Distrowatch review grumbles

[PPC]

@ anticapitalista:
I was oversimplifying in my remarks about that particular review- in a way you can say that "frugal install" and "remaster/persistence" and "snapshot" are "tools", even if not "MX tools" the reviewer mentioned... and I would say tools, that someone, for example, used to Win10 would not know about, or not even realize how useful are, nor how to use...
The guy mentioned "sysvinit", yes, I forgot to say that. He also said MX came from Mepis and antiX. The guy is very technically savvy, what's why I was a bit shocked by his opinions about the tools and the his comment that some tools solved problems the user would not have if not using this particular Distro. I still can't figure what the guy is talking about...
By the way- I read most of the yt video's comments and they vary- there are people praising MX, others trashing it... It a way it's worst than these bad Distrowatch reviews. there are comments like saying MX is "ugly" !!!

[Fibogacci]

... MX is based on Ubuntu Stable, that's all. ...

Debian Stable

[MAYBL8]

People are nit picking when all they can say is a Distro is ugly or something about a tool that helps it users.
You can make any distro look any way you want. You can even make it look like Windows or a Mac.
All of that is not important. What is important is I can turn on my Computer every day and not have to worry it won't turn on or some virus attacking me today. I can get my work done and worry about the important things in life.
My 2 cents
Thanks

[PPC]

Hi! Sorry if this is a (quite a) bit off topic- I'm not talking about a "distrowatch review". My native language is portuguese and I recently saw, a MX review on a brasilian tech Youtube channel- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwzYZ-jCGNM
As far I as know it's not subbed in english...
What got my attention was this- the guy, not really trashing MX, complained about the sometimes bad looking icon theming and also said that MX Tools sometimes helped fix problems the user would not have if not using MX!? I was like WTF on that comment? I agree with some of the guy's remarks- that MX is Debian with some extra tools, XFCE DE and ARC theme and papirus icon theme. He is 100% correct... but what he didn't say is that MX runs like a dream, it's not just a patchwork of everything he mentioned, but a harmonious mix of everything that makes the MX much better than the sum of all it's the parts... What comments can I make in his video to try to change the guy's mind?

P.

Objection: he's not 100% correct. MX is based on Ubuntu Stable, that's all. He (and you) aren't taking into account all the packaging work done by Stevo (and perhaps others?) to add new apps that aren't in Stretch, provide updated, newer versions of older versions that are in Stretch's repos, provide up-to-date patched kernels, and (as you say) ensure that everything "just works" on as many hardware platforms in the World as possible. And that's only one of many things that sets MX aside from Debian and many other distros. The work by the antiX "crewe" to make MX lean and mean so it runs even on old Pentium II boxes, little netbooks and notebooks with Atom processors and low-end Celerons, and fairly low RAM is another. The MX manual is yet another: how many other distros come with a built-in, detailed user manual available at the touch of an alt+F1 keystroke combination?

Ubuntu is also based on Debian if I recall correctly. Is Ubuntu merely Debian with some additional orange and black theming and a few add-ons? When it comes down to it, all Linux distros are ultimately based on Linus Torvald's kernel, Richard Stallman's ports of Unix command-line apps, plus XFree86, a desktop environment and a window manager added. Yet Ubuntu is different than Mint which is different than PCLinuxOS which is different than Puppy... you get the idea.

Other than that' tell him what you just said here about MX running like a dream and the harmonious mix and the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

Sorry but I was under the impression that MX is based in Debian, not "Ubuntu". and please, read my replay to anticapitalista. I was oversimplifying... I was not attacking, in any way MX, or antiX. I love and use both OS's... I used the phrase "100% correct... but..." as a figure of style, ok? Thecnicaly, MX is Debian, with a lot, lot, lot of work done over it... Debian does not "run" on my atom netbook... it crawls... antix "runs" on it... In the same way win10 does not "run" on my desktop, but MX does... Sorry if what I said (trying to get arguments for MX) seemed I was, in any way attacking MX... People- read not just the text, but try to capture the spirit of what I was asking, please...

[JayM]

Yes, MX is based on Debian Stable, and emphatically not on Ubuntu (my mistake on my initial reply, sorry.) Yet Ubuntu is also based on Debian. PCLinuxOS is based on Mandriva/Mandrake as is Mageia, What I was saying is that the differences between MX and Ubuntu, and between PCLOS and Mageia, are almost like night and day. "Based on" doesn't mean "equals", is what I mean. From how you described the review the person was basically saying that MX is nothing more than regular Debian Stable with some added tools and Xfce. Both you and I know that that's not the case. I'm not arguing with you really, but with that reviewer. And one of the things you could tell him is what I said: "based on" isn't the same thing as "the same as."

[JayM]

... MX is based on Ubuntu Stable, that's all. ...

Debian Stable

Correct, and fixed in my reply above (I had a Senior Moment, I guess.)

[dolphin_oracle]

Just a reminder, the original idea behind the thread was to monitor reviews and see if there were issues we could fix. Commentary on the reviews is fine, but let's try not to get carried away commenting about the reviewer.

[Stevo]

You should probably spin off the YT video into a separate thread.

I'm particularly interested in exactly what problems they think that MX tools address that are caused by MX and not experienced by Debian XFCE users. Maybe the panel location? Yet Debian users may also wish to move the panel easily to the sides or bottom of the screen, as well as save the configuration with a mouse click, so that's nonsense.

[colin_b]

Version: 18.2
Rating: 1
Date: 2019-04-09
Votes: 0

It has lower performance and boot time according to Xubuntu. Installing the Nvidia 1050 driver was problematic, I could easily install it on Xubuntu. Maybe there are solutions, but I don't recommend for the end user.

It has lower performance and boot time according to Xubuntu

[dolphin_oracle]

Version: 18.2
Rating: 1
Date: 2019-04-09
Votes: 0

It has lower performance and boot time according to Xubuntu. Installing the Nvidia 1050 driver was problematic, I could easily install it on Xubuntu. Maybe there are solutions, but I don't recommend for the end user.

It has lower performance and boot time according to Xubuntu

well, the boot time under sysVinit is a little slower than the systemd boot time (on MX and Xubuntu) on my machine, so I guess accurate. Nvidia is a little problematic right now too as some systems require an xorg.conf and some don't (and in fact, it causes problems).