Another Thing I Didn't Know About MX Linux

Technically, I began using Linux in 2002, with an ill-fated attempt to install Fedora on a PC -- not my daily driver -- just to see how I'd like it. I didn't. I don't know if I did something wrong in the installation or if that's just how Fedora came back then, but all I got was a command line and I wasn't going to move away from MacOS and Windoze unless I got a nice GUI interface.

As a practical matter, I began using Linux in 2003, when my Windoze computer got a boot sector virus that none of the usual tools could seem to destroy, and I had a couple of CDs a friend had sent me with Mandrake Linux on them. In an 18-hour period, I went from finishing my workday, to nuking my Windoze PC's hard drive, to installing and configuring Mandrake, to teaching myself enough to get by, to starting my next workday, with not a lot of sleep in between.

Since then, I've use a lot of different Linux distributions. A few that I can remember, after Mandrake, in no particular order: Debian, OpenSuse, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Puppy, openSUSE, Slackware, Arch, Manjaro, Knoppix, Raspberry Pi OS, and Mint. I've used some of the previous ones in different versions, GUI setups, etc., and those are not nearly all of them. I've probably at least live-USB-previewed 50 or 60 distros.

And until I went looking for non-systemd distributions, I don't ever recall even hearing of MX.

So I found this headline on my "new tab" page a few minutes ago quite interesting:

3 reasons why MX Linux is more popular than Ubuntu, Fedora, and Zorin OS

I'm not sure the headline is really 100% truthful.

Distrowatch's "Page Hit" rankings have MX third behind CachyOS (which I've never used and barely heard of) and Mint, which indicates a lot of interest, but not necessarily more interest than many distributions that people get other than by visiting the distros' own web sites. It's worth noting, however, that that home page popularity long pre-dates the systemd controversy. Clearly, a bunch of people have been interested in MX Linux for quite some times.

And ranked on the basis of ratings by DistroWatch readers, MX comes in 26th of 34 distributions and behind two of the three in the headline (Ubuntu comes in 31st).

So I wouldn't put it in the "more popular than" league, necessarily. A lot of people get their Linux pre-installed on new machines (especially Ubuntu), or buy one of those "flash drive with 17 Linux distributions" things on Amazon, or get a USB from a friend, or whatever.

Also, the "three reasons" are kinda BS. There are all kinds of Linux distros that work great on all, or under-powered, hardware, that are easy to install/configure/update/maintain/use, and that fit offer "persistent live booting" if you want to run them from USB.

MX is, however, a bigger player than I assumed it was. And it deserves to be. It's a solid Linux distro.

Site-Specific Problem ... MAYBE Related to MX Linux

Over a period of about two weeks, my experience with MX Linux as a replacement for Linux Mint (and systemd) has proven almost uniformly excellent. It's at least as fast to install, and as easy to use, maintain, and update, as any Linux distribution I've tried, and anecdotally it seems to hog less RAM and less CPU time, and run lower CPU temperatures than, Mint.

One, and only one, exception.

I use (and recommend) InoReader as my RSS reader. Since much of my work involves finding/blurbing/linking content online from a (fairly) stable source pool, it saves me a lot of time and trouble.

Lately, it's been intermittently opening links very slowly after clicking, sometimes to the point that I'd even classify the behavior as a "freeze."

Because the problem is intermittent, I have yet to determine whether it's behaving that way only in MX Linux, or only in my usual browser, or only on this particular matchine, or more generally (the latter would point to a problem with my Internet connection or with InoReader itself).

On a little bit of search engine work, I'm not seeing any similar reports from other InoReader users, so I suspect the problem isn't with them. So it could be something with MX Linux. It's not disruptive enough to my workflow to justify another OS switch, but worth taking note of.

Another Benefit from the Change of Linux Distributions

I wanted to give it a few days just to make sure it was a permanent feature, not a temporary anomaly. It's the former:

MX Linux (XFCE desktop version) is easier on my computer than Linux Mint was. According to psensor, I'm running noticeably lower CPU and drive temperatures.

I suppose that could be because I've installed less stuff -- stuff that might leave rogue processes running even when the apps themselves are supposedly closed -- but my recollection is that Mint ran higher temperatures than I'm seeing now even upon install.

Not that Mint was red-lining my CPU temp or anything. But presumably lower temperatures on a regular basis should mean longer CPU -- and fan -- life.

MX Linux, Day 2 Observations

OK, I've had a full day plus since install to put MX Linux through its paces, meaning I've been able to do pretty much all the things I do on a computer with this operating system. Still liking it. I've only really got two observations, one very positive and one very mildly negative.

Positive Observation: This morning, the little task bar icon that means "it's time for updates/upgrades" turned green. I pressed it. A window opened and showed me a list of OS and app updates/upgrades available. I pressed the OK button, entered my password ... and 20 seconds later (by my count) it informed me that it was done downloading and installing them. Since I did a full update/upgrade on install, there wasn't a lot for it to do. I'll expect downloads to take longer when there's a full new browser version or whatever. But it was easy, and the post-download installation/check was very fast.

Negative Observation: Several times, my task bar has just ... disappeared. It seems to have something to do with power management. It happens when the screen goes dark from inactivity. It's easy to get the thing back (about 10 seconds in settings -- I put the particular function on the desktop after the second or third time it happened), and I expect there's a permanent fix for it that I'll research, find, and implement, but if you try MX out, let me know if it happens to you too.

Other than that, it seems at least as stable, reliable, and easy to install, use, and maintain, as Linux Mint and other good distributions. Which means it's a lot more stable, reliable, and easy to install, use, and maintain than Windoze.

And The Winning Candidate Distro Is ...

MX Linux.

After messing around with Devuan as a live USB, I did the same with MX Linux, and I just like it better. 

The install to hard drive is as easy as it should be (as easy as Ubuntu or Mint, much easier than Windows), it has a nice intuitive app installer, and so far everything I've mess with has worked easily (for example, setting up Dropbox).

All of this was by way of moving to a non-systemd Linux distribution (MX gives you the choice between systemd and sysvinit), but I was also looking for something "Linux Newbie Friendly," and MX qualifies:

1. Download the iso you want (I chose the one with the XFCE desktop/GUI, but you can also go with KDE or Fluxbox);
2. Burn the iso to a thumb drive;
3. Boot your computer from the thumb drive;
4. Mess around with MX a little and see if you like it;
5. Click the "Install" icon on the desktop and follow the easy instructions;
6. Enjoy!

I considered installing MX next to Mint and Windows, but then I had a better idea: I had it nuke the whole hard drive and just completely take over.

Why? Since I've had this computer, I've used Windows two or three times ... to play Starcraft. If I really want to play Starcraft, I'll do the Wine or virtual machine thing. I'm tired of wasting hard drive space on Windows and after logging into it this morning to grab the product key just in case, I hope it's the last time I ever do that.