I enjoyed reading through this and the points were good. My view on this is like a scale, currently the scale is closely balanced. If the focus (weight) is shifted to the user interface the scale is then unbalanced, becoming more like ubuntu as said above. This is one reason why I and others dislike ubuntu. It doesn't work well because it is focused on physical appearance. Then when you change ubuntu from how it was released to what you like it becomes problematic. In my opinion Antix is made balanced. It already has a good user interface, even if you have different personal preferences that you would like to see. Behind this lies a great OS build that can handle changes in your personal preference and much much more. On top of these very broad sides it is light on your computer, working with even the old computers giving them new life. If these suggestions are to make it more appealing to other people, then what about those who do not like these options? In my opinion if you are trying to make something more physically appealing to everyone, then take the antix core and place a whole bunch of select menus that can allow anyone to pick what they like to have installed install.

Dave wrote:I enjoyed reading through this and the points were good. My view on this is like a scale, currently the scale is closely balanced. If the focus (weight) is shifted to the user interface the scale is then unbalanced, becoming more like ubuntu as said above. This is one reason why I and others dislike ubuntu. It doesn't work well because it is focused on physical appearance. Then when you change ubuntu from how it was released to what you like it becomes problematic. In my opinion Antix is made balanced. It already has a good user interface, even if you have different personal preferences that you would like to see. Behind this lies a great OS build that can handle changes in your personal preference and much much more. On top of these very broad sides it is light on your computer, working with even the old computers giving them new life. If these suggestions are to make it more appealing to other people, then what about those who do not like these options? In my opinion if you are trying to make something more physically appealing to everyone, then take the antix core and place a whole bunch of select menus that can allow anyone to pick what they like to have installed install.

Nice comments, Dave. Note that antiX now has three distinct variations, and those who want what they want CAN get it - as long as they are willing to put some of their own efforts into it. The standard antiX (recently called antiX"FULL" to distinguish it from the other varieties, is the classic version, which has been around a few years now. Some movement toward usability was already added to this version when the default Window Manager was made IceWM and the default setup underwent some modifications. Then the BASE version was added, which uses the previous default Window Manager, Fluxbox, which is very flexible, but perhaps not initially familiar to some people. With the BASE version, antiX is light and nimble enough that you can create whatever you want.

But now anticapitalista is looking into creating a true core base without anything but a simple text installation program - something closer to Arch and Slackware than what we have been used to in the past. So in the future, we could have three nimble variations, the classic version, the BASE version with a very light GUI, and the stripped down version with the text installer and core tools and not much else. This third option is clearly intended for those who want to create their own highly customized system, and would almost certainly not appeal to those who are looking for a Ubuntu-like experience. What's so nice about free software is that we can - AND DO - have BOTH alternatives and a whole range of choices.

I think Ubuntu and its derivatives offer solid software, and I actually use it at least occasionally. I tend to prefer either the Kubuntu or Xubuntu alternative, but I've recently used a Lubuntu derivative called Peppermint OS, which is a fork of Lubuntu but it also uses tools from Linux Mint. Distros like this one, and also creative options like Crunchbang Linux show that you can make good solid systems from many starting points. i just happen to prefer the antiX starting point, pretty much as it is now. It's always good to continually look at other options. It does not mean we will adopt them necessarily, but it is just healthy to regularly consider other approaches, and based on what I know about anticapitalista, he does this as well as anyone that I know.