Mint Cinnamon isn't too bad if you're making a jump from Windows because the User Interfaces are so similar. It's what we have on our school's computers when we're not using Windows in CS class.
. Since I tried dslinux for the first time I always wondered how it feels using a real linux distro so I tested kali (former backtrack linux) in the recommended way, through a live dvd/live usb, and I liked what I saw. Now one year later I'm here still using it and since the developers have improved the distro pretty much I think that I gonna stick to it for a good time. Maybe in the future I also test Arch linux since it is friendly wth low specs machines like mine (Intel NUC).
I'm DYING to use Arch right now! I've probably spent 40 hours or so trying numerous attempts to install Arch onto my External Hard Drive and it's been an utter failure. Let me just tell you, never consult the Ubuntu Forums because they NEVER help!
I'm almost ready to try that, considering my Arch situation. What's the difference between that OS and Arch? Is there really any?
I tried Debian, but I'm not a big fan of Gnome and the way it operates. I definitely think you should give it a try, though. I just didn't like the desktop environment because I'm that guy lol. I know a lot of people prefer Gnome over the others, however.
If it's just the Desktop Environment, that's an easy fix. Pretty trivial to install, say, XFCE or LXDE, or whatever. As for Gnome, are you talking 2.0 or 3.0? I enjoyed 2.0 back when it was the standard DE for Ubuntu, but 3.0 seemed to be pandering to tablet users.
2.0 was great in my opinion, 3.0 is doo-doo butter. There's something about 3.0 that I don't like, especially the customization. There's a very small and fixable issue, but when I hover over the activities button, it thinks of it as a click. I'm pretty sure it's a hotspot. I don't like it, and that kind of bugs me. The customization feels very limited to me. I feel as if customizing the windows is a bigger hassle than it should be. The biggest peeve of mine is the desktop. I can't show the desktop files without getting certain applications to change that. Customizing Gnome to feel like another Environment that's out of the box is a bit too much for me. But that's just what I think. I can definitely see why some people love it.
I can't remember if I even tried 3.0, or if I just read about it and knew immediately that it was not gonna be a DE for me. I was immediately turned off by Unity for what I perceived to be a DE that was too focused on tablet devices, so I thought going back to Gnome would be the solution. Who'd have guessed that Gnome 3.0 would've been even worse in that regards? Seriously, why call it Gnome if you're completely changing the philosophy of the DE? I switched to XFCE at that point and didn't look back.
Yeah, calling Gnome 3.0 was a horrible mistake. If you were to look at the 2.0 & 3.0 side-by-side, you wouldn't even think 3.0 would change so much. I'd even go so far as to say they tried to go for an Android look, because honestly, that's how it feels. I don't think a DE should feel like Android, and they accomplished that.
When I had first used Biebian, I started to sing like crazy and I noticed I developed a mangina. Horrible experience. 10/10 would do it again
