In my previous article, I gave a list of criteria to help choose a Linux distribution. In this post, I summarize how distributions pass or fail these tests and reveal my preference.

The power to choose is a good thing, so long as you are choosing right. That has become difficult for most people in the Linux world, where there is a bewildering range of possibilities, and the advice you get, instead of narrowing things down, re-emphasizes the great quantity of your options. It's no wonder that people who might be interested in trying an alternative operating system never start. In this two-part series, I will present a list of some of the factors that I considered in choosing a distribution, and show my reasoning process in action.

As of the time of this writing, it's been about a day since my adventure in attempting to use the terminal for all tasks began. This will be somewhat abbreviated compared to the last post, for the purpose of getting it online in a reasonable time.

For most people, the age of computer terminals ended after MS-DOS. But starting today at around 10:30 AM, and continuing for a day or two, I intend to use only terminal-esque programs on my desktop computer.

I like to think of myself as a precise person, but things fall through the cracks.

I've spent time around computers and/or programming, and sometimes I hear people say things to the effect that what I do is "complicated" or "over [their] head". What that implies to me is "I could never do that". In this article, I intend to show that not only could you do that, you may already be thinking or doing things that overlap with the programming field.

There are three mainstream families of operating systems ("OSes") for regular users in modern computing: macOS, Windows, and Linux (which includes Google's Chrome OS).

"Users don't always want things to work faster"?