fatmac wrote:Should I mention MX-14 here (?), I have it on an old Advent dual core 12"TFT laptop & a 10"TFT Novatech N1 netbook.
(Other machines still on 13.1/13.2.)

I have four instances of *some* version of antiX running on my two laptops. On the larger of the two, the one I call"a portable", the Gateway 2000 Series Model PA6A 17" display, I have an instance of antiX Core that I believe I've had there since 2009. The other instance is a freshly installed instance of antiX 13.2 that I installed not long after the release; I believe I'm using"Full" on this one.

On the Lenovo, I also have two instances of antiX, MX-14 and another more recently crafted instance of antiX Core. I use antiX kernels on some of these and Liquorix kernels on others; so far, just the stock system with MX-14.

antiX 13.2 Full, but with a number of the original packages purged and customized to resemble CrunchBang Linux (openbox window manager and tint2 panel).

My latest? I have THREE: antiX Core (with Sid), antiX 14R Alpha, and antiX MX-14.3. All are great; each can be configured to suit whatever preferences you have. I currently have the antiX 14R running a light configuration; the antiX Core and antiX MX-14 both use Xfce, one is"stable" (MX-14) and the other, well, it's actually stable in terms of working, but the package changes are quite volatile. What's most impressive is that all three of them, regardless of whether I use Debian {stable, testing, unstable} they all work really well, showing just how flexible and usable these distributions are!

I can go super stable with low maintenance, testing with moderate, rolling changes, or Sid with the latest. I use caution with Sid around release updates, and I've had the current setup at least three or four years, and I've used Core since it was a prototype, and it's been a wonderful experience. So there's something for many different interests.