Serious opinion?

why

sauce?

stop trying to run non-legacy software on legacy hardware faggot

it's for retards, better use arch linux, you will understand how linux works and you will learn hacking and pentest, try it!

Attached: 1554828834750.png (1024x719, 890K)

didn't they already completely drop 32 bit?
i can't find any 32 bit iso on ubuntu.com

Fuck! Dropped. Can’t function without 32-bit.

Unironically one of the goto distros in the just werks department. I'd say Fedora and maybe Manjaro are in the same level.

They dropped 32-bit iso images but supported installing 32-bit libraries if you needed them. Now they are axing 32-bit support completely which means no more running 32-bit legacy programs at all.

Vanilla just works. The flavor distros are usually better.
It's bloated though, and probably because of this, it works.

who cares about 32 bit
get an even remotely modern pc and it won't be a problem

its great. just give it a go on a live cd

Having a modern pc doesn't mean that old programs magically become 64-bit.

The loss of 32 bit support is a bummer, but regardless it is the sweet spot in terms of user-friendliness, compatibility, and configurability.

Bloated and includes non-free. Only good for introduction to GNU/Linux.

Ubuntu is bad because of gnome

Posting this from my 32 bit Thinkpad X60 running Slackware Linux. Come and try to take this thing away from me and see what happens.

Attached: 2019-06-18-205444_1024x768_scrot.png (1024x768, 408K)

it´s fucking great and it just works
only retards talk shit about ubuntu

i've never encountered any linux software that is 32-bit only

Ubuntu is fine.

PCSX2
>anything with apt
>working
Big laugh. Don't even make me talk about them forcing dash down my throat even if I SPECIFY to sue bash in my script.

why don't you install 64 bit on it then if you that much ram
also based s4s poster

Wine requires 32-bit libs to support old vidya.

32-bit dosbox works better than the 64-bit version.

The X60 has a soldered on CPU and 64 bit models are uncommon. Fortunately, the T60, AKA the greatest laptop ever made doesn't have this problem as it does let you replace the chip with a 64 bit one, however, at that point you're forcing yourself to work with an architecture with a higher memory footprint when you're limited to 3GB of RAM anyway. Plus I hate dealing with multilib but that's not as relevant.

Why tf are all you niggers bitching about 32 bit compatibility? you can add the i386 repos really fucking easy. Having a 32 bit OS is retarded unless youre running off of an SBC, a VM or a rooted android phone. Plus Lubuntu still supports 32 bit as well as other well known Debian distros.

*until 2021

They are completely removing 32bit packages from the repos and telling people to run shit in a 18.04 container.

works for me.
I like it especially now that they've added a "minimal install" checkbox to the installation process.

t. guy who distro hopped a lot in his youth

Old videogames.

Use any flavor.

Official i386 libs will dissapear from the main repos.

I had 64bit ubuntu on my t60 and it ran like trash

It's literally fine. It's everything you want about Linux without having to tinker.

> and 64 bit models are uncommon
no they're not, I bought 3 64-bit X60 on ebay in one month, look harder faggot, 32-bit is dead

well at least will not drop i386... r-right?

You won't do shit you fat fucking NEET.

don't worry. Nobody wants to hear it anyways.

It's great, lots of community support and help. Ignore people screeching about other distros. I currently use Manjaro because it's less autistic Arch, but Ubuntu is something I always can fall back on

I don't really like it, but it has its uses. I use it whenever I need to use proprietary software that doesn't run on the BSDs.
That's probably its best use: for closed-source stuff, games, etc.

It's not bad. I've actually just come back to Ubuntu, currently on my new laptop.

Over the span of 3-4 years: Ubuntu => Mint => Manjaro => Mint => Debian => Ubuntu.

There are better options on every level of analysis, except for adoption by the masses
But it isn't that big of a mess as anons try to meme it

You do realize 64 bit processors can run 32 bit applications right? The only dropped supoort for 32 bit *architecture*

you know that without 32bit libs you can't run a lot of applications right?

Only closed-source applications are affected.

it's good, and some "Linux" things are made exclusively for Ubuntu only, because it's popular.

just for ubuntu or just for .deb packages??

Attached: 1556188682997.jpg (1920x1080, 129K)

Some deb packages are actually unable to run on Debian proper because they're made to target Ubuntu specifically.

it's good, I'm using it right now.

this even other distros have to "hack" the binaries to be able to use them.

Ubuntu 10 should update to latest after installation

ubuntu is bad for the same reason why it works so well, hope that helps OP

Bad? Not really
Bloated? Yes

>muh sekrit klub xd

Ended up back on Ubuntu after a year or so of Fedora, then Arch, then Debian. Ubuntu does maintain (some) newer packages than even Debian Unstable and apparmor seems to JustWerk. As other have said, quite a few packages are targeted for Ubuntu and require no fucking around to get to work correctly.
Keep in mind, you can still configure Ubuntu as much (or little) you wish. I completely remove snapd in favor of a few flatpaks, and prune a lot of packages I don't use.

>hurrr durrr guise do it fit in yet

yes. canonical is shit. no need to deal with them when you have de jewed ubuntu and manjaro.

shieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet

Attached: 1556255378530.jpg (1080x1080, 215K)

FUCK UBUNTU
AND FUCK 64BIT

>Too poor to afford anything newer than an IBM T42

It's easy to install, comes with a variety of pre-configured DEs, and can be as minimal as you want it. It also gets excellent developer and community support due to its popularity. No, it's not perfect, but there's a damn good reason people use it.

fpbp

One good reason to use it is for its exclusive terminal program called the Task Selector, or tasksel.

Rather than having to go hunting for programs in a graphical package manager, or having to look up package names online to use apt, you can just use apt to install tasksel and from there, you can choose any DE, you can choose any LAMP component, OpenSSH and a bunch of other common things that people would typically install for home desktop use, server applications, children's educational stuff (Edubuntu's software is stil available through tasksel, even though Edubuntu itself is abandoned).

Debian testing is better, it's just ubuntu minus everything that makes it feel gross

Samefagging for attention?

Also,
>Family Planning Benefit Program
Sure sounds like your parents missed out on that.

Honestly, I'd say Debian stable's way better than Debian testing. I mean Debian stable is stable, obviously, while Debian testing is pretty much Archbuntu.

it's good for getting shit done. And yes, you can rice it, I am using a customized i3 (ugly as fuck but it werks).

Also, my interest is Emacs, not Linux. PPA are good enough.

Gnome is a bad desktop environment. For a Linux distro it consumes a hell lot of RAM and CPU power. PPAs and similar solutions are a pain in the ass if the package isn't available in the normal repository. It comes preinstalled with garbage, The animations are clunky. They did shady stuff in the past with that Amajew search thingy. Ubuntu is the "go to distro" for beginners, unfortunately it is a crappy experience with that huge gay bar on the left side instead of some Windows-like preconfigured DE like KDE Plasma

Attached: 1559529712889.gif (280x200, 1.88M)

I guess it depends on what kind of release schedule you prefer to use software on, which in turn largely depends on the purpose of the host system but also depends partly on personal taste.

I prefer the testing branch because I want my software to default to being as close to bleeding edge as possible without winding up with a completely broken system. I don't mind if there are small intermittent failures here and there as long as I get all the latest features. If a particular package persistently misbehaves, I can just downgrade it. The reason I take this point of view toward administrating my system is probably because my system is a PC. In the case of a server, I'd probably prefer stable because I don't expect to interact with it as much and need it to stay up withour my manual intervention.

>Gnome
you know you can use Ubuntu with KDE, LXDE, ...
we are talking about the whole distro here, not about the "flavors"

Ubuntu is not just Gnome. They are one of the few distros to give each spin a whole new distro name, but they are share the same ubuntu repos.

Gnome is far better to use than kde/xfce on a laptop. it works a lot better with minimal mouse(trackpad) interaction.

its basically that "it looks good, it works" shit but the only thing holding it down is the ram usage

>unfortunately it is a crappy experience with that huge gay bar on the left side instead of some Windows-like preconfigured DE like KDE Plasma
>No KDE Plasma in Kubuntu
>No Xfce in Xubuntu
>No Budgie in Ubuntu Budgie Remix
>No LXDE/LXQT in Lubuntu
>Noo lazy to type apt-get install followed by the name of his preferred DE
You went full retard there.

1-1.5gb ram is nothing to worry about on any modern computer. obsessing over it is pure autism

>I prefer the testing branch because I want my software to default to being as close to bleeding edge as possible without winding up with a completely broken system
So why didn't you just use Arch's stable branch?

Linux is nice, but you Jow Forumsays shill for it too much.

I thought we're speaking just about Ubuntu here. The OP has the logo an name of Ubuntu. Nowhere do I see anything mentioned about the alternations.
I quite like Kubuntu and if I weren't a virgin who wants frequently updated software, I migth even use it.

>Gnome is far better to use than kde/xfce on a laptop
The huge ass bar on the left surely isn't good for my tiny 12,5" screen, but I am aware that you can change it.

>1-1.5gb ram is nothing to worry about on any modern computer.
Especially now that Ubuntu only supports modern computers with 64-bit processors and more than 1 GB of RAM installed.

yeah that big bar ubuntu places isn't, but that's not gnome default and its easy to remove

I only hit 1GB ram with Firefox or similar open. RAM usage is comparable to KDE.

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-06-18 21-49-25.png (1920x1080, 3.4M)

Then you still have the bar on top which eats even more workspace.
If I remember correctly I was never able to just get everything I need on a minimal bar on the bottom with everything included ilke in W10. That's why it's KDE for me now. I also don't need to install 999 Gnome "extensions" I think they were called just to get some more functionality. There are more reasons than that why I dislike Gnome but that was the main thing for me.
Pic related. I was never able to simply get something like this.

>That's why it's KDE for me now
Then why didn't you just download and install Kubuntu, or better yet, open Ubuntu's terminal and type "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop"

It is okay. Not good but not completely horrendous. The only problem I have with it is that it takes away the most beautiful thing in the world. The fucking terminal.

Everything you do is accessed via a GUI. Wanna make a boot stick? better use the utility they say instead of using 'dd'

they hide the terminal from you and when you need to use it, you have no idea what you are doing

Oops uploaded the wrong screen. Here we go.

That's what I did in the end and I never looked back.

Attached: Screenshot_20190619_065622.png (1366x311, 128K)

yeah I don't like it either that's why I use i3, but gnome + maximised windows + workspaces is still much faster to work with than kde by using default keybindings.

>provide GUI versions of some utilities
>terminal is somehow unusable
it's literally the same terminal with the same access as any other distro, Terminal on Gnome, Konsole on KDE, etc.

honestly Fedora and openSuse are better

>That's what I did in the end and I never looked back
>Deleted old image of his Arch dock
Nice cop-out. You just installed Arch over Ubuntu because you're an idiot who can't type

im not an arch autist, more of a fedora guy myself

Are you retarded? I switched from Ubuntu to Kubuntu and then to Arch with KDE. We were mainly discussing the things that come with Ubuntu/Gnome.

So why delete your previous pic of your Arch start button? :^)

Just finished installing Ubuntu 19.04.

I used to be good at that shit, but now with UEFI I don't even know anymore.

Pretty comfy once it's set up though