[sf-lug] SF-LUG meeting notes for Monday 18 March 2019

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Bobbie Sellers (bliss-sf4ever at dslextreme.com):
> On 3/19/19 5:03 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> 
>> Falkon (formerly QupZilla) is a pretty nice lightweight Web browser.  Also,
>> again, you spend only a tiny amount of time running the installer and
>> then potentially many years running the distribution.  Aren't
>> your choice of other Web browsers just one easy package operation away?
>> So, why does it matter that you for some reason are dissatisfied with
>> Falkon?
>
> Because PCLinux is an ideal distribution for converts
> from Windows.  I came from the Amiga with a brief stopover
> at Windows XP to make my first Mandriva CDs in 2006
> in order to make the old Great Quality 2.4 Megahertz
> Pentium into a dual boot machine.
> That Windows like interface is one of the purposes for
> which it was designed.     <https://pclosusers.com/>

You seem to have missed the point of the question.  Even most live
distros facilitate installing additional packages during live-distro
runtime, adding the additional package files to the volatile (e.g.,
RAMdisk) storage.  (If on the other hand, the live distro doesn't act
that way, then indeed you could add packages only to an installed
system, there being just some limits to what live distros are designed
to do.)

Without objection, in addition to not saying why you didn't just fetch a
Web browser package you liked better, I note that you didn't say what's
wrong with Falkon in your view.  (No obligation, obviously, but I was
curious.)

Talking about Amigas and Windows XP and Mandriva is all very
interesting, but I'm not at all sure what that had to do with my
question.

> Now Rick, I know all about all the different browsers that can be
> downloaded but does the newcomer to Linux?  I think not.

Indeed.  But you do.  So, if you didn't like Falkon for some reason,
what on earth stopped you from fetching something you liked better?

As we both agree, one of the main use-cases for a live distro is to get
a general sense of what a distro would look and act like if installed,
to decide whether to install it.  You already know what Firefox or
Chromium would look and act like if installed after OS-installation onto
anything:  It'd look and act like a big dumb overengineered Web browser,
the same one it would be anywhere else.  

> Nor does the newcomer know about all the themes that can be downloaded
> and installed as well as other graphical enhancements,

This is likewise true but utterly irrelevant to my point.  If you don't
like a live distro's default KDE theme, it's common sense to install one
you like better rather than to just say 'live distro sux0rs because I
don't like the default theme.'  I mean, really, Bobbie.


> Which is why I am sure that pclinuxos64-kde5-2019.03.iso which is a
> 1.8 GB release is superior to the Darkstar release of 936 MB.

Then, you are sure of something for blatantly illogical reasons.

As I pointed out upthread, the default installation of any distribution
is -- obviously -- just a starting place.  Talking about one
distribution ISO being 'superior' to another just because of the
immediate end-state in the first 20 seconds after installation is just
as idiotic a practice as judging houses by their front doors, and for
the same reason.