or anything else.
If your distro is built from the basis of Ubuntu, then it is an Ubuntu remix. That is what the word "remix" means.
If you use the same desktop as a prominent, official Ubuntu remix, then I think that calling the distro a variant of the official remix with that desktop is fair and accurate.
> Hope this clears things up a little.
No, it does not. "Denial" is not the same thing as "refutation". You have your own opinion and are angrily calling mine incorrect because it is different. That is not how this works.
> I see I have a long way to go with getting the correct information out there.
No, not really. What you have a long way to go at is accepting criticism gracefully, in my humble opinion.
> Thank you.
Adding that on the end does not compensate for attacking someone's reputation, knowledge and judgement, and being offensive to someone and then spuriously thanking them does not make it any less hostile or confrontational.
Regarding the distro itself; it is definitely "heavy". It's too big for many of the shovelware netbooks that other linux distros can save from the recycling.
If the target market is Windows users; then emphasis on transition is probably an important feature. Chrome is what it is - common - so that is an understandable choice albeit not one I would make. (Says me posting this from Chrome on a work-related laptop because the available alternative is Edge).
The out of box experience and installation of "essential" tools is critical in a Windows transition environment. Not wholly forgivable to have user-interface in install time with messaging that might not be understood. What does Linux Lite do that other distros don't already do; better? As an established linux user, I have no reason to look backwards to this. I would be hard pressed to recommend it as a way forward for a "new" user either.
Today, I'd point totally new users to Mint and nothing else. Power "windows" users once you have a clue what you are doing? Probably Manjaro or MX. And then at that point for the uber keen to learn internals (rather than just using an appliance) to suffer a Gentoo walkthrough...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
