Reader supplied reviews for MX Linux
Average rating
8.0 from 679 review(s)
Version: 23.6
Rating: 8
Date: 2025-04-18
Votes: 0
|
Just tried 32 bit versions, main Xfce and fluxbox. I'm very impressed with Xfce , looks promising, lot of tools, htop shows around 460mb of ram after live session boots. With that left side panel looks bit like Ubuntu, nice conky monitor design, powerful aps out of the box. That's for the Xfce. Fluxbox edition is bad, needs lot of work and I recommend to look at Sparky minimal and take some inspiration there - much better lightweight distro based on Debian - MX fluxbox is using lot of apps written for different desktops and that makes it heavy. Can imagine using this distro with Xfce as daily. But my potato 2005 Acer needs lightweight system and that's why I'm staying with sparky minimal.
|
Version: 23.6
Rating: 10
Date: 2025-04-16
Votes: 19
|
MX Linux is a solid desktop Linux distro for those wanting something from the Debian family but with more utilities and newer kernels and better hardware support than stock Debian stable.
For new Linux users coming from Windows I would say it is suitable for those with more technical knowledge and experience of using computers, and operating systems such as DOS, as it does require more typing at the command line interface than say Linux Mint, which i would say is better for those who are less experienced at computing as it has better GUI tools.
For users coming from Windows, it also requires more tinkering after installing to get it to look and behave more like the Windows user interface in order to be familiar and easy to use, than Mint. Watch youtube videos on how to set MX up and customise it after installing.
One area in which it is better than Mint is in the Linux kernels available for it in the MX Linux repositories. These are newer and may afford better support for newer hardware than those in Mint, including the Debian edition of Mint. For example, MX Linux lets me use my Intel AX200 wifi card whereas LMDE (and also stock Debian) does not support it. MX Linux currently has a version 6.14 Linux kernel available, whereas Mint is still stuck at 6.11 .
MX Linux also has newer kernels that have security fixes for known vulnerabilities (eg. CVE-2024-53150 and CVE-2024-53197 which are used by authoritarian regimes to hack devices of journalists and civil society members) whereas Ubuntu LTS and Linux Mint lag behind in this area (as of April 2025 still no safe kernels in those distros).
One of the strengths of MX is the set of utilities it comes with. It has useful utilities for deleting unnecessary files to free up more disk space, for tweaking the user interface, and so on.
The flagship edition of MX uses Xfce desktop environment and this is the version I like best as it comes with a very good set of utilities such as the Xfce screenshot app which is one of the best I have used, and Xfce very easy to customise. Xfce is also relatively light on system resources like RAM.
Other editions include a KDE edition (which will use more RAM than Xfce and in my opinion offers no significant advantage over Xfce to make up for this), and one using Fluxbox (lighter on system resources than Xfce but possibly less user friendly also). If you have an old computer with a slower CPU and less RAM, I would recommend MX Linux's sister distro AntiX instead of the fluxbox edition of MX, as it is designed for that use case with smaller kernels and so on. I would say MX is best for computers built during the last 15 years with at least 4 GB of RAM to the hardware made in the last year.
|
Version: 23.6
Rating: 9
Date: 2025-04-14
Votes: 3
|
Well, you see, it's like this:
I have had MX Linux since 23.4 and have been content enough, mostly. But I have been in the habit of following the releases of all of the -buntu/Ubuntu series that comes out twice a year: October and April, hence the 24.10 and depending on the "flavor" of the -buntu distro, it is either already released, (as of April 13, 2025), or in the last week of beta. Since 2017, I had been updating my releases of Kubuntu because I love the customizing abilities of KDE Plasma. I had had enough of a wee taste of Qt that went along with Plasma and so, when Plasma hit version 6, it came at a really bad time, or so the Powers That Be had told us, which explained the repeated versions and re-versions of 5.27. Supposedly. So, when I noticed that Kubuntu had once again asked us to swallow that bitter "Pill/worm-on-a-hook," one more time, once again, I switched to MX. So, holding out hope that KDE or Canonical or some other entity might finally switch to Plasma 6.xx, I was terribly disappointed. Again.
Oh, I know: what does all of this have to do with MX Linux? Simply this: I finally realized that even though I was running LXQt on Linux MX 23, everything that I really wanted in a distro or OS, if you will, was already here! I did have to do a bit of tweaking beyond the usual on-hand resources (there were not that many, as can be evidenced by the mile-and-a-half-long menu of every MX Program or Application under the sun). Seriously! MX should adopt the motto, "If we ain't got it, you don't need it!" Still, I can't shake the feeling that something is still missing! I haven't a clue what that might be but until I can think of something else that I want but likely don't actually need, MX will already have made it an option!
Yes, fine. But would I recommend MX Linux to someone who still uses Mac or Windows? Absolutely! Actually, I already have, a few times! So what are you doing still reading this? Go download MX right now!
|
See all 679 reader reviews of MX Linux...
|
|
bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx 
