In search of a Linux distro recommendation

[Ken Springer]

I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the following:

Fits on a CD
Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't
include applications
Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible,
"right out of the box".

An option for #1 is a distro that's available on multiple CD's.

I don't want to clutter this post with info that may not be needed, but
if anyone wishes to have more information, just ask. :-)

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 12.0
Thunderbird 12.0.1
LibreOffice 3.5.2.2

[atec77]

On 13/05/2012 8:58 AM, Ken Springer wrote:
> I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the
> following:
>
> Fits on a CD
> Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't include
> applications
> Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible, "right
> out of the box".
>
> An option for #1 is a distro that's available on multiple CD's.
>
> I don't want to clutter this post with info that may not be needed, but
> if anyone wishes to have more information, just ask. :-)
>

I use Simply Mepis which is DVD bootable stand alone for testing

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Ken Springer]

Thanks for the suggestion. Can the install be broken into pieces so it
fits on one or more CD's? The computer I want to install it on only has
a CD drive. I'll be giving the computer away, it's an old laptop, so
using a DVD isn't possible. Too old to have them, and the BIOS doesn't
support booting from a USB port.

[Ken Springer]

Went to the website after posting it, found the smaller version that
fits on a CD.

One slooooooooooooooow site to download from. :-( This is the second
time I've been to that site, and the previous time was also slow. But I
can wait it out! LOL

[atec77]

Hope it foes well for you , for simple operation and a nice interface
Mepis suites my purpose

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Ken Springer]

On 5/12/12 9:02 PM, atec77 wrote:

> Hope it foes well for you , for simple operation and a nice interface
> Mepis suites my purpose

Thanks. I'll probably be trying a number of distros. Hoping to find
one that I think newbies to computers will find easy to use. The "looks
like XP" request is for those that have at least seen XP.

[atec77]

On 13/05/2012 1:48 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
> On 5/12/12 9:02 PM, atec77 wrote:
>
>> Hope it foes well for you , for simple operation and a nice interface
>> Mepis suites my purpose
>
> Thanks. I'll probably be trying a number of distros. Hoping to find one
> that I think newbies to computers will find easy to use. The "looks like
> XP" request is for those that have at least seen XP.
>
>

I introduced it to a new group learning Cert III/IV It recently and the
results were interesting , although not strictly "Windows" looking most
liked it and found the installation simple and use obvious , there are
others of course and you may find something more suitable
but being Debian based it is a good start
B

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Max Wachtel]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 18:58:47 -0400, Ken Springer
<word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:

> I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the
> following:
>
> Fits on a CD
> Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't
> include applications
> Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible,
> "right out of the box".
>
> An option for #1 is a distro that's available on multiple CD's.
>
> I don't want to clutter this post with info that may not be needed, but
> if anyone wishes to have more information, just ask. :-)
>

I have an a31 thinkpad and lubuntu 12.04 works well on it.
http://lubuntu.net/
--
Registered Linux User #393236

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:58:47 -0600, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com>
wrote:

>I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the following:
>
> Fits on a CD
> Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't
>include applications
> Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible,
>"right out of the box".

Knoppix?

I think it's a fairly small one.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Ken Springer]

I tried both Lubuntu and Ubuntu. Lubuntu does not recognize the
modem/Ethernet card in the computer, and Ubuntu doesn't look enough like
XP to meet the need.

But thanks for the suggestion.

[Ken Springer]

On 6/5/12 10:24 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:58:47 -0600, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the following:
>>
>> Fits on a CD
>> Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't
>> include applications
>> Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible,
>> "right out of the box".
>
> Knoppix?
>
> I think it's a fairly small one.

I had forgotten Knoppix, it was one of the first Linux versions I
briefly looked at years ago.

It is small, but way too far away from XP for what I need.

Thanks for the suggestion, though.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 6/5/12 10:24 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:58:47 -0600, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm looking for a stable, easy to use Linux distro that meets the following:
>>>
>>> Fits on a CD
>>> Does not have to include applications, just as Windows doesn't
>>> include applications
>>> Needs to look and feel and work as much like XP as is possible,
>>> "right out of the box".
>>
>> Knoppix?
>>
>> I think it's a fairly small one.
>
> I had forgotten Knoppix, it was one of the first Linux versions I
> briefly looked at years ago.
>
> It is small, but way too far away from XP for what I need.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, though.

XP?

There is nothing in Linux that "works as much like XP as possible."


Now if you told us what your real requirements were you might get helpful
advice.

So, what do you need?

>
>

[J G Miller]

On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 15:15:16 +0000, UnrUh asked:

> So, what do you need?

I would guess -- a free and reliable replacement for Windoze 8 ;)

[Ken Springer]

LOL!!! I already have that!!! See my sig!

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:

<snip>

> XP?
>
> There is nothing in Linux that "works as much like XP as possible."
>
>
> Now if you told us what your real requirements were you might get helpful
> advice.
>
> So, what do you need?

It's all right there in the original post.

That is "what" I need, I just didn't include any "whys and wherefores". :-)

There are a lot of people who need a computer for various reasons, but
can't afford one. I work on the premise that any computer (well, almost
any) is better than no computer when it comes to accessing the internet.

So I collect older parts and pieces, and assemble a working system that
I take to a local social agency, and they give it away to someone they
deem to need a computer system. As a minimum, it includes monitor,
keyboard, mouse, and printer.

The odds are pretty favorable that if the recipient(s) have any computer
exposure/experience, it's likely Windows. But the hardware I have is
rarely capable of running newer than XP.

The two biggest problems I have is a legal copy of XP for installing,
and a hard drive large enough.

Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
for an updated install of XP.

Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
seems the logical answer.

It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
possible.

Based on screenshots, ZorinOS looked really promising, but none of their
releases would install. Lubuntu doesn't recognize the Ethernet
connection. But Ubuntu does, go figure. :-) I've forgotten why
PCLinux doesn't fit the bill. There are some distros that resemble XP
to the user, but they don't fit on a CD, and that's needed for this laptop.

It's been hit and miss in finding a distro that fits. Damned Small
Linux installed great, but the interface is so different, it would
undoubtedly confuse any recipient or friends thereof. Others I've tried
that did install also had the "strange interface" issue I want to avoid.

I'm just offering the labor to get a working system, but I'm not
interested in providing long term technical support. So the KISS
principle *must* apply as of all the OS's I've experimented around with
over the years, I know the least about Linux.

If you've got any different suggestions/solutions, I'd like to hear it.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:

> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> XP?
>>
>> There is nothing in Linux that "works as much like XP as possible."
>>
>>
>> Now if you told us what your real requirements were you might get helpful
>> advice.
>>
>> So, what do you need?
>
> It's all right there in the original post.
>
> That is "what" I need, I just didn't include any "whys and wherefores". :-)
>
> There are a lot of people who need a computer for various reasons, but
> can't afford one. I work on the premise that any computer (well, almost
> any) is better than no computer when it comes to accessing the internet.
>
> So I collect older parts and pieces, and assemble a working system that
> I take to a local social agency, and they give it away to someone they
> deem to need a computer system. As a minimum, it includes monitor,
> keyboard, mouse, and printer.
>
> The odds are pretty favorable that if the recipient(s) have any computer
> exposure/experience, it's likely Windows. But the hardware I have is
> rarely capable of running newer than XP.

So? Since you want them to be able to access teh internet, XP is hardly
a requirement. Even a livecd of any distro would do what you want.

>
> The two biggest problems I have is a legal copy of XP for installing,
> and a hard drive large enough.

Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.

>
> Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
> satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
> it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
> legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
> for an updated install of XP.
>
> Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
> recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
> help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
> seems the logical answer.

No, most recipients will NOT know something about XP. They will know
something about clicking on an icon and getting something they want to
use. Any Linux distro will give them that.

Ie, what feature of XP do you expect them to be "familiar" with?

> It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
> on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
> possible.

You would like to avoid it why? Where else are they going to get the
image. (Since your equipenment is old, a bootable usb stick will not
work.)

>
> Based on screenshots, ZorinOS looked really promising, but none of their
> releases would install. Lubuntu doesn't recognize the Ethernet
> connection. But Ubuntu does, go figure. :-) I've forgotten why
> PCLinux doesn't fit the bill. There are some distros that resemble XP
> to the user, but they don't fit on a CD, and that's needed for this laptop.
>
> It's been hit and miss in finding a distro that fits. Damned Small
> Linux installed great, but the interface is so different, it would
> undoubtedly confuse any recipient or friends thereof. Others I've tried
> that did install also had the "strange interface" issue I want to avoid.

Like what?

>
> I'm just offering the labor to get a working system, but I'm not
> interested in providing long term technical support. So the KISS
> principle *must* apply as of all the OS's I've experimented around with
> over the years, I know the least about Linux.
>
> If you've got any different suggestions/solutions, I'd like to hear it.

Sure. Just install one of the livecd versions of linux Any one. Pick the
one which has the most letters in common with your name. It will give
you a desktop. a browser, an internet connection ( wireless and wired)
and an office package (openoffice of Libreoffice often, although even
koffice might be enough).


>
>

[J G Miller]

On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 13:43:26h -0600, Ken Springer explained:

> a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
> seems the logical answer.

Install an appropriate working GNU/Linux distribution and
then change the system Xsession to fire up icewm with the
XP theme set as default.

Problem solved.

[Ken Springer]

Most of that is over my head, so it's likely to be over the recipient's
head.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:

> On 6/8/12 3:01 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>> On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 13:43:26h -0600, Ken Springer explained:
>>
>>> a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>> seems the logical answer.
>>
>> Install an appropriate working GNU/Linux distribution and
>> then change the system Xsession to fire up icewm with the
>> XP theme set as default.
>>
>> Problem solved.
>
> Most of that is over my head, so it's likely to be over the recipient's
> head.

??? He is telling you how to set up the desktop. You do it for the
recipient. Then it is finished.
He said, install linux, alter the default to use icewm not kde (Ie,
change the line in a single file-- depends on which distro you choose).
That's it. Installing XP is over your recipient's heads. Does that mean
you would not install XP?

>
>

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 2:53 PM, unruh wrote:
> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:

<snip>

> So? Since you want them to be able to access teh internet, XP is hardly
> a requirement. Even a livecd of any distro would do what you want.

*If* the only requirement was to access the internet, you would be correct.

But, it isn't. :-) I'm trying to assemble a fully functioning system
for use, not a specialty, does just one thing, system.

> Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
> XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.

That is on the list, and a couple of people have said that such licenses
do exist. But I'd prefer to avoid any legal entanglements. :-)

I'm also trying to get the social agency I give these to interested in
this idea, but so far no luck. It would be nice if they would foot some
bills for stuff, but that's not likely to happen.

I also "want" the numbers to the next PowerBall lottery, but I'm not
likely to get them. <grin> So, I'm looking for alternatives.

I don't have the funds to purchase copies of XP, I have to make use of
what's available, which is basically my time.

>>
>> Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
>> satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
>> it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
>> legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
>> for an updated install of XP.
>>
>> Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
>> recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
>> help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>> seems the logical answer.
>
> No, most recipients will NOT know something about XP. They will know
> something about clicking on an icon and getting something they want to
> use. Any Linux distro will give them that.

True, they may not, but a dollar will get you a donut their friends are
likely to.

> Ie, what feature of XP do you expect them to be "familiar" with?

In a very general way, look and feel, not just something specific.

>> It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
>> on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
>> possible.
>
> You would like to avoid it why? Where else are they going to get the
> image. (Since your equipenment is old, a bootable usb stick will not
> work.)

Personal preference, mostly, which is based on not being happy with that
type of system, both in Windows and Mac worlds.

>>
>> Based on screenshots, ZorinOS looked really promising, but none of their
>> releases would install. Lubuntu doesn't recognize the Ethernet
>> connection. But Ubuntu does, go figure. :-) I've forgotten why
>> PCLinux doesn't fit the bill. There are some distros that resemble XP
>> to the user, but they don't fit on a CD, and that's needed for this laptop.
>>
>> It's been hit and miss in finding a distro that fits. Damned Small
>> Linux installed great, but the interface is so different, it would
>> undoubtedly confuse any recipient or friends thereof. Others I've tried
>> that did install also had the "strange interface" issue I want to avoid.
>
> Like what?

It goes to the "look and feel" comment above. In XP, when you get to
the desktop, you simply have My Computer (sometimes! <grin> on the
desktop. With most of the distros you get icons representing all of the
drives, usually in the lower left corner from what I've seen. And,
instead of being labeled A, C, D, etc., you have Floppy (far more
logical I think), but then you move to a cryptic (to most people I
think) sda0, sda1, etc.

In general, the names used for many common desktop icons for
applications may not be familiar with many Windows users.

I'm trying to do my best not to cause any heartburn with whomever gets
the unit. :-)

I will definitely give the Linux community kudos on the design of the
icons. Far, far more attractive than the normal Windows and Mac icons.

>
>
>>
>> I'm just offering the labor to get a working system, but I'm not
>> interested in providing long term technical support. So the KISS
>> principle *must* apply as of all the OS's I've experimented around with
>> over the years, I know the least about Linux.
>>
>> If you've got any different suggestions/solutions, I'd like to hear it.
>
> Sure. Just install one of the livecd versions of linux Any one. Pick the
> one which has the most letters in common with your name. It will give
> you a desktop. a browser, an internet connection ( wireless and wired)
> and an office package (openoffice of Libreoffice often, although even
> koffice might be enough).

If this was for me, I'd play with all of them and then settle. Looking
for something like XP would not be a requirement at all. But the
computers are *not* for me, and like anyone building something for an
unknown person, I'm trying to anticipate what will fit best with the
likely/target audience.

As you can see from my sig, I use FOSS software. But LO is having some
issues at the moment, and on an XP system, I'm now installing Kingsoft
Office. For a Linux install, I'd definitely check out Koffice, or maybe
just Abiword and Gnumeric. I'd need to check to see if Lotus Symphony
comes in a Linux version too. But that's putting the cart before the
horse. :-)

In my poking around on the web this afternoon, I've stumbled on some
themes to make your Linux install look like either Windows or Mac. I
didn't know that was an option, so I'll check that out also.

[Ken Springer]

The problem now is, my lack of Linux knowledge. Everything J.G.
suggested may as well have been written in Celtic. <grin> I have no
idea what Xsession and icewm is or how to manipulate it.

But when you install Windows and OS X, you don't have to go back and
edit some installation file to get what you started with out of the box.

If/when I do the Xsession thing and go that way, that would be a plus
for the disk image idea of providing the eventual user/owner a means to
reinstall everything.

One huge problem for me, too many ideas and too little time! LOL

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 6/8/12 3:54 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/8/12 3:01 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>>>> On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 13:43:26h -0600, Ken Springer explained:
>>>>
>>>>> a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>>>> seems the logical answer.
>>>>
>>>> Install an appropriate working GNU/Linux distribution and
>>>> then change the system Xsession to fire up icewm with the
>>>> XP theme set as default.
>>>>
>>>> Problem solved.
>>>
>>> Most of that is over my head, so it's likely to be over the recipient's
>>> head.
>>
>> ??? He is telling you how to set up the desktop. You do it for the
>> recipient. Then it is finished.
>> He said, install linux, alter the default to use icewm not kde (Ie,
>> change the line in a single file-- depends on which distro you choose).
>> That's it. Installing XP is over your recipient's heads. Does that mean
>> you would not install XP?
>
> The problem now is, my lack of Linux knowledge. Everything J.G.
> suggested may as well have been written in Celtic. <grin> I have no
> idea what Xsession and icewm is or how to manipulate it.

One of the features with Linux is the huge range of options. There is
not just one desktop for running X, there are many. The two dominant
ones are kde and gnome, but icewm is another lighter weight one (better
for slower hardware or limited hard disk)

>
> But when you install Windows and OS X, you don't have to go back and
> edit some installation file to get what you started with out of the box.

That is because, like the old Soviet system, you get one item on the
store shelves and that is what you have to be happy or otherwise with. I
remember when I had a collegue come from the Soviet Union, and I took
him to Eatons here. He spent 4 hours there, and stumbled out, not having
bought anything because there was too much choice. Under Linux you have
choice.

>
> If/when I do the Xsession thing and go that way, that would be a plus
> for the disk image idea of providing the eventual user/owner a means to
> reinstall everything.

Xsession is the configuration of the screen desktop. Ie, you always want
it (your people do not want to operate in console only mode.)

The easiest thing would be just to use the most popular, kde, and go
with that, and give them a LiveCD to reinstall from.

Remember a LiveCD fits on a CD. .8GB. so it will certainly fit on your
disks.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 6/8/12 2:53 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> So? Since you want them to be able to access teh internet, XP is hardly
>> a requirement. Even a livecd of any distro would do what you want.
>
> *If* the only requirement was to access the internet, you would be correct.
>
> But, it isn't. :-) I'm trying to assemble a fully functioning system
> for use, not a specialty, does just one thing, system.

What else? Internet, word processing, spreadsheet, music, ....
All on one system.

All I am saying is that you have a desktop there. They know how to click
on icons. There are icons there they can click on. What else do you want
them to be able to do? Edit the registers in XP? I doubt it (but it is
much easier to do in Linux)

>
>> Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
>> XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.
>
> That is on the list, and a couple of people have said that such licenses
> do exist. But I'd prefer to avoid any legal entanglements. :-)
>
> I'm also trying to get the social agency I give these to interested in
> this idea, but so far no luck. It would be nice if they would foot some
> bills for stuff, but that's not likely to happen.

Linux is free.

>
> I also "want" the numbers to the next PowerBall lottery, but I'm not
> likely to get them. <grin> So, I'm looking for alternatives.
>
> I don't have the funds to purchase copies of XP, I have to make use of
> what's available, which is basically my time.

And in general does not take much time.

You have commented that some of the desktops you have seen are no XP
enough. What do you mean? What was missing for you?

>
>>>
>>> Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
>>> satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
>>> it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
>>> legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
>>> for an updated install of XP.
>>>
>>> Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
>>> recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
>>> help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>> seems the logical answer.
>>
>> No, most recipients will NOT know something about XP. They will know
>> something about clicking on an icon and getting something they want to
>> use. Any Linux distro will give them that.
>
> True, they may not, but a dollar will get you a donut their friends are
> likely to.
>
>> Ie, what feature of XP do you expect them to be "familiar" with?
>
> In a very general way, look and feel, not just something specific.

Computers are specific. They are very very literal.

>
>>> It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
>>> on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
>>> possible.
>>
>> You would like to avoid it why? Where else are they going to get the
>> image. (Since your equipenment is old, a bootable usb stick will not
>> work.)
>
> Personal preference, mostly, which is based on not being happy with that
> type of system, both in Windows and Mac worlds.

Sorry, what type of system? CDRoms? There are three ways of getting data
into your system from outside. CD/DVD, usb stick, or network. Since
network requires a working system to use it, which you will not have if
you are reinstalling, that leaves the other two. Since old equipment
will not boot from usb sticks, that leaves one. What other option did
you have in mind?

>
>>>
>>> Based on screenshots, ZorinOS looked really promising, but none of their
>>> releases would install. Lubuntu doesn't recognize the Ethernet
>>> connection. But Ubuntu does, go figure. :-) I've forgotten why
>>> PCLinux doesn't fit the bill. There are some distros that resemble XP
>>> to the user, but they don't fit on a CD, and that's needed for this laptop.
>>>
>>> It's been hit and miss in finding a distro that fits. Damned Small
>>> Linux installed great, but the interface is so different, it would
>>> undoubtedly confuse any recipient or friends thereof. Others I've tried
>>> that did install also had the "strange interface" issue I want to avoid.
>>
>> Like what?
>
> It goes to the "look and feel" comment above. In XP, when you get to
> the desktop, you simply have My Computer (sometimes! <grin> on the
> desktop. With most of the distros you get icons representing all of the
> drives, usually in the lower left corner from what I've seen. And,
> instead of being labeled A, C, D, etc., you have Floppy (far more
> logical I think), but then you move to a cryptic (to most people I
> think) sda0, sda1, etc.

??? Where? I have never had a desktop that did that. Linux does not have
drives or drive letters. It has names. And your filesystem is all one
big thing.

(who has floppies now?)

>
> In general, the names used for many common desktop icons for
> applications may not be familiar with many Windows users.

You mean libreoffice rather than office?

>
> I'm trying to do my best not to cause any heartburn with whomever gets
> the unit. :-)

If you want to change the names you can certainly do that, but believe
me, your users will be smart enought to figure out that libreoffice is
what you click on to get a word processor opened.

>
> I will definitely give the Linux community kudos on the design of the
> icons. Far, far more attractive than the normal Windows and Mac icons.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I'm just offering the labor to get a working system, but I'm not
>>> interested in providing long term technical support. So the KISS
>>> principle *must* apply as of all the OS's I've experimented around with
>>> over the years, I know the least about Linux.
>>>
>>> If you've got any different suggestions/solutions, I'd like to hear it.
>>
>> Sure. Just install one of the livecd versions of linux Any one. Pick the
>> one which has the most letters in common with your name. It will give
>> you a desktop. a browser, an internet connection ( wireless and wired)
>> and an office package (openoffice of Libreoffice often, although even
>> koffice might be enough).
>
> If this was for me, I'd play with all of them and then settle. Looking
> for something like XP would not be a requirement at all. But the
> computers are *not* for me, and like anyone building something for an
> unknown person, I'm trying to anticipate what will fit best with the
> likely/target audience.
>
> As you can see from my sig, I use FOSS software. But LO is having some

What issues?

> issues at the moment, and on an XP system, I'm now installing Kingsoft
> Office. For a Linux install, I'd definitely check out Koffice, or maybe
> just Abiword and Gnumeric. I'd need to check to see if Lotus Symphony
> comes in a Linux version too. But that's putting the cart before the
> horse. :-)

Apparently it does.

[J G Miller]

On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 15:27:14h -0600, Ken Springer wrote:

> Most of that is over my head,
> so it's likely to be over the recipient's head.

What you are trying to do is most commendable and I
do hope that you find a satisfactory solution.

With regards to my suggestions being over the
recipient's head, the recipient will not have
to know anything about what I suggested since
it will be the solution already installed on
the PC.

If you do not know how to install packages and
edit system files, then the whole project is
really beyond your capabilities.

Do you know if there is a Linux User Group in your
area as this is the type of project which the members
should only be too keen to help with and get involved?

PS For icons on the dekstop wallpaper just like in
Windoze XP to double click and fire up an application,
idesk works really well.

[J G Miller]

On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 22:32:26h +0000, UnrUh suggested:

> The easiest thing would be just to use the most popular, kde, and go
> with that, and give them a LiveCD to reinstall from.

KDE4 does not look and feel much like XP though, does it?

Also will not KDE4 be rather too heavy for the hardware specified
which is going to be the showstopper.

For an "out of the box" icewm setup, and I mentioned icewm specifically
because it is a lightweight window manager and it has layout is XP
like with a "start" menu and it has an XP theme to use, then perhaps
antiX could be the solution for the technically challenged?

<http://antix.mepis.ORG/index.php?title=Main_Page>

antiX is specifically designed for older ie slower hardware.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-08, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
> On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 22:32:26h +0000, UnrUh suggested:
>
>> The easiest thing would be just to use the most popular, kde, and go
>> with that, and give them a LiveCD to reinstall from.
>
> KDE4 does not look and feel much like XP though, does it?

Not sure which part of look and feel of kde is not like XP. they have
icons on the desktop, and you click on the icons to run a program. That
is the crucial "look and feel" and that is the same. Yes the icons look
a bit different. Yes, the desktop background looks a bit different. But
why is any of that going to cause problems?

>
> Also will not KDE4 be rather too heavy for the hardware specified
> which is going to be the showstopper.

That may be true.

>
> For an "out of the box" icewm setup, and I mentioned icewm specifically
> because it is a lightweight window manager and it has layout is XP
> like with a "start" menu and it has an XP theme to use, then perhaps
> antiX could be the solution for the technically challenged?
>
> <http://antix.mepis.ORG/index.php?title=Main_Page>
>
> antiX is specifically designed for older ie slower hardware.

OK, never heard of it.

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 4:45 PM, unruh wrote:
> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>> On 6/8/12 2:53 PM, unruh wrote:
>>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:

<snip>

>

> What else? Internet, word processing, spreadsheet, music, ....
> All on one system.

Understood, one of the pluses for doing Linux.

> All I am saying is that you have a desktop there. They know how to click
> on icons.

That is an assumption that dare not be made. :-) I know one of my
systems went to senior citizens that had never owned a computer. How do
you know what they or any user knows?

About a month ago, I met a senior who'd bought her first computer
because "everyone said she needed one". She was totally lost.

> There are icons there they can click on. What else do you want
> them to be able to do? Edit the registers in XP? I doubt it (but it is
> much easier to do in Linux)

I'm looking past just the recipients of the system, to the like helpers
of the recipients. I'm not wanting to give them pause when they are
asked "How do I....?"

>>
>>> Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
>>> XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.
>>
>> That is on the list, and a couple of people have said that such licenses
>> do exist. But I'd prefer to avoid any legal entanglements. :-)
>>
>> I'm also trying to get the social agency I give these to interested in
>> this idea, but so far no luck. It would be nice if they would foot some
>> bills for stuff, but that's not likely to happen.
>
> Linux is free.

I wasn't referring to just the OS, but also things like missing power
cords, USB cables, ink cartridges, etc.

>>
>> I also "want" the numbers to the next PowerBall lottery, but I'm not
>> likely to get them. <grin> So, I'm looking for alternatives.
>>
>> I don't have the funds to purchase copies of XP, I have to make use of
>> what's available, which is basically my time.
>
> And in general does not take much time.

For Linux, you're right. But, if I do install Windows, then there's all
the updates and software to install. I also install the printers, set
the monitor to best resolution, etc. I don't just turn out a
"generically" configured box like you buy from the shelf.

> You have commented that some of the desktops you have seen are no XP
> enough. What do you mean? What was missing for you?

A Utopian situation would be if the Linux desktop was visually and
operationally identical to XP. But, that's not going to happen, so as
close as possible to that is my goal. Now that I've found out about the
themes available, I'm willing to consider putting a Win 7 theme on.
Then potential helpers will still see something more familiar than the
various Linux desktops I've seen so far.

>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
>>>> satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
>>>> it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
>>>> legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
>>>> for an updated install of XP.
>>>>
>>>> Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
>>>> recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
>>>> help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>>> seems the logical answer.
>>>
>>> No, most recipients will NOT know something about XP. They will know
>>> something about clicking on an icon and getting something they want to
>>> use. Any Linux distro will give them that.
>>
>> True, they may not, but a dollar will get you a donut their friends are
>> likely to.
>>
>>> Ie, what feature of XP do you expect them to be "familiar" with?
>>
>> In a very general way, look and feel, not just something specific.
>
> Computers are specific. They are very very literal.

They never do what you want them to, only what you tell them to! LOL

Think of it this way, if you were a forever Windows user, and were asked
to help someone with their Mac, how successful would you likely to be,
assuming you were the average computer user? I stipulate you might not
do so well, having seen this happen with PC users who've switched to a
Mac in my Mac User Group.

>
>>
>>>> It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
>>>> on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
>>>> possible.
>>>
>>> You would like to avoid it why? Where else are they going to get the
>>> image. (Since your equipenment is old, a bootable usb stick will not
>>> work.)
>>
>> Personal preference, mostly, which is based on not being happy with that
>> type of system, both in Windows and Mac worlds.
>
> Sorry, what type of system? CDRoms? There are three ways of getting data
> into your system from outside. CD/DVD, usb stick, or network. Since
> network requires a working system to use it, which you will not have if
> you are reinstalling, that leaves the other two. Since old equipment
> will not boot from usb sticks, that leaves one. What other option did
> you have in mind?

In this case, I'm stuck with a CD. I simply wanted to provide an
operating system disk as opposed to a disk image of a final
installation. When using a disk image system, I've often been forced
into installing items that didn't need fixing, i.e. software, instead of
just installing the OS.

>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Based on screenshots, ZorinOS looked really promising, but none of their
>>>> releases would install. Lubuntu doesn't recognize the Ethernet
>>>> connection. But Ubuntu does, go figure. :-) I've forgotten why
>>>> PCLinux doesn't fit the bill. There are some distros that resemble XP
>>>> to the user, but they don't fit on a CD, and that's needed for this laptop.
>>>>
>>>> It's been hit and miss in finding a distro that fits. Damned Small
>>>> Linux installed great, but the interface is so different, it would
>>>> undoubtedly confuse any recipient or friends thereof. Others I've tried
>>>> that did install also had the "strange interface" issue I want to avoid.
>>>
>>> Like what?
>>
>> It goes to the "look and feel" comment above. In XP, when you get to
>> the desktop, you simply have My Computer (sometimes! <grin> on the
>> desktop. With most of the distros you get icons representing all of the
>> drives, usually in the lower left corner from what I've seen. And,
>> instead of being labeled A, C, D, etc., you have Floppy (far more
>> logical I think), but then you move to a cryptic (to most people I
>> think) sda0, sda1, etc.
>
> ??? Where? I have never had a desktop that did that. Linux does not have
> drives or drive letters. It has names. And your filesystem is all one
> big thing.

Some of the distros I've tried have icons on the desktop, lower left
corner, for the floppy, each hard drive partition, and the optical
drive. I actually used to set my Windows desktop up with those
shortcuts, but I've gotten away from it.

> (who has floppies now?)

Depends on how old the hardware is. :-)

>
>>
>> In general, the names used for many common desktop icons for
>> applications may not be familiar with many Windows users.
>
> You mean libreoffice rather than office?

Ice Weasel instead of Firefox or Chrome, would be another example. And
I suspect many will wonder "Where's Internet Explorer?" But I provide
paperwork that explains what's on the computer not a normal MS program
such as MS Office.

>
>>
>> I'm trying to do my best not to cause any heartburn with whomever gets
>> the unit. :-)
>
> If you want to change the names you can certainly do that, but believe
> me, your users will be smart enought to figure out that libreoffice is
> what you click on to get a word processor opened.

I don't change the names of the apps, as I list them in the paperwork
and give a brief description of what they do.

>
>>
>> I will definitely give the Linux community kudos on the design of the
>> icons. Far, far more attractive than the normal Windows and Mac icons.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm just offering the labor to get a working system, but I'm not
>>>> interested in providing long term technical support. So the KISS
>>>> principle *must* apply as of all the OS's I've experimented around with
>>>> over the years, I know the least about Linux.
>>>>
>>>> If you've got any different suggestions/solutions, I'd like to hear it.
>>>
>>> Sure. Just install one of the livecd versions of linux Any one. Pick the
>>> one which has the most letters in common with your name. It will give
>>> you a desktop. a browser, an internet connection ( wireless and wired)
>>> and an office package (openoffice of Libreoffice often, although even
>>> koffice might be enough).
>>
>> If this was for me, I'd play with all of them and then settle. Looking
>> for something like XP would not be a requirement at all. But the
>> computers are *not* for me, and like anyone building something for an
>> unknown person, I'm trying to anticipate what will fit best with the
>> likely/target audience.
>>
>> As you can see from my sig, I use FOSS software. But LO is having some
>
> What issues?

Seems to be some "regression" issues, things worked in the last version,
but not the current version. I consider the term to be a politically
correct way of "we screwed up".

And new features are seemingly being added, while bugs remain unfixed.
About 3 months ago, I filed a bug for 3.5.0, which another user posted
as being reproducible, yet the bug remains unconfirmed and unfixed as of
3.5.4. There were 3 or 4 other bugs I found but never filed. If they
aren't concerned enough to even confirm a bug, I'm not terribly
interested in spending my time filing them.

Right now, it hung on boot up and opening a fresh text document. Force
quit.

And I'd filed an issue where the phrase a command used on columns gave a
different result than the same command used on rows. What's with that?

There's a mailing list thread with the subject "Is 3.5.4 ready for
business users?" In the thread, I said no, for a couple of reasons
including the one mentioned above. And I also said because of the bugs,
I was installing Kingsoft Office. Not as powerful, but my limited use
has not found the bugs.

>
>> issues at the moment, and on an XP system, I'm now installing Kingsoft
>> Office. For a Linux install, I'd definitely check out Koffice, or maybe
>> just Abiword and Gnumeric. I'd need to check to see if Lotus Symphony
>> comes in a Linux version too. But that's putting the cart before the
>> horse. :-)
>
> Apparently it does.
>
>>
>> In my poking around on the web this afternoon, I've stumbled on some
>> themes to make your Linux install look like either Windows or Mac. I
>> didn't know that was an option, so I'll check that out also.

Just tried Kubuntu, doesn't see the network card. :-(

Haven't read your other post yet, nor the ones from J. G. Miller, but
this computer project has to go on hold for a couple of weeks. Work,
and two computers with higher priority at my end.

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 4:32 PM, unruh wrote:
> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>
> One of the features with Linux is the huge range of options. There is
> not just one desktop for running X, there are many. The two dominant
> ones are kde and gnome, but icewm is another lighter weight one (better
> for slower hardware or limited hard disk)

And what exactly is "X"? Xsession? X Windows?

>>
>> But when you install Windows and OS X, you don't have to go back and
>> edit some installation file to get what you started with out of the box.
>
> That is because, like the old Soviet system, you get one item on the
> store shelves and that is what you have to be happy or otherwise with. I
> remember when I had a collegue come from the Soviet Union, and I took
> him to Eatons here. He spent 4 hours there, and stumbled out, not having
> bought anything because there was too much choice. Under Linux you have
> choice.

And why I'm asking for suggestions, and not taking the first rabbit out
of the hat.

>>
>> If/when I do the Xsession thing and go that way, that would be a plus
>> for the disk image idea of providing the eventual user/owner a means to
>> reinstall everything.
>
> Xsession is the configuration of the screen desktop. Ie, you always want
> it (your people do not want to operate in console only mode.)
>
> The easiest thing would be just to use the most popular, kde, and go
> with that, and give them a LiveCD to reinstall from.
>
> Remember a LiveCD fits on a CD. .8GB. so it will certainly fit on your
> disks.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> One huge problem for me, too many ideas and too little time! LOL
>>
>>

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 4:58 PM, J G Miller wrote:
> <http://antix.mepis.ORG/index.php?title=Main_Page>
>
> antiX is specifically designed for older ie slower hardware.

Downloading now for a looksee when I can get back to this project.

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 4:49 PM, J G Miller wrote:
> On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 15:27:14h -0600, Ken Springer wrote:
>
>> Most of that is over my head,
>> so it's likely to be over the recipient's head.
>
> What you are trying to do is most commendable and I
> do hope that you find a satisfactory solution.

Thanks, and I don't give up easily! <grin>

> With regards to my suggestions being over the
> recipient's head, the recipient will not have
> to know anything about what I suggested since
> it will be the solution already installed on
> the PC.

My concern is if, for some reason, everything had to be reinstalled.
That's one place where a disk image to reinstall solves that issue.

> If you do not know how to install packages and
> edit system files, then the whole project is
> really beyond your capabilities.

From the little playing I've done with Linux, I'd hazard the analogies
that installing packages is similar to installing an exe or msi file in
Windows. And editing the system files similar to batch files and
modifying the registry among other things in Windows. But my knowledge
of Linux terminology is basically nil.

> Do you know if there is a Linux User Group in your
> area as this is the type of project which the members
> should only be too keen to help with and get involved?

There is, but it's more moribund than a herd of Wooly Mammoths. :-( I
joined them, attended one meeting and then work in the summer put the
nix on any other meetings. At the end of the summer, attended one
meeting, and then they lost the use of the meeting locale. Been no
meetings since. :-(

I joined because I wanted to learn more about Linux, but it doesn't look
like group will be resurrected.

> PS For icons on the dekstop wallpaper just like in
> Windoze XP to double click and fire up an application,
> idesk works really well.

On the todo list to check out.

[atec77]

On 9/06/2012 7:27 AM, Ken Springer wrote:
> On 6/8/12 3:01 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>> On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 13:43:26h -0600, Ken Springer explained:
>>
>>> a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>> seems the logical answer.
>>
>> Install an appropriate working GNU/Linux distribution and
>> then change the system Xsession to fire up icewm with the
>> XP theme set as default.
>>
>> Problem solved.
>
> Most of that is over my head, so it's likely to be over the recipient's
> head.
>
>

The recipient is handed a working machine , no need for them to know
more than point and click initially
I install mephis on the free machines and so far no one had problems
understanding it which dispels the need for a windows type interface imho

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Ken Springer]

I have mephis here to try, just haven't gotten to it yet.

How knowledgable were the eventual users of the free machines, if you
have any idea?

[unruh]

On 2012-06-09, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 6/8/12 4:45 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/8/12 2:53 PM, unruh wrote:
>>>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> What else? Internet, word processing, spreadsheet, music, ....
>> All on one system.
>
> Understood, one of the pluses for doing Linux.
>
>> All I am saying is that you have a desktop there. They know how to click
>> on icons.
>
> That is an assumption that dare not be made. :-) I know one of my
> systems went to senior citizens that had never owned a computer. How do
> you know what they or any user knows?
>
> About a month ago, I met a senior who'd bought her first computer
> because "everyone said she needed one". She was totally lost.

Uh, but for those people, the similarity or not to XP would be
irrelevant. They have no experience, so Linux is as mysterious or clear
as anything else, including Windows.

>
>> There are icons there they can click on. What else do you want
>> them to be able to do? Edit the registers in XP? I doubt it (but it is
>> much easier to do in Linux)
>
> I'm looking past just the recipients of the system, to the like helpers
> of the recipients. I'm not wanting to give them pause when they are
> asked "How do I....?"

Then even if you gave them a mac there might be problems. Or if you gave
them XP ( which MS has ended support for) and the helper just uses
Windows 7

>
>>>
>>>> Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
>>>> XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.
>>>
>>> That is on the list, and a couple of people have said that such licenses
>>> do exist. But I'd prefer to avoid any legal entanglements. :-)
>>>
>>> I'm also trying to get the social agency I give these to interested in
>>> this idea, but so far no luck. It would be nice if they would foot some
>>> bills for stuff, but that's not likely to happen.
>>
>> Linux is free.
>
> I wasn't referring to just the OS, but also things like missing power
> cords, USB cables, ink cartridges, etc.

Yes. Do you have a used computer store in town?

>
>>>
>>> I also "want" the numbers to the next PowerBall lottery, but I'm not
>>> likely to get them. <grin> So, I'm looking for alternatives.
>>>
>>> I don't have the funds to purchase copies of XP, I have to make use of
>>> what's available, which is basically my time.
>>
>> And in general does not take much time.
>
> For Linux, you're right. But, if I do install Windows, then there's all
> the updates and software to install. I also install the printers, set
> the monitor to best resolution, etc. I don't just turn out a
> "generically" configured box like you buy from the shelf.
>
>> You have commented that some of the desktops you have seen are no XP
>> enough. What do you mean? What was missing for you?
>
> A Utopian situation would be if the Linux desktop was visually and
> operationally identical to XP. But, that's not going to happen, so as
> close as possible to that is my goal. Now that I've found out about the
> themes available, I'm willing to consider putting a Win 7 theme on.
> Then potential helpers will still see something more familiar than the
> various Linux desktops I've seen so far.

Of course as soon as they try to do something, they would notice the
difference, and might be even more confused. Where is My Computer?

>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now, I have a laptop with both those problems. XP will run
>>>>> satisfactorily on it, I installed one of my personal copies to see how
>>>>> it would perform. But I've no copy (COA sticker satisfies me for
>>>>> legality) of XP to install, and the hard drive is just 10 GB, too small
>>>>> for an updated install of XP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Linux sounds like a viable alternative, but given the odds most
>>>>> recipients will know something about XP, or have friends that do and can
>>>>> help them, a Linux install that to the user is very reminiscent of XP
>>>>> seems the logical answer.
>>>>
>>>> No, most recipients will NOT know something about XP. They will know
>>>> something about clicking on an icon and getting something they want to
>>>> use. Any Linux distro will give them that.
>>>
>>> True, they may not, but a dollar will get you a donut their friends are
>>> likely to.
>>>
>>>> Ie, what feature of XP do you expect them to be "familiar" with?
>>>
>>> In a very general way, look and feel, not just something specific.
>>
>> Computers are specific. They are very very literal.
>
> They never do what you want them to, only what you tell them to! LOL
>
> Think of it this way, if you were a forever Windows user, and were asked
> to help someone with their Mac, how successful would you likely to be,
> assuming you were the average computer user? I stipulate you might not
> do so well, having seen this happen with PC users who've switched to a
> Mac in my Mac User Group.

Never mind, I got handed a mac at a workshop I went to. While behind the
scenes it is Unix, I really did not enjoy using it and was lost for the
first while.

>
>>
>>>
>>>>> It also needs to be easily reinstalled if necessary. A bootable image
>>>>> on CD will fill this bill, but that's something I'd like to avoid if
>>>>> possible.
>>>>
>>>> You would like to avoid it why? Where else are they going to get the
>>>> image. (Since your equipenment is old, a bootable usb stick will not
>>>> work.)
>>>
>>> Personal preference, mostly, which is based on not being happy with that
>>> type of system, both in Windows and Mac worlds.
>>
>> Sorry, what type of system? CDRoms? There are three ways of getting data
>> into your system from outside. CD/DVD, usb stick, or network. Since
>> network requires a working system to use it, which you will not have if
>> you are reinstalling, that leaves the other two. Since old equipment
>> will not boot from usb sticks, that leaves one. What other option did
>> you have in mind?
>
> In this case, I'm stuck with a CD. I simply wanted to provide an
> operating system disk as opposed to a disk image of a final
> installation. When using a disk image system, I've often been forced
> into installing items that didn't need fixing, i.e. software, instead of
> just installing the OS.

Ah, well then you will like the LiveCDs, which are an operating system
in and of themselves. Ie, the user can boot up from the CD and have a
runnning working OS, which they can then install, or renew.

Well, the web says Apache Openoffice is coming out any day now.

[atec77]

no knowledge for many if my 80+ mum used mephis with no experience and
no problems you and you user will manage

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Ken Springer]

Me, yes. A new user, maybe. One thing GUI designers seem to avoid
talking about is that a point and click interface that is intuitive to
one individual is not necessarily intuitive to the next.

As unruh just found out with his Mac experience.

[atec77]

perhaps unruh wasn't a limp wristed mac user from birth ?

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, June 9th, 2012, at 05:57:20h -0600, Ken Springer observed:

> One thing GUI designers seem to avoid talking about is that
> a point and click interface that is intuitive to one individual
> is not necessarily intuitive to the next.

If orangutans can use iPads, then surely ...

<http://news.cnet.COM/8301-13579_3-57431422-37/the-ipad-its-not-just-for-humans-any-more/>

<http://www.foxnews.COM/scitech/2012/05/09/orangutans-at-miami-zoo-use-ipads-to-communicate/>

<http://articles.nydailynews.COM/2011-08-31/news/30114044_1_orangutans-ipad-milwaukee-zoo>

[unruh]

On 2012-06-09, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:

I figured it out. Most people figure it out. It is not "rocket science"
( although the design of it is).

>
>

[Ken Springer]

On 6/8/12 8:44 PM, unruh wrote:
> On 2012-06-09, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>> On 6/8/12 4:45 PM, unruh wrote:
>>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/8/12 2:53 PM, unruh wrote:
>>>>> On 2012-06-08, Ken Springer <word...@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/8/12 9:15 AM, unruh wrote:

<snip>

>> I'm looking past just the recipients of the system, to the like helpers
>> of the recipients. I'm not wanting to give them pause when they are
>> asked "How do I....?"
>
> Then even if you gave them a mac there might be problems. Or if you gave
> them XP ( which MS has ended support for) and the helper just uses
> Windows 7

I think you missed my point. :-) If these folks have problems, aren't
they most likely to call some of their friends who "know computers"?
And which operating system, Windows, Mac, or Linux, are the friends
likely to have experience with? I want to install what the friends are
likely to know.

>>
>>>>
>>>>> Talk to Microsoft. Maybe you can strike a deal with them? Since you want
>>>>> XP, why do you ask in a Linux newgroup? Get XP.
>>>>
>>>> That is on the list, and a couple of people have said that such licenses
>>>> do exist. But I'd prefer to avoid any legal entanglements. :-)
>>>>
>>>> I'm also trying to get the social agency I give these to interested in
>>>> this idea, but so far no luck. It would be nice if they would foot some
>>>> bills for stuff, but that's not likely to happen.
>>>
>>> Linux is free.
>>
>> I wasn't referring to just the OS, but also things like missing power
>> cords, USB cables, ink cartridges, etc.
>
> Yes. Do you have a used computer store in town?

No. Don't even have a decent electronics outlet of any kind. I don't
call Walmart an electronics outlet! LOL I do buy some things from
them, but it's usually via their site to store shipping process.

<snip>

>> A Utopian situation would be if the Linux desktop was visually and
>> operationally identical to XP. But, that's not going to happen, so as
>> close as possible to that is my goal. Now that I've found out about the
>> themes available, I'm willing to consider putting a Win 7 theme on.
>> Then potential helpers will still see something more familiar than the
>> various Linux desktops I've seen so far.
>
> Of course as soon as they try to do something, they would notice the
> difference, and might be even more confused. Where is My Computer?

Exactly, assuming they know what My Computer is. Which is why I'd
prefer XP, but since I can't afford to supply XP, I'm looking at going a
less desirable but workable route.

<snip>

>> Think of it this way, if you were a forever Windows user, and were asked
>> to help someone with their Mac, how successful would you likely to be,
>> assuming you were the average computer user? I stipulate you might not
>> do so well, having seen this happen with PC users who've switched to a
>> Mac in my Mac User Group.
>
> Never mind, I got handed a mac at a workshop I went to. While behind the
> scenes it is Unix, I really did not enjoy using it and was lost for the
> first while.

It still gives me fits too, and I've had this one for 3+ years. I'll
also own up to not having the time to get to know it as much as I'd like to.

If it makes you feel any better, many former PC users hate their new
Macs for the first couple of months, then most of them never want to
switch back.

<snip>

> Ah, well then you will like the LiveCDs, which are an operating system
> in and of themselves. Ie, the user can boot up from the CD and have a
> runnning working OS, which they can then install, or renew.

I do like the LiveCD idea. That's how I've been trying out the various
"colors" of Linux. There's one out there, Ylmf, that looks great from
posted screenshots, but when you run it, it's full of Chinese text.
Really bummed me out, and the visuals were remarkably WinXP.

<snip>

>> There's a mailing list thread with the subject "Is 3.5.4 ready for
>> business users?" In the thread, I said no, for a couple of reasons
>> including the one mentioned above. And I also said because of the bugs,
>> I was installing Kingsoft Office. Not as powerful, but my limited use
>> has not found the bugs.
>
> Well, the web says Apache Openoffice is coming out any day now.

Old enough here to remember the days when "out any day now" was almost a
euphemism for vaporware. So I'll believe it when I see it.

<snip>

[Ken Springer]

Just proves that humans shouldn't be so arrogant thinking they are the
only intelligent lifeform on this planet.

[atec77]

Nothing makes me think all humans display intelligence

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, June 10th, 2012, at 13:29:12h +1000, Atec 77 wrote:

> Nothing makes me think all humans display intelligence

Apparently, 50% of humans are below the average human
intelligence level. ;)

[atec77]

I have sneakers smarter than people I meet on a daily basis

no matter which way the bell swings

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[Aragorn]

On Sunday 10 June 2012 13:53, J G Miller conveyed the following to
alt.comp.os.linux...

The actual distribution is such that there are way more than 50% of the
human population who are below the average human intelligence level, but
the discrepancy is rectified by the degree by which those above the
average human intelligence level are smarter than the rest.

But of course, as we all know, 92.6% of all statistics are totally
inaccurate. ;-)

--
= Aragorn =
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

[atec77]

Truth
lies
and statistics manipulated and not

--









X-No-Archive: Yes

[unruh]

Actually that is not necessarily true. Let say that 99.999 % had an IQ
of 90 and the other .001% had an IQ of 1000. Then 99.999% would have an
IQ below the average. Average is not median.

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, June 10th, 2012, at 21:22:44h +0000, UnrUh suggested:

> Actually that is not necessarily true. Let say that 99.999 % had an IQ
> of 90 and the other .001% had an IQ of 1000. Then 99.999% would have an
> IQ below the average. Average is not median.

My understanding from discussion elsewhere is that the the intelligence
level is defined so that it is a normal distribution, hence the median
and the average are the same.

If that is not correct, then please point me to an authoritative source
of information.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-11, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
> On Sunday, June 10th, 2012, at 21:22:44h +0000, UnrUh suggested:
>
>> Actually that is not necessarily true. Let say that 99.999 % had an IQ
>> of 90 and the other .001% had an IQ of 1000. Then 99.999% would have an
>> IQ below the average. Average is not median.
>
> My understanding from discussion elsewhere is that the the intelligence
> level is defined so that it is a normal distribution, hence the median
> and the average are the same.

No it is not. And it cannot be. You cannot have an iq under 0, and a
normal distribution is defined over the infinite range. IQ is what IQ
tests measure.

[J G Miller]

On Monday, June 11th, 2012, at 19:55:58h +0000, UnrUh stated:

> No it is not. And it cannot be. You cannot have an iq under 0, and a
> normal distribution is defined over the infinite range.

Which infinite range?

Put the terms

iq normal distribution

into your favorite search web engine and take a look at some of
the matches.

[unruh]

On 2012-06-11, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

> On Monday, June 11th, 2012, at 19:55:58h +0000, UnrUh stated:
>
>> No it is not. And it cannot be. You cannot have an iq under 0, and a
>> normal distribution is defined over the infinite range.
>
> Which infinite range?

Minus infinity to plus infinity.

>
> Put the terms
>
> iq normal distribution
>
> into your favorite search web engine and take a look at some of
> the matches.

So?

Here is one of those results:

http://gleigh.tripod.com/normal.htm
The normal distribution is the most important continuous probability
distribution in statistics and is well known to be a good fit in
relation to IQ scores. However, it has been noted more than once that
there seem to be many more children who score exceptionally high ( say >
160 IQ ) than is predicted by the theoretical curve. So you could expect
in practice to find a little raised bump at the top end of an
experimentally gathered set of IQ scores. At the time of writing, I have
not seen an explaination for this.

[J G Miller]

On Friday, June 8th, 2012, at 19:12:58h -0600, Ken Springer explained:

> On 6/8/12 4:58 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>> <http://antix.mepis.ORG/index.php?title=Main_Page>
>>
>> antiX is specifically designed for older ie slower hardware.
>
> Downloading now for a looksee when I can get back to this project.

You should also take a look at this project which uses icewm to create
an XP like desktop (just found it while searching for something else).


<http://sourceforge.NET/projects/lxp/>

They use idesk which I already mentioned as a means of getting Windoze
style desktop icons,

[Ken Springer]

This looks *very* interesting, J G, thanks a bunch.

I briefly scanned the homepage, and would my impression be that this
could be applied to just about any Linux version, or just the Debian
based versions. Understand, I still don't have a handle on Debian vs. X
vs. Y. <grin>

Now, where would I go to learn how do implement something like this?
Remember, I'm about as much a Linux newbie as you can find. LOL

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, June 14th, 2012, at 13:05:28h -0600, Ken Springer explained:

> I briefly scanned the homepage, and would my impression be that this
> could be applied to just about any Linux version, or just the Debian
> based versions.

Just a gentle reminder that Linux is actually just the kernel.

The rest of the system which is contained in the various *distributions*
(viz Debian, Mint, openSUSE, slackware etc) is made up of predominantly
GNU software plus software from major projects such as GNOME, KDE etc.

All GNU/Linux, BSD, and commercial Unix systems follow a similar pattern
of after booting the kernel, starting various daemons (services eg
printer spooling service, mail transfer agents etc) and for graphical
user login a display manager.

The graphical display manager runs a system X11 session script and
passes control when a user logins to that user and then
runs some related scripts depending, by default, on the display
manager running, and for some running a script in the user's
home directory if present or else that of the system default.

These script are almost always Bourne shell scripts and one of
them starts the window manager/desktop environment for
the user.

Some display managers even allow the user, prior to logging
in to select which window manager/desktop environment to run by passing
the choice from a menu as a variable to the X11 session file.

I have to write in general terms here, because the specific details
all depend on which display manager is installed and to some extent
on which distribution is installed.

If you want the most customizable of display managers, then that
remains the mate display manager (formerly gdm but replace in
GNOME by the lacklustre gdm3).

So in order to make use of the the LXP, you need to ensure that icewm,
idesk, and xfe are installed on the system and that the system X11
session file runs icewm by default, or even that icewm is the only
window manager installed.

As suggested the easiest way of achieving that goal would be to install
antiX icewm version.

Then you just need to ensure that the XP theme is installed in the system
icewm themes directory and that the system icewm preferences file uses
that theme by default.

So really what is being done as means of customization is nothing out
of the unusual or very complicated at all.

I have not looked at the contents of the LXP download, but either it
will have detailed instructions on how to do all of the above, or even
just a script to run to install the necessary components and you will
not have to do any editing of configuration files at all ...

> Remember, I'm about as much a Linux newbie as you can find.

Just download the LXP archive file, unpack it, and have a look at the
README file and instructions.

After downloading, at the command line run

tar xvzf lxp-icewm-1.2.30-LookXP_themes.tar.gz

or use some fancy GUI archive manipulation program eg xarchiver
or file roller to navigate the contents.

[Ken Springer]

On 6/14/12 4:09 PM, J G Miller wrote:
> On Thursday, June 14th, 2012, at 13:05:28h -0600, Ken Springer explained:
>
>> I briefly scanned the homepage, and would my impression be that this
>> could be applied to just about any Linux version, or just the Debian
>> based versions.
>
> Just a gentle reminder that Linux is actually just the kernel.

No problem about a "gentle reminder". I freely admit to being "dumber
than a box of rocks" about Linux basics. LOL

As I said, a "box of rocks" here. LOL I certainly have to pick up
more basics somewhere to understand what you wrote.

In looking at the home page of the project, none of the current version
of various versions of Linux are listed, and it's been a number of years
since anything was posted. Yet the SourceForge page has a recent date
for an update. So, it makes me question as to the viability of this idea.

Sure don't want to be a programmer to get this done. Programming
interest at my end died years ago.

[Joe]

I'd try Quelitu Lxde,
http://wavesofthefuture.net/computers/download-telecharger-descargas-free-gratuit-gratis-quelitu.shtml
Its based on Lubuntu and designed to be small and fast on older hardware.

[RayLopez99]

Don't believe this shit. I had old hardware that worked fine with Windows 2000 but failed miserably on all versions of Linux save "Puppy Linux" when run from CD mode only.

If you really love Linux so much, just get modern hardware, load Windows 7/8 on it, then run a Virtual OS like Oracle VM virtualbox on it, which is free and works.

RL