Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Review: Linux Mint 4.0

Filed under
Linux
Reviews

Mint has struck again! The developers of this elegant Linux distribution are back with a new version of their elegant Linux distribution for you to enjoy. As you may remember, in our previous review of Linux Mint, we introduced you to a Linux desktop that was both elegant and practical for both the new and experienced Linux user. We explored their motto of "From freedom came elegance" and found it to be true in many ways. We even looked at a lot of features that eventaully won Linux Mint a place on our short list of recommended Linux distributions. But now that a new version has arrived on the scene, we're left with one nagging question. What makes Linux Mint 4.0 better than the existing 3.0 version we previously reviewed? Well, a number of things apparently. So let's look at each of these new improvements and see what they have to offer you and if they can truely make Linux Mint 4.0 better than its predicessor.

Initial Impressions

The latest version of Linux Mint, codenamed "Daryna" (don't ask me how to pronounce that because I still haven't figured it out myself) is based on both the Celena version of Linux Mint (version 3.1) and Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon (version 7.10 of Ubuntu). For those worried about the interface changing a lot, don't fear, because it really hasn't. All the familiar features and organization of Mint are still there, including in the Mint menu. But aside from its familiarity, Mint 4.0 isn't without it's problems. One of the things I found early on was a fair degree of instability in the general system. While it wasn't crashing all over the place, it was still a bit unstable. I even had the background crash and die at least once on me taking the desktop icons and all desktop features with it, which is almost unheard of in other distributions, including Ubuntu.

More Here




More in Tux Machines

Feral Interactive Ports Life Is Strange to Linux and Mac, Episode 1 Is Now Free

Feral Interactive has recently announced that they have managed to successfully port the popular, award-winning Life Is Strange game to GNU/Linux and Mac OS X operating systems. Read more

Introduction to Modularity

Modularity is an exciting, new initiative aimed at resolving the issue of diverging (and occasionally conflicting) lifecycles of different “components” within Fedora. A great example of a diverging and conflicting lifecycle is the Ruby on Rails (RoR) lifecycle, whereby Fedora stipulates that itself can only have one version of RoR at any point in time – but that doesn’t mean Fedora’s version of RoR won’t conflict with another version of RoR used in an application. Therefore, we want to avoid having “components”, like RoR, conflict with other existing components within Fedora. Read more

Our First Look at Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon

Now that I’ve had about a week to play around in Mint 18, I find a lot to like and have no major complaints. While Cinnamon probably isn’t destined to become my desktop of choice, I don’t dislike it and find it, hands down, the best of the GNOME based desktops I’ve tried so far. Anybody looking for a powerful, all purpose distro that’s designed to work smoothly and which can be mastered with ease would be hard pressed to find anything better. Read more

The subtle art of the Desktop

The history of the Gnome and KDE desktops go a long way back and their competition, for the lack of a better term, is almost as famous in some circles as the religious divide between Emacs and Vi. But is that competition stil relevant in 2016? Are there notable differences between Gnome and KDE that would position each other on a specific segment of users? Having both desktops running on my systems (workstation + laptop) but using really only one of them at all times, I wanted to find out by myself. My workstation and laptop both run ArchLinux, which means I tend to run the latest stable versions of pretty much any desktop software. I will thus be considering the latest stable versions from Gnome and KDE in this post. Historically, the two environments stem from different technical platforms: Gnome relies on the GTK framework while KDE, or more exactly the Plasma desktop environment, relies on Qt. For a long time, that is until well into the development of the Gnome 3.x platform, the major difference was not just technical, it was one of style and experience. KDE used to offer a desktop experience that was built along the lines of Windows, with a start center on the bottom left, a customizable side bar, and desktop widgets. Gnome had its two bars on the top and bottom of the screen, and was seemingly used as the basis for the first design of Mac OS X, with the top bar offering features that were later found in the Apple operating system. Read more