
Awesome Linux Software - PleaseHelpMe
https://github.com/LewisVo/Awesome-Linux-Software
======
laumars
I appreciate the effort that goes into these kinds of lists but to be honest I
would advocate people getting more familiar with their package manager and
learning how to search for packages within it instead of using 3rd party lists
compiled in this way. The benefit of the package managers is they can convey
more information (eg open source or not - just looking through that list I saw
non-free software without much warning about their status) as well as actually
enabling you to install said software.

Plus there are nice graphical package management tools like the Ubuntu
Software Center that has screenshots and reviews which I believe would better
aid those who are less experienced with Linux - those who are the likely
target of this git repository - so they would benefit more greatly from said
management tools than an ordered list of app names. And frankly I would trust
the descriptions used by package managers more than the unofficial overviews
compiled by casual users of the software (thus people who might overlook
features or even just miss the point of the product entirely).

~~~
pjmlp
The problem is the ton of garbage that one finds before actually finding
_Awesome Linux Software_ on them.

Reviews are not enough, curating is also required, because when everything is
a 5 with 50% reviews going both ways no one has time to try out everything.

~~~
laumars
I get your point and that's definitely true for any reviewing system but I'm
unconvinced this list does any better job. Let's take the Sharing Files
category[1]:

* aria2: no reference that it is a command line program

* Deluge: no reference that it is a command line program which requires quite a bit of configuring to get a web gui working

* Dropbox: it's comment says "Dropbox is a free service that lets you bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and share them easily." which isn't technically untrue but isn't really all that accurate either given the context it's placed in. Should be rewritten as "Cloud storage with paid for and free plans".

* ownCloud: no reference that this is a web project so you need to run Apache / nginx with PHP and have the whole thing port forwarded on your router.

* Teamviewer: a non-free remote desktop application. While it does support file transfer it doesn't strictly belong in this category

* uGet: described as "The best download manager for linux" which is highly subjective, opinionated description and doesn't actually describe what it does well. So it's of no help to people what-so-ever

* uTorrent: no mention that it is not open source, and only the server (ie not the desktop GUI version - the server is only controlled via the web UI) natively supports Linux. Also last time I checked it worked on Ubuntu, but there's no mention of that here either

That's just one category as well. There are issues in all the categories I
looked at. Take the Office[2] category as another example, they have 12
entries, 4 are described as office suites, and 3 of those 4 are have
descriptions that say "one of the best" or "the best" office suite on Linux.
And ironically the only one of those 4 descriptions that actually explains
what comes with the office suite is the only one that wasn't described "one of
the best on Linux". So how is that helpful to users confused about which
office product to run on Linux when the only one that is explained is the one
that isn't recommended and all the others have no meaningful description?

The curation and descriptions of these kinds of lists really need to undergo
heavy editorial work otherwise they become pointless and I'm really not
convinced this meets the mark. For example if I wanted a decent bit-torrent
client I could just google "linux torrent client" and I would get pages of
results linking to reviews comparing different clients and listing their top 5
/ 10 / whatever - often with some real in depth analysis too. That's the kind
of lists that people who are looking for software need. Something that
explains their use, their strengths and weaknesses. Otherwise it becomes no
more effective than a list produced by your package manager.

Don't get me wrong, lists like these had a real benefit in the 90s when it was
harder to search for content, but these days you need to provide a lot more
than just a list of names and a terse description if you want to actually help
people. As it stands, some of the descriptions given could waste a lot of
people's time as they go down the rabbit hole of installing ownCloud (for
example) but expecting it to function like Dropbox / Onedrive and then getting
frustrated by the configuration of Apache and their home router. Or installing
Deluge or aria2 and then getting annoyed that they aren't seeing an icon
appear in their launcher.

[1] [https://github.com/LewisVo/Awesome-Linux-Software#sharing-
fi...](https://github.com/LewisVo/Awesome-Linux-Software#sharing-files)

[2] [https://github.com/LewisVo/Awesome-Linux-
Software#office](https://github.com/LewisVo/Awesome-Linux-Software#office)

~~~
dozzie
> * aria2: no reference that it is a command line program

> * Deluge: no reference that it is a command line program which requires
> quite a bit of configuring to get a web gui working
    
    
      $ apt-cache show aria2 | grep Tag
      Tag: implemented-in::c++, interface::commandline, network::client,
      $ apt-cache show deluge | grep Tag
      Tag: devel::lang:python, implemented-in::python, interface::x11,

~~~
yorwba
Since when does apt-cache show tags? Mine doesn't, I have

    
    
      $ apt-cache policy apt | grep Installed
      Installed: 1.2.24

~~~
laumars
He's using the `show` parameter which does include tags. However you can't
really grep it like he had done because the tags can span multiple lines with
indentation rather than line prefixes (ie human readable rather than machine
readable).

~~~
yorwba
_apt-cache show_ doesn't show tags for me:

    
    
      $ apt-cache show aria2 | grep Tag
      $ echo $?
      1

~~~
laumars
Does on Debian and has done for a few releases as far as I can recall. I've
done it on Wheezy (7.x) boxes and it's still there on an Jessie (8.1) machine
I just tested it on.

------
bpizzi
The mainteners have indeed put some effort in making that list, which is
comandable. But it was an instant close for me as soon as I reached
Education/BibleTime.

My personnal opinion on this is that some 'Bible study application' has
nothing to do in the same list as Maple or Matlab. I'll go even further by
saying that it's not to be listed under 'Education'. A todler is not
'educated' when given batism, he's just endoctrined. Again, that's a personnal
opinion and I'm fine if you don't share it.

~~~
delcaran
Reading the Bible is what have pushed me away from religion: when you're
endoctrined you're only given the "good parts"...

~~~
Fjolsvith
*indoctrinated

~~~
delcaran
Thanks!

~~~
Fjolsvith
The whole point was that people can't get past their own religious hangup to
find a spell checker, which they obviously need.

------
ekianjo
Not sure what to make of this list. It mixes Proprietary Software with Free
Software (with no clear indication of which is which, and no clear license
information anyway), and software that is not just available for Linux anyway
but on pretty much any other platform.

A good list for me would mention:

* License type

* Whether it's in active development or not

* Cross-platform or not

* Whether it's a KDE or GNOME application (or something else) - since it's pretty relevant for Linux users.

* Patreon/support links for projects where it's relevant

* Links to proper user reviews (folks who have spent significant time using them)

For example, backup solutions are all very, very different in terms of what
they can do, and it took me a long time to find out the one that is working
for my own criteria. Just listing a bunch of backup tools is not going to save
time for anyone, Wikipedia is a much better resource in that regard for
example.

~~~
r3bl
I am maintaining kind of a rival repository to this one[0].

I heavily moderate it. Most of what's on that list has been verified by me.
Contains about 50 pieces of software. The problem is: people don't give a shit
about this heavily curated lists. They just want a gigantic list of every
software ever. Heck, I think I have like five commits in total in that
section, but at least it satisfies one of your criteria (GNOME or KDE based or
something else). No KDE user ever has stumbled upon my list and made some
contributions, so I'm really lacking on that front.

I'll see what I can do about the rest of your proposals. I'm pretty sure I
could easily implement at least half of them.

[0] [https://github.com/aleksandar-todorovic/awesome-
linux#applic...](https://github.com/aleksandar-todorovic/awesome-
linux#applications)

~~~
ekianjo
If you add more to your list I might contribute to it. I briefly checked your
list and in the distro list you are missing of the important new ones - Solus.
:)

EDIT: I don't think you need to have huge screenshots everywhere (personally I
rather have text info than graphics) and it's not super useful anyway to show
screenshots since it does not tell you much about anything at all. Feature
lists, as in bullet points, would rather get my preference.

~~~
r3bl
> I don't think you need to have huge screenshots everywhere

Can't disagree with you on that. I remember seeing a couple of repos recently
that have like a "More" button which actually loads the image. Will try
tracking them down to see the code and using the same procedure.

------
timrichard
Looks good.

I'd previously bookmarked this blog (closed in 2015) for a large number of
smaller utilities :

[https://inconsolation.wordpress.com/](https://inconsolation.wordpress.com/)

A bit of a treasure trove. I had a great time going through those reviews.

------
PleaseHelpMe
Another two lists that should be mentioned here are:

[1]: [https://github.com/iCHAIT/awesome-
macOS](https://github.com/iCHAIT/awesome-macOS)

[2]: [https://github.com/Awesome-Windows/Awesome](https://github.com/Awesome-
Windows/Awesome)

They all share the same idea.

------
marcolinux
How could that be! Gkrellm.net is not ont that list. Great monitoring app for
your linux desktop. I use it since 2000, I think.

