Linux Mint 7 "Gloria" was released a little while ago, so before it became too old of news, I thought I'd take a whack at experimenting with it for the sake of netbookers everywhere (and for myself, naturally). As I type this on gedit after about two weeks' use, let's just say that the system on my EeePC 1000 HE is, for the most part, rather glorious-- pun intended. As a bonus, I also got Google's Chromium browser to run on it, so keep on reading to find the section on that.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2009-07-10
Member since:2006-02-22
I've just installed on my new laptop - It installed perfectly the default opensource drivers seem to work fine with my graphics card and wireless.
It's suprising how different it feels from Ubuntu Jaunty for example the having a control panel - but son far I like it
Member since:
2008-07-15
To get the optimal battery life, you need to have Eee-control installed to take advantage of Asus's ACPI extensions and bios features. This also enables various other ACPI features such as Wifi, Bluetooth, and other toggles. I have a 1000HE as well and with Eee-control installed, I can easily get 9 hours on a charge. You can find Eee-control here:
http://greg.geekmind.org/eee-control/
Don't quote me on this, but I imagine the Ubuntu 9.04 debs would work on LinuxMint 7 (note you need to install the dkms package first).
As for the Wifi, I'm curious, do you have a Ralink RT2860 or an Atheros AR928X chipset in your 1000HE? I ask because the Wireless connection issues you're having sound a lot like the rt2860, which on Ubuntu at least needs to have its driver updated before it will work properly and, if Linuxmint includes the same version of the rt2860 driver Ubuntu does, an update will help a lot with your connection issues. My 1000HE has an ath9k chipset in it, thankfully, but I've set up Linux on others' with the rt2860 and they're having the same issues you are (long connection times, unreliable reconnect, etc).
Member since:
2007-12-26
I like installing Linux Mint on the computers of users new to Linux. As they are normally put of by strict open-source and codec policy. Also Linux Mint is very easy to use for newcomers.
Myself, I really don't like Linux Mint, for the reason that they really want to shove there brand up you. It's logo is everywhere. All the standard backgrounds feature that ugly logo. They have customised almost everything, sometimes even calling it "Mint edition", when the only difference is that there logo is everywhere. Google is set to a custom , much more impractical, Mint version, so the makers of Mint can get revenue. And it's purposefully hard to change this behaviour.
But besides that, it's a good working distro.
Member since:
2006-01-04
Member since:
2007-12-17
Dude, you should try Sabayon (http://www.sabayon.org). Mint is just a copycat of Ubuntu, doesn't bring anything "new".
Edited 2009-07-10 15:31 UTC
Member since:2006-10-06
Member since:2006-02-22
Member since:
2007-10-09
GCC 4.5.0 will have support for the Atom processor, so maybe that'll help distros like this. Although this being single core might be more of the reason it's not as snappy. (Otherwise I'd really say I find it troubling that it isn't blazingly fast. 1.66 Ghz really should be enough for most stuff.) Then again, considering how slow most distros are in getting GCC 4.4.0 (most still don't have it), I wouldn't hold my breath. 
You can get a better battery than just the stock 6-cell, I think, 12-cell perhaps?
Chrome on Windows does feel a lot snappier than Firefox, and FF3.5 (strangely) did seem to slow down on startup some single core XP machines of mine although in fairness FF3.5 is better in various ways.
Nice review overall.
Member since:
2006-10-06
But still disappointing to see hardware glitches and weird network issues right off the bat. I keep looking for that easy to use Linux that might tempt me to get a refurbished netbook - but I'd want to use the whole machine, not just some of it.
Still, I like the ease of use concept of Mint.
Member since:2008-07-15
Hmm, perhaps what you should do is get a referbished netbook and ask someone who knows Linux to get everything working, or buy a netbook with Linux pre-installed and configured. As a general rule, all the hardware in these netbooks does work fine under Linux, the issues mostly being outdated or nonexistent drivers on the default installs. Windows is no different really, try installing a base winxp and see how ready it is to work out of the box (not talking about your restore disks here, but a flat out basic XP disk). Even Win7 on my 1000HE needed a driver for ACPI and to have Eeectl configured before everything worked as it should and, on balance, I actually needed to do less tweaking to Linux than I did to either Windows revision to get things working the way I wanted.
It mostly comes down to the sheer variations in hardware, although one would think that some could concentrate a bit more on Netbooks as they, at least, are similar internally. Still, neither Windows nor Linux have the ease of install that Mac OS X does for the simple reason that there is just so many hardware combinations.
Member since:2006-05-28
Member since:2007-01-01
Member since:2008-07-15
Member since:2009-06-30
I really didn't mean to fuss, but I hadn't seen a post by Jordan before and wanted to bring it up. I really wasn't trying to troll or bother people. I love OSNews, and don't consider myself a grammar nazi. Everyone makes mistakes. I just thought it was worth bringing up if Jordan is new. Thats all.
Member since:2007-01-01
Member since:
2007-01-01
http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/screenshots/index.p...
From 7 back to Mint 2. Interesting!
Member since:
2006-01-09
I use Mint on an hp 2140 netbook and it all worked right out of the box. I installed it using a USB CD and have it installed to an SD card, as I have OSX as my main HD in this unit. It works really well off my 16GB class 4 card. I want to see how much faster it is on a class 6. If I didn't use this machine as my main machine and use so much of OSX, I'd use Mint. I may use it to do some java development, as OSX and eclipse seems slower than mint and eclipse from the SD card (which doesn't seem right now, does it?)
Member since:
2009-07-11
I would like to endorse the earlier post which criticized the poor writing of this article.
This could and should have been edited. It's rambling and contains elementary errors.
"based off of": hello? Does this mean based on?
"elegace" ?
"kafuffle" : should have been kerfuffle?
The question about whether this was an English lesson is rather stupid. Correct use of English indicates some minimum level of professionalism and education.
I suspect the author didn't get paid for this. He certainly should have been paid for it and OSNEWS shouldn't have published it without editing it.
It does matter.
Member since:2005-10-11
I think OSNEWS is community driven?
How about you make the corrections and submit it to Thom or Kroc.
Although English is spoken around the globe it is not everyone primary language.
Or Jordan being an OSNEWS editor can take your advice and just correct the article.
Edited 2009-07-11 01:12 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
How about this scum bag, maybe after being here for more than 1 day and contributing some articles to the site - then you might have a 'right' to steam roll a community members contribution.
I find it funny that you register on this site only to make one comment about the the quality of the 'English'. For me, I liked the article, it was readable and quite frankly who gives a shit about the grammatical errors - it is understandable, he was able to communicate his ideas, so quite frankly your 'views' are without any merit.
Member since:2006-08-23
> who gives a shit about the grammatical errors
Lots of us do. I care a great deal, for instance.
Errors make the language much less readable. For those of us who know how to use the language correctly, they are intensely irritating and make a piece of text almost painful to read.
Errors impair communication. They are not arbitrary rules, to be ignored; the difference between "its" and "it's", for instance, is important, because "its" and "it's" mean two totally different things.
You would not forgive someone who sometimes said "ATI" when they meant "nVidia", or who kept mixing up "Linux" and "BSD". You'd call them a fool and ignore what they wrote. Well, "its" and "it's" are just as different, as are "there" and "their", or "there's" and "theirs".
There are rules and standards for a reason, and the reason is that they make communication more clear, less ambiguous and easier for the recipient, the reader, to understand.
Misuse and mangling of language mark the writer out as someone of below-average intelligence or poor education. In a comments board, someone who can't spell or doesn't know grammar is someone I can probably safely ignore; they have branded themselves as a fool.
Learn the rules. Use them. And prepare to be mocked, vilified or ignored if you don't.
But in an article, in a published work, for such errors to persist makes me think that the piece is not worth reading, and it makes the publishers look bad.
There is a rider to this, which is that I am a native English speaker. I do not expect perfection from someone to whom English is their second or third language. That includes, in this instance, the site editor - although Thom's written English is excellent and very nearly flawless.
However a name like Jordan Cunningham sounds to me like a British or American name. I don't know this, but it seems a reasonable guess. In that case, I expect native fluency.
Member since:2008-12-06
I thought I might address your critisizms of my use of the English language (I'm the Jordan Spencer Cunningham in question despite my comment username being displayed as "weildish"):
I'm an American citizen, and I happen to be very fluent in the English language-- definitely better than ~80% of the US population is, at least. I cringe as you have while talking to many of them online. However, I understand and will be the first to admit that I don't understand the rules perfectly, and then there are some rules that I throw out for the sake of a style of writing or simply because I feel they don't matter; I want to say things a certain way, and if my readers can understand it, I'm happy to trample a few rules. I am a creative writer by nature and not one to hold strict to the rules, but I still try to maintain a certain standard. You have to admit that I am not as most of the US population seems to be with their language. I love English-- how it is so flexible and how one can explore it, even break through it to yet unknown vistas.
I am happy to better my English, and I appreciate constructive criticism. Please understand that I can only do so much as an editor, and even though I proofread my work multiple times before posting, I usually won't pick every mistake up (also, I often skip over known mistakes simply because I'm used to bending the rules for my creative work).
I will gladly accept future criticisms in email if the criticizer explains the rules behind these criticisms, but please leave criticism on the author's language use out of the comments from this time forward. Thank you.
PS-- Kerfuffle and kafuffle are interchangable. I consider them slang (as do many others), and both are acceptable if the occasion permits; even multiple dictionaries agree with me if you'd like to be technical.
Edited 2009-07-11 22:00 UTC
Member since:2006-04-17
English is not a controlled language. There is no governing body that dictates "correct" English. There are hundreds of different dialects of English, each with its own set of "rules".
You would not forgive someone who sometimes said "ATI" when they meant "nVidia", or who kept mixing up "Linux" and "BSD". You'd call them a fool and ignore what they wrote. Well, "its" and "it's" are just as different, as are "there" and "their", or "there's" and "theirs".
I've never seen an instance of interchanging (their, they're, there), (it's, its), or (you're, your) where context didn't provide the intended meaning. Saying "nVidia" when you mean "ATI" is a clear semantic difference. Not even remotely an adequate analogy.
Errors make the language much less readable. For those of us who know how to use the language correctly, they are intensely irritating and make a piece of text almost painful to read.
The purpose of language is to communicate. When there is coherence, the communication is successful. Despite you being annoyed by "errors", this article is perfectly coherent...the intended meaning is adequately conveyed.
Member since:
2006-08-23
I find this a very odd review.
It praises the product highly, yet makes many criticisms. Indeed, more failures are pointed out than successes.
It mentions features that were not tested, but dismisses them as unimportant. It points out ways that this product fails in comparison to rivals - notably, battery life - yet still recommends the distro.
It also seems to lack comparisons to more directly-equivalent rivals, such as vanilla Ubuntu; more saliently, it would have been useful to compare Mint directly against netbook-focussed distros such as EasyPeasy.
I find the described problems with networking, for instance, very troubling; the author says they've been resolved, but does not seem to know how or by what, and doesn't seem to care. That sort of thing is going to be very important to prospective users; merely sidelining it or ignoring it is not an acceptable response.
I am left uncertain of the conclusion; whereas the writer certainly seems to like Mint, I have a worrying feeling that they have not compared it fairly and squarely against either Windows, other general Linux distros or indeed other netbook distros. I also got the impression that the author was content to live with limitations and missing functionality that I, for one, would not accept.
If some hardware doesn't work, a good review explains why and details how to fix it. It does not say "but I don't use that, so it's OK."
I fear that this means that, as a review, the article has rather failed in its mission.
Member since:2009-07-11
I also had the same problems with this article that you did---like --what exactly WAS the point of all this?
"Though Linux Mint 7 wasn't yet included in the default options of the program{unetbootin} (it comes with a preset list of distributions to use), I was still able to download the image and install it on the USB drive from that" --just because were ABLE to do something doesn't necessarily mean it's going to work and we have no idea if this was compared to UNR or if Ubuntu was installed via unetbootin...
Member since:
2005-11-19
Member since:2008-07-15
That wasn't a license condition, it was just one of the developers of LinuxMint making a personal request that you not use it unless you support his views. Plain stupid imho, as such a philosophy demands conformity to a certain viewpoint which is basically against the spirit of foss, and should be ignored.
Member since:
2008-11-17
Member since:
2005-10-12
Member since:
2006-01-04
but I'll add my 2 cents to this article...
I installed mint after seeing this article out of curiousity and so far I'm very impressed.
there could be more nautilus scripts by default but I'm very impressed with mintupload, it fits my needs perfectly.
also the menu and control panel are very thoughtful, expect the menu lacks a simple method to make keyboard shortcuts for programs it's very easy to use and quite effective.
the software repository is of course the same as ubuntu but the special app that shows screenshots and so on works perfectly well and I actually got hinted at one or two apps I really like that I didn't know before so it's a good tool but it's still missing some entries. it currently has about 500. I think if it has 800 entries or so it might be really useful for the linux newb in about any scenario.
so I'd give this distro a 9 of 10.
also I have to note it was very simple to install the alsa-driver snapshot package to get my Creative X-Fi to work which I never could do quite right using ubuntu (maybe that was just my fault but still just note that it works and is as easy as ./configure && make install && modprobe ....)
the performance is also quite good on my desktop pc and the menu offers the ability to select programs for autorun with a simple right click which gets my torrent program and so on running really well.
all in all I would recommend it over any other distro I tried so far and I tried about all there is.
EDIT:
Oh right...the default programs for video playback didn't work very well for me, especially concerning subtitles...but vlc works fine as expected so I recommend to install it.
Edited 2009-07-13 11:50 UTC