Bodhi Linux 7 brings Enlightenment to Ubuntu Bodhi Linux 7.0 is the latest release of one of the oldest Ubuntu-based distros, with one of the more unusual desktops. The latest version is based on Ubuntu 22.04, with the Moksha desktop, which is a fork of Enlightenment 17. There's a choice of four editions: three 64-bit ones, and a 32-bit edition which is still based on …
Or the 32-bit version is, at least - I don't think there were many 64-bit netbooks. I used it for several years on my eeePC 701 4G.
"The Windows key doesn't open the start menu, but a left-click on the desktop does." - if it hasn't changed in the last few versions, pressing Windows key + space bar at the same time also works.
Ironic that Enlightenment used to be thought of as the heavyweight option that needed a powerful machine!
I remember playing with Bodhi a few years ago, before the Moksha fork. The Japan theme back then was absolutely gorgeous. I'm pleased to note that its Moksha equivalent still looks pretty good.
Just a shame the default theme has that <chyrosran22>Hhhhhhhhiiiideeeeeeous</chyrosran22> flat green icon set.
"It has been my experience that there has been absolutely nothing which has been capable of bringing enlightenment to Ubuntu."
FTFY
IMO, Canonical has spent it's entire life trying to STOP anything resembling enlightenment ...
The latest version is based on Ubuntu 22.04, with the Moksha desktop, which is a fork of Enlightenment 17. There's a choice of four editions: three 64-bit ones, and a 32-bit edition which is still based on Ubuntu 18.04, the last Ubuntu LTS which supported x86-32. The 64-bit editions differ chiefly in the kernel they use. You can have either the basic Ubuntu "Jammy" 5.15, or the current HWE version with kernel 6.2, or for those with shiny, very new kit, an "s76" edition with the latest kernel 6.4."
All this is just one set of forks, from the many many alternatives.
A bewildering thicket of branches from the many various distros.*
And just getting the best out of MINT so I can use my machine productively was more than enough time and effort for me. And I'm pretty techie minded- (which is why I use a 'nux I could have stayed with Windows 10) I was a trainer for educational IT for a good number of years and taught a borough's technophobe school head teachers and their staff how to use their new fangled 486 machines with two floppy disc drives when I was an educational IT trainer, decades back. And so on.
But when it comes to seeing my way through this forest of Linux trees, bushes and shrubbery. Nah. It'd take far too much effort for a non-techie to even contemplate dropping Windows for 'Nux
*Sorry about the mixed metaphors but the word "fork" just isn't up to the job.
That is not my experiance at all .... i found it easier....there was a steepish curve to climb in the early days but that was actully more fun than ms round fuckery .... jesus i thought i was losing it when win 7 just became more bloated than a corpse in a gimp suit .... 8 was a hard no and 10 was was ... was ..just pain and horror....have been using nix at home exclusivly since 2018
Is it more difficult to use than ChromeOS, which is, after all a Linux distro?
For most distros, I think that actually the only thing that is missing is a better curated App Store. Sure, they are all better than Microsoft's but the difference is that on Windows, people already know what to look for.
"but the difference is that on Windows, people already know what to look for"
Do they? Or is it that Windows is now a vehicle for selling software much of which comes as standard with Linux?
If a Windows user wants, say a PDF editor and it's not something for which MS have included an advert do they know by osmosis what a suitable Windows PDF editor is or do they turn to their favourite web search?
OTOH I wish KDE would take a look at all the queries about making Discover work. It needs to be moved from the only just works* to the Just Works category.
* Allegedly. I've never seen it work at all.
[Author here]
> web pages say stuff like "You will need a PDF reader
True, but Firefox not only renders PDFs natively in-app, but in the last year or so, it also *edits* them in-browser.
https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/18/firefox_106_arrives/
Not sure what teh "it" refers to there. MINT or 'Nux generally.
If MINT- it doesn't put things there on a plate like like Chrome/MacOs/Windows.Comparable, imho to moving from Twitter to Masto.
But it's the thick forest of 'Nux distros, forks of distros and forks of forks of distros, with concommitent alternative interfaces in some cases*, that is the biggest barrier to wider, general adoption.
*To quote from Wikipaedia, just about MINT alone.... Linux Mint is available with a number of desktop environments to choose from, including the default Cinnamon desktop, MATE and Xfce. Other desktop environments can be installed via APT, Synaptic, or via the custom Mint Software Manager.
Author here]
> their new fangled 486 machines with two floppy disc drives
TBH this casts some doubt on your account, because the 486 came out in 1989 and went widespread in the early 1990s, which was about a decade after the era of twin-floppy PCs. By the 486 era, any normal business computer had a hard disk.
I don't think I ever saw a floppy-only 386, let alone a 486. Floppy only was mainly confined to the 8086/8088 era.
Anyway, you complain a lot about this, but really, Bodhi is an option for a DIYer. If you don't have preferred native Linux apps this is not a distro for you.
If you just want to get online, ChromeOS will do you. If you have enough opinions to want to avoid Google, then Linux Mint. Got a HiDPI screen? Cinnamon edition. Job done.
BTW, it's word: Mint, not MINT. So is MATE but they capitalise it because it's a Spanish word not an English one.
"I don't think I ever saw a floppy-only 386, let alone a 486."
Quite common in industrial controllers, and in some medical equipment.
The floppy is not necessarily externally accessible.
A couple of weeks ago, I worked on an Idexx Vettest 8008 blood test machine. It boots FreeDOS, runs from a single floppy, contains no HDD, and the display is a rather small LCD. This later model has a 386, 2 megs of RAM, an unused IDE controller and unused ISA expansion slot. They have odd memory mapping because of the LCD display, a small built-in thermal printer, and proprietary hardware for the blood work itself. I have never tried to plug in a HDD or expansion card, no point.
[Author here]
> Quite common in industrial controllers, and in some medical equipment.
That's a fair point but the poster specified these were school computers:
«
taught a borough's technophobe school head teachers and their staff how to use their new fangled 486 machines with two floppy disc drives when I was an educational IT trainer
»
This post has been deleted by its author
Author here]
their new fangled 486 machines with two floppy disc drives
TBH this casts some doubt on your account, because the 486 came out in 1989 and went widespread in the early 1990s, which was about a decade after the era of twin-floppy PCs. By the 486 era, any normal business computer had a hard disk.
Doesn't take much to make you doubt, does it. It was a long time ago. Probably mid to late '80s. RM 3 or 480Z And frankly that kind of petty detail from decades ago is too trivial to make any difference.But it was largely and obviously an illustrative point.
Anyway, you complain a lot about this, but really, Bodhi is an option for a DIYer. If you don't have preferred native Linux apps this is not a distro for you.
That's like saying "If you're lost in a forest don't take any notice of the oak trees"
BTW, it's word: Mint, not MINT. So is MATE but they capitalise it because it's a Spanish word not an English one.
Can you get any more trivial?
RM380Z/480Z were both Z80. The 380Z ran CP/M, I'm not sure about the 480Z.
Where you *should* have picked Liam up was on his comprehension. In the late '80s, most well-spec'ed PCs did indeed have two floppy disk drives, one 5.25" the other 3.5", as we were in the change-over period to 3.5". That they also had hard disks was not covered in the original comment.
GJC
[Author here]
> Doesn't take much to make you doubt, does it.
No, it doesn't. I hang out a lot in tech fora all over the internet, looking for stories and news and info, and the number of times I see people confidently talking about their tech knowledge but citing details that they misremember from long ago.
It is extremely common for people to think that they know stuff, but not actually realise that they don't, or that they used to but they've forgotten. They free-associate stuff based on vague recollections, without realising. That means that they give bad advice, actively unhelpful info, or sometimes completely backwards and totally wrong or even harmful info.
And when they are called on it they are almost always angry, indignant and deny it.
I am not accusing them, or you, of malice. Hanlon's Razor applies.
But when someone makes strong claims and their claim contains factual errors, that is I am afraid very damning and it makes me suspect that they may be wrong -- even more than spelling or grammar errors. Most of the world are not native English speakers.
The computer business is by nature and definition extremely pedantic because if you get the capitalisation of one letter wrong in one command it won't work. Change one underscore to a minus sign and you can destroy a computer. People who work in this trade _must_ be exceptionally pedantic, or they won't be able to do their jobs.
It's the nature of the business.
You missed the point(s).
"...And I'm pretty techie minded- " I know my way around computers and have spent years helping the general user to generally use their machines. I''m not an engineer or a coder. Any IT skills I used to have are long obsolete. I am ( was) a teacher and teacher trainer.
And the key point was that your article demonstrates why 'Nux is a long way from being what so many 'Nux advocates want it to be, the OS of the desktop*.
A few trivial "gotchas" aren't going to change that.
Because-the actual point- it is is an arcane art that needs considerable persistence and commitment to penetrate. Which is fine by me. But then I don't particularly wish to read 'Nux advocates propose that it should be on the general desktop. as, as I headed that comment "a mainstream option"
*As itself, not lying under another OS- which mostly is what is meant
...apologize, in advance, for (possibly) high-jacking the intent of your comment, but...do you, and everyone, realize, exactly, how your comment characterizes the mental set and the tactics of the followers of the orange-haired Florida Man--and the man himself----and of demagogues everywhere? [see the definition of 'demagogue' here; it is very scary, and absolutely 100% correct in the case of certain individuals]
Consider what's been said...
“...it is extremely common for people to think that they know stuff, but not actually realise that they don't...”
“...they give bad advice, actively unhelpful info, or sometimes completely backwards and totally wrong or even harmful info.
“And when they are called on it they are almost always angry, indignant and deny it...”
“...But when someone makes strong claims and their claim contains factual errors, that is I am afraid very damning and it makes me suspect that they may be wrong ..”
With all due respect for your attempts at sensitivity and deference to your subject, Hanlon's Razor does, absolutely, NOT apply in this case. Malice is intended for the most part, by practically all the actors involved.
And, once again, sincerest apologies. Your comment goes very deeply to the general human condition...
------------------------------------------------------
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large crowds."--George Carlin
I think the Amstrad 1640 was the most modern computer I saw with twin floppies.
One floppy with MS Dos, one floppy with Word Perfect, Sage or whatever you wanted to run, then pull out the DOS floppy and put your data disk in its place.
Well apart from my own Cyrix 686, but I added a second floppy to it myself.
All of the different desktop environments, tiling window managers, etc. is one of the things I love about Linux, as I am a tinkerer and willing to try different workflows, but as for your car analogy, when I drive an unfamiliar vehicle, I am often cursing under my breath as I try to find the headlight dimming switch, cruise control, seat adjustment, etc...
"when I drive an unfamiliar vehicle, I am often cursing under my breath as I try to find the headlight dimming switch, cruise control, seat adjustment, etc..."
Yes. Some manufacturers go out of their way to make things difficult for people unfamiliar with their product. Sometimes they even change it model year to model year. More fool them. People like stability in a tool, they don't like to fiddle about with it just to get it to do something that worked perfectly well last year.
First, we shoot all the marketers ...
"Userspace should be inviolate." —Linus Torvalds
Which misses the real life point that cars are differentiated mostly by just three factors; reputation/marketing, form factor and price. i.e. What is coolest, how many seats do I need, what can I afford, And once a make is settled on the sales staff will talk buyers through the options.
I guess my visual senses may be different to others - that desktop screenshot is so unbelievably ugly you may as well just use LXqt and have a very lightweight desktop that's also ugly.
I long for the day when there's a Linux distribution that actually produces a polished Desktop experience.
Some come close, but beneath the surface, horrors of design lurk.
That's why for my Linux needs on Desktop, I really don't give a monkeys about the Desktop manager - LXQt or XFCE does the job - ugly as heck, but super lightweight.
[Author here]
> that desktop screenshot is so unbelievably ugly you may as well just use LXqt and have a very lightweight desktop that's also ugly.
It is, er, a strong identity. I am not a huge fan, but at least it is different.
Me, I'd say, if they are going to embrace bling, lean in and make it look amazing, like something from a Hollywood scifi film. All flashing lights, animations, transparency, 3D surfaces that spin and flip like Sun's Looking Glass desktop, and so on.
But Englightenment has never leaned in to this, sadly. It's bling, but it's 1990s bling, and a bit stale now.
But hey, at least it's a change and it's not grey.
> Me, I'd say, if they are going to embrace bling, lean in and make it look amazing, like something from a Hollywood scifi film. All flashing lights, animations, transparency, 3D surfaces that spin and flip like Sun's Looking Glass desktop, and so on.
We had some of that years ago with Compiz - some of its features (key bindings for different zoom levels, and the freehand drawing layer) are really nice for screencasting. Sadly that appears to be yet another project that's now on life support.
Windows and Microsoft applications are getting less and less customisable each release. It's now very close to having four options - bright, dark, accessible A and accessible B, the latter two of which only exist because the law requires them.
macOS seems to only have bright and dark.
Perhaps the OP simply doesn't know that customising a UI theme is an option?
> I guess my visual senses may be different to others - that desktop screenshot is so unbelievably ugly you may as well just use LXqt and have a very lightweight desktop that's also ugly.
I can't imagine why they went with that as a default theme when literally all the others are better looking: https://www.bodhilinux.com/softwaregroup/themes/
Some of those are really nice.
(But arguably less nice than the ones available a decade ago: https://web.archive.org/web/20140331075316/http://art.bodhilinux.com/doku.php?id=bodhi_e17_themes_v3 )
"If Ubuntu is so good,"
It really isn't. It has many of the same issues as the commercial offerings from Redmond and Cupertino, and for the same reasons.
"why is everyone trying to fix it by spinning it off to things like this?"
First of all, Ubuntu is itself a spin-off, from Debian. The 2nd gen spin-offs are not trying to fix it. They are trying to capitalize on it. Just like Canonical.
I have found lubuntu to be effective as a fairly good unbuntu remix. If that's your starting point and you don't want to deviate far from the true Upath. https://lubuntu.me/
As mentioned elsewhere the Raspberry Pi Desktop for PC's is pretty good. That's a strong debian flavour. https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/raspberry-pi-desktop/
I did try things like puppy linux a long time ago, but my opinion counts for much less there. I could see that puppy was more efficient, by doing less, but it was a learning curve that I wasn't personally prepared to get into.
Dear reader, your mileage may vary.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
