Jump to content

A Lighthearted Look at Linux Users


raymac46
 Share

Recommended Posts

Based on my geeking around with window managers lately, I have concluded that you can categorize Linux users into 4 basic groups. There is overlap to be sure but in general a user will spend most of his/her time in one group or other.

 

1. Keyboard Tapping Minimalists

This group likely wants the desktop to stay out of the way when they are getting stuff done. A KTM will likely run a tiling window manager, avoid the use of a mouse, spend most of the time in the Terminal and on the keyboard. They will be an experienced power user in all likelihood.

 

2. Window Manager Configurators

These folks know their way around Linux too, but they don't mind a bit of GUI automation or configuration. They probably use a stacking WM like Flux or Openbox (maybe even Window Maker.) They may have older equipment which benefits from the lighter side of things, or maybe they just like dekeing around with the system and then checking things out in htop. They want to choose their own apps - no pulling in some text editor they don't like.

 

3. Full Service Lightweight Runners

Now we move from window manager to desktop environment enthusiast. But these users want to stay on the light side and maybe use the CLI a bit more. They likely have one of the LX* desktops, or even Xfce or MATE. They choose their apps carefully to match up with the desktop.

 

4. Full Monty Bling Bloaters

These are the hungry hippos of Linux. They love their bling and GUI toys, their compositors and 3D animation. You know their desktops - Plasma, Cinnamon, GNOME. What's a Terminal?

 

I have to confess that although I stray away once in a while I am a let the good times roll FMBB. So sue me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Well you are mostly right but a lot of us evolved over the years. At one time, I was full on bling with compiz cube and all that but I still used terminal applications as well. 

I went from terminal configuration (mostly all that was around then) with full blown bling on Gnome 2.x with compiz cubes and such to windows managers like fluxbox and openbox. Over the years, my machines have gotten a lot more powerful but my workflow has gotten even more minimalist. It doesn't matter if I have the most powerful machine money can buy, I will still use terminal apps except for the browser.

 

I disagree with people running window managers because of older hardware. While that may be the case for some, it's not the case for the majority of WM users. If your hardware is that old, you may not be able to run most of the linux distributions at all. Most only support newer 64bit processors. 

 

Being minimal is a mindstate and your workflow, not because of a limitation. If anything, I feel that my linux usage has evolved into just running terminal apps. It's like in the Matrix movie, all I see is blondes and redheads while looking at the code.

 

 

  • +1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By older hardware I mean something like a C2D that runs 64 bit Linux. The 32 bit stuff isn't really worth having nowadays. But if you have a 10 year old laptop that supports 64 bit I think it would likely work better with a WM than a full blown Cinnamon setup.

One other thought. I believe if you still use Windows you are more likely to go for the full bling bloat in Linux. Maybe to keep other users happy, or maybe you like the Windows paradigm with the taskbar at the bottom and a start button. That's why I like Cinnamon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Well I work on window's systems M-F at work so I am used to their bloated and buggy environment but no matter how powerful the machine, it will always be Linux and i3 window manager for me. I still prefer powershell commands on windows over the graphical methods so I see it more of an efficiency thing.

 

So I run lightweight applications for efficiency over the need to do so. It's faster for me to run a single command instead of clicking 3 or 4 times to do the same thing.

 

I learned a long time ago, all those fancy applications are mostly just running a command in the background with a few switches added. They just add the gui to make it easier to do so. Not all applications but the majority are like this.

 

I can go through k3b and burn a iso to dvd by clicking my way through the application or I can simply run:

 

su -c 'growisofs -Z /dev/dvd=/path/to/iso'

 

Or instead of clicking through etcher or unetbootin, I can burn an iso with

 

su -c 'dd bs=64M if=path-to-iso of=drive-partition'

 

I see it more of a personal preference over needing to run a certain type of environment. Maybe it is just the geek in me :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

Well I work on window's systems M-F at work so I am used to their bloated and buggy environment but no matter how powerful the machine, it will always be Linux and i3 window manager for me. I still prefer powershell commands on windows over the graphical methods so I see it more of an efficiency thing.

 

So I run lightweight applications for efficiency over the need to do so. It's faster for me to run a single command instead of clicking 3 or 4 times to do the same thing.

 

I learned a long time ago, all those fancy applications are mostly just running a command in the background with a few switches added. They just add the gui to make it easier to do so. Not all applications but the majority are like this.

 

I can go through k3b and burn a iso to dvd by clicking my way through the application or I can simply run:

 


su -c 'growisofs -Z /dev/dvd=/path/to/iso'

 

Or instead of clicking through etcher or unetbootin, I can burn an iso with

 


su -c 'dd bs=64M if=path-to-iso of=drive-partition'

 

I see it more of a personal preference over needing to run a certain type of environment. Maybe it is just the geek in me :ninja:

To me it has to be "personal preference" that makes 40 or so key presses sound easier than a few mouse clicks. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

Well I can type much faster than I can navigate, even using shortcuts to launch the application.

You'd have to be pretty darned fast to type forty characters in the time it take me to click the mouse 5 times.  That's about what it takes to open the file manager, select the iso, choose the image writer and choose the destination. And all with one finger instead of ten.😁

Edited by Bookmem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
54 minutes ago, Bookmem said:

You'd have to be pretty darned fast to type forty characters in the time it take me to click the mouse 5 times.  That's about what it takes to open the file manager, select the iso, choose the image writer and choose the destination. And all with one finger instead of ten.😁

 

About 140 wmp on average

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

 

About 140 wmp on average

But you aren't typing words, you are typing commands and file names with crazy punctuation.  How fast can you type "clonezilea-live-2.7.1-22-amd64.iso" and NEVER have a typo?  I had an Aunt who was Stuart Udall's PA when he was Sect of the Interior and she could only type 130 wpm.  Personally, I would never recommend CLI over GUI if it required 140wpm typing skills.🙁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
5 minutes ago, Bookmem said:

But you aren't typing words, you are typing commands and file names with crazy punctuation.  How fast can you type "clonezilea-live-2.7.1-22-amd64.iso" and NEVER have a typo?  I had an Aunt who was Stuart Udall's PA when he was Sect of the Interior and she could only type 130 wpm.  Personally, I would never recommend CLI over GUI if it required 140wpm typing skills.🙁

 

 

No need to. I just type clo<tab> and it autocompletes the name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Then I can hit tab twice and it will list the options to run:

 

BBcKOCZ.png

 

Then I can just hit the first letter of the option and hit tab again to autocomplete and so on ....

 

Oh and you can use arrow keys and enter to select or just autotab it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just posted the original comments for fun. I am sure there are exceptions to the rule. I can't type or spell commands correctly so I mostly stick to GUIs. However I know there are others who can use the Terminal with ease. Nobody should be stereotyped if they don't want to be.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Oh I know. It's just with unlimited choices, it's hard to really categorize any linux user and I tend nitpick on things ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

 

Linux is neat that way and you have options to run it how you like. Nice to have choices.

And I still contend that not using GUI isn't really a matter of it not working, it is strictly a matter of "personal preference".   IMHO, if you had put even a tiny bit of the effort learning a GUI that you have in learning the CLI, then " navigating" it would be a cinch.  You are, of course, entitled to your "personal preference".  But there is a difference between preferring and advocating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
41 minutes ago, raymac46 said:

There are two categories of Linux users - those who categorize other users and those who do not LOL.

 

💯    :hysterical:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Well I would advocate learning linux commands. You do not have to nowadays but its good to know what is going on and how to work in the command line. 

  • Agree 1
  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that using the terminal has its advantages. For example, I made use of the CLI to build my copy of menumaker and then to run it to update the openbox menu. And if you run Arch it is the only sane way to update the packages.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach

Well technically there are some available in the archlinux repos but it is not recommended due to:

 

Quote

Warning: PackageKit opens up system permissions by default, and is otherwise not recommended for general usage. See FS#50459 and FS#57943.

 

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman/Tips_and_tricks#Graphical

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, securitybreach said:

Well I would advocate learning linux commands. You do not have to nowadays but its good to know what is going on and how to work in the command line. 

I'm all in favor of users learning CLI commands.  I use some of them on a regular basis.  But you don't need to abandon using a GUI to do that.  I firmly believe in "the right tool for the job".  Sometimes that's a CLI command but, IMHO, most of the time, for most people, a GUI is better.  As and example, I use the dd command to make backup imgages of my RPi 4 and 400 SD cards.  But I use the Mint GUI Image Writer app to write the img file to the SD cards.

Edited by Bookmem
  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, raymac46 said:

There is overlap to be sure

 

Yep.  I think I'm in both the 2nd group and the 3rd group. And I use CLI for some things (like package management), GUI for others. For some strange reason, the only calendar app I use most of the time is when I type cal or cal -3 in a terminal.

  • +1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, raymac46 said:

I agree that using the terminal has its advantages. For example, I made use of the CLI to build my copy of menumaker and then to run it to update the openbox menu. And if you run Arch it is the only sane way to update the packages.

 

I guess I must be insane then as I use Archup to maintain my main Arch install.

 

https://forums.scotsnewsletter.com/index.php?/topic/56171-window-maker/&do=findComment&comment=464334

 

Archup blockbuster movie

 

😂

  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty schizo when it comes to updates. I use the GUI in Linux Mint and Mageia. I use apt in Debian, and pacman in Arch. I have even used pamac in the Terminal on my Manjaro VBox installation. Whatever works.

I am paranoid enough about Arch updates that I am not sure whether I'd want a nag icon for it.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, raymac46 said:

I am pretty schizo when it comes to updates. I use the GUI in Linux Mint and Mageia. I use apt in Debian, and pacman in Arch. I have even used pamac in the Terminal on my Manjaro VBox installation. Whatever works.

I am paranoid enough about Arch updates that I am not sure whether I'd want a nag icon for it.

 

Archup is pretty much a not needed dock app really as Arch updates occur nearly every day. It just sits there looking grey and when there are some updates it turns that pretty Arch blue. When you click on it it opens up a terminal and runs pacman up to the point where you can choose to update or not. So it is just a tad easier than opening a terminal and typing the pacman commands.

Mind you almost ninety percent of Window Maker dock apps are not needed. Most are just eye candy or time wasters. 🤣

  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
23 minutes ago, raymac46 said:

I am paranoid enough about Arch updates that I am not sure whether I'd want a nag icon for it.

 

I thought about a notifier years ago but then I remembered, there would always be a notification on arch so pointless for me

 

  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...