What version of Linux should I try?
March 2, 2005 2:49 PM Subscribe
I want to try Linux.
I want to try it, and not just toy around with it, but maybe use it. So, obviously, I need good suggestions. What is a form of Linux that is not overly-user friendly, so that when I master it I have to upgrade to something more "adult," but nothing that only hackers would understand. Maybe a middle-range one with tutorials, or something.
I'm not too afraid of the idea of partitioning my system, but I'd prefer to just do it to my secondary PC.
Alos, besides my innate curiosity, what do some of you think the advantages of Linux are? As a home system, not a server for stability.
I want to try it, and not just toy around with it, but maybe use it. So, obviously, I need good suggestions. What is a form of Linux that is not overly-user friendly, so that when I master it I have to upgrade to something more "adult," but nothing that only hackers would understand. Maybe a middle-range one with tutorials, or something.
I'm not too afraid of the idea of partitioning my system, but I'd prefer to just do it to my secondary PC.
Alos, besides my innate curiosity, what do some of you think the advantages of Linux are? As a home system, not a server for stability.
Best answer: well, i haven't used it for quite some time but i ran linux on my computers for several years. I'm assuming you're also okay with running BSD distributions which are similar, but not exactly linux. BSD distros generally favor stability over new features, but the differences are pretty slim. The BSD community is smaller than the linux, but it makes up for it in friendliness. The linux community is huge, but because of that your questions may get lost in the madness.
linuxiso.org and distrowatch have small descriptions of all of the major distros that are available, so you may want to peruse and read the summary on each one.
For a new linux user, i'd recommend either fedora (RedHat successor), or mandrake. Both of these have great documentation and user groups. Or did, at least.
Middle range is something like debian, slackware, or suse, or freeBSD . If i had a choice, i'd pick freebsd because of the 'ports' system which helps uninstall/install applications. debian has something similar, called 'apt', so if you want a linux distro from this group i'd choose that. Slackware does have an appeal as being one of the most "unix-like" linux distributions in that the structure and layout of the files are much like how they were in the old days (which feels 'cleaner' to me, but that's just my preference).
More technical distros like gentoo or openBSD are probably a little over the top for your first time using linux.
advantages of using linux/BSD:
- no spyware (yet).
- not many viruses
- not much processing power required (you can run it on your old, slow computer and it will be quite responsive)
- customizable user interface (well, customizable anything as white_devil points out)
- no distractions of playing video games (well, mostly)
- never really have to see the screen "do you want to reboot now?" as almost anything can be changed while it's running
- can fairly easily setup some free spam mail filters since you'll already (maybe) have python/perl installed. a lot of spam filters are written in perl/python.
posted by escher at 3:30 PM on March 2, 2005
linuxiso.org and distrowatch have small descriptions of all of the major distros that are available, so you may want to peruse and read the summary on each one.
For a new linux user, i'd recommend either fedora (RedHat successor), or mandrake. Both of these have great documentation and user groups. Or did, at least.
Middle range is something like debian, slackware, or suse, or freeBSD . If i had a choice, i'd pick freebsd because of the 'ports' system which helps uninstall/install applications. debian has something similar, called 'apt', so if you want a linux distro from this group i'd choose that. Slackware does have an appeal as being one of the most "unix-like" linux distributions in that the structure and layout of the files are much like how they were in the old days (which feels 'cleaner' to me, but that's just my preference).
More technical distros like gentoo or openBSD are probably a little over the top for your first time using linux.
advantages of using linux/BSD:
- no spyware (yet).
- not many viruses
- not much processing power required (you can run it on your old, slow computer and it will be quite responsive)
- customizable user interface (well, customizable anything as white_devil points out)
- no distractions of playing video games (well, mostly)
- never really have to see the screen "do you want to reboot now?" as almost anything can be changed while it's running
- can fairly easily setup some free spam mail filters since you'll already (maybe) have python/perl installed. a lot of spam filters are written in perl/python.
posted by escher at 3:30 PM on March 2, 2005
This comes up fairly often, so you might wanna search old threads... but personally, I really like Ubuntulinux. Linux Mandrake is also pretty darn good for beginners... but ubuntu is a user-friendly offshoot of debian, which means that it's easy to grab new software for it without the rpm-related dependency issues.
The main advantage of linux is freedom! You just don't have to worry about all that crazy licensing stuff anymore...
posted by ph00dz at 3:46 PM on March 2, 2005
The main advantage of linux is freedom! You just don't have to worry about all that crazy licensing stuff anymore...
posted by ph00dz at 3:46 PM on March 2, 2005
I would say, take your "main" box, reformat, install linux and see If you can do what you like to do in windows, on a linux distro. Avoid using windows for a week.
Try burning CD's, browsing the web, reading pdfs, playing divx's, playing mp3's etc.
If you like it, then you will be inclined to continue using it, and you will prosper.
Do not underestimate the intellectual constraints imposed by Windows. Try to understand what you are doing; If you "get" the logical structures you are trying to work within, you can lessen the frustration of a steep learning curve;
That , unfortunatly, requires you do read every single fucking manual. The payoff for all that work, I am sure you can appreciate.
posted by kuatto at 3:48 PM on March 2, 2005
Try burning CD's, browsing the web, reading pdfs, playing divx's, playing mp3's etc.
If you like it, then you will be inclined to continue using it, and you will prosper.
Do not underestimate the intellectual constraints imposed by Windows. Try to understand what you are doing; If you "get" the logical structures you are trying to work within, you can lessen the frustration of a steep learning curve;
That , unfortunatly, requires you do read every single fucking manual. The payoff for all that work, I am sure you can appreciate.
posted by kuatto at 3:48 PM on March 2, 2005
My suggestion is to either go with a distro that a good friend who'll help uses, or just go for Red Hat.
Set aside lots of time, and wave goodbye to any interesting hardware you have installed.
I couldn't find any advantages of Linux over Windows except maybe the price (and the fact that you're not supporting an evil monopoly). My experience with Linux convinced me that Windows is cheap.
What you may find is that you don't actually want Linux, you just want to replace all the extra crap that comes with Windows. Apart from the basic OS, nothing else I run is made by Microsoft.
posted by krisjohn at 4:03 PM on March 2, 2005
Set aside lots of time, and wave goodbye to any interesting hardware you have installed.
I couldn't find any advantages of Linux over Windows except maybe the price (and the fact that you're not supporting an evil monopoly). My experience with Linux convinced me that Windows is cheap.
What you may find is that you don't actually want Linux, you just want to replace all the extra crap that comes with Windows. Apart from the basic OS, nothing else I run is made by Microsoft.
posted by krisjohn at 4:03 PM on March 2, 2005
Xandros OCE.
It's very friendly to beginning users, it's based on Debian, so it's easy to upgrade to "advanced" plus it comes with a 30-day trial of Crossover Office for those pesky windows apps you can't live without.
posted by madajb at 4:37 PM on March 2, 2005
It's very friendly to beginning users, it's based on Debian, so it's easy to upgrade to "advanced" plus it comes with a 30-day trial of Crossover Office for those pesky windows apps you can't live without.
posted by madajb at 4:37 PM on March 2, 2005
I must second Ubuntu, I've had practically no problems with it so far, whereas all the red hat based distributions I had previously installed were difficult as hell for me to get to grips with, but that was generally down to 3D acceleration support and pro sound-card drivers.
posted by iamcrispy at 4:52 PM on March 2, 2005
posted by iamcrispy at 4:52 PM on March 2, 2005
It is inevitable that there will be some disagreement, but...
"For a new linux user, i'd recommend either fedora (RedHat successor), or mandrake. Both of these have great documentation and user groups. Or did, at least."
I would consider this to be bad advice. Fedora and Mandrake are RPM-based distributions with extremely poor dependency management of packages (because RPM as a package format is incapable of good package management), leading to the dreaded "RPM hell." Red Hat has a number of incompetent packagers, and even putting apt on top of RPM doesn't help if the distribution's dependancy graph is broken. Working around the many problems that Red Hat and other RPM distributions have is not the easiest way to introduce yourself to a new OS.
Get a Knoppix LiveCD image and boot it, familiarize yourself with the Linux environment, maybe install it if you find it comfortable. When installed, it turns into a passable Debian distribution, which is a good middle-of-the-road option. It's less geeky than Slackware or Gentoo, because there is a lot of additional and convenient automation for administrators and users, but it doesn't softball you and treat you like a helpless loser like Mandrake or SuSE.
More than once, I have heard happy things about Ubuntu, mentioned above, but have not yet tried it.
Or if you are of a somewhat technical bent, the assembly and installation of LinuxFromScratch can be extremely educational. I learned a tremendous amount about Linux, as well as UNIX in general, by doing something similar, back before there was such a thing as a "distribution." This is somewhat more of a sink-or-swim, trial by fire approach, but a learning method that works well for some.
As to the more general question, "the advantage of Linux" is highly variable depending on what you are comparing it to. For example, compared to the average Windows installation, it's widely if anecdotally considered more stable and for certain classes of work -- software development, text processing, and a fair number of IT-type activities -- much more productive due to the large and flexible tool set available at default installation. Compared to commercial UNIX, such as SCO, Digital Tru64, Solaris, or AIX, it's main advantage is that it is sane. Compared to BSD, the chief advantages of Linux are binary software availability, driver availability and hardware compatibility. Compared to the general category of closed-source environments, there is a lot of flexibility to fix things yourself, or for others to fix things that a vendor hasn't or won't.
Also, to further clarify some statements made up above: BSD -- FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD -- is not Linux. It is UNIX, which Linux is similar to. They are similar enough to run a lot of the same software, but different in many subtle and potentially infuriating ways.
posted by majick at 5:11 PM on March 2, 2005
"For a new linux user, i'd recommend either fedora (RedHat successor), or mandrake. Both of these have great documentation and user groups. Or did, at least."
I would consider this to be bad advice. Fedora and Mandrake are RPM-based distributions with extremely poor dependency management of packages (because RPM as a package format is incapable of good package management), leading to the dreaded "RPM hell." Red Hat has a number of incompetent packagers, and even putting apt on top of RPM doesn't help if the distribution's dependancy graph is broken. Working around the many problems that Red Hat and other RPM distributions have is not the easiest way to introduce yourself to a new OS.
Get a Knoppix LiveCD image and boot it, familiarize yourself with the Linux environment, maybe install it if you find it comfortable. When installed, it turns into a passable Debian distribution, which is a good middle-of-the-road option. It's less geeky than Slackware or Gentoo, because there is a lot of additional and convenient automation for administrators and users, but it doesn't softball you and treat you like a helpless loser like Mandrake or SuSE.
More than once, I have heard happy things about Ubuntu, mentioned above, but have not yet tried it.
Or if you are of a somewhat technical bent, the assembly and installation of LinuxFromScratch can be extremely educational. I learned a tremendous amount about Linux, as well as UNIX in general, by doing something similar, back before there was such a thing as a "distribution." This is somewhat more of a sink-or-swim, trial by fire approach, but a learning method that works well for some.
As to the more general question, "the advantage of Linux" is highly variable depending on what you are comparing it to. For example, compared to the average Windows installation, it's widely if anecdotally considered more stable and for certain classes of work -- software development, text processing, and a fair number of IT-type activities -- much more productive due to the large and flexible tool set available at default installation. Compared to commercial UNIX, such as SCO, Digital Tru64, Solaris, or AIX, it's main advantage is that it is sane. Compared to BSD, the chief advantages of Linux are binary software availability, driver availability and hardware compatibility. Compared to the general category of closed-source environments, there is a lot of flexibility to fix things yourself, or for others to fix things that a vendor hasn't or won't.
Also, to further clarify some statements made up above: BSD -- FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD -- is not Linux. It is UNIX, which Linux is similar to. They are similar enough to run a lot of the same software, but different in many subtle and potentially infuriating ways.
posted by majick at 5:11 PM on March 2, 2005
Gotta third Ubuntu. It's simply wonderful. Installs tend to be a breeze, and adding new software is easy. Beautiful, beautiful eye candy everything, but in a very minimalistic way. The community is great from what I've read, though I haven't needed any help so far. :> Am I that good? Nope, it's the Ubuntu.
I know everyone has a distro they are religious about, but I never found anything I liked much at all until Ubuntu--for reasons that somewhat mirror your distro requirements. It seemed the things I could use well were "might as well be Windows" distros that didn't really teach me anything whereas the really learning-intensive distros were just too hard to get going with. Ubuntu is perfectly in the middle. Love it.
posted by littlegreenlights at 5:35 PM on March 2, 2005
I know everyone has a distro they are religious about, but I never found anything I liked much at all until Ubuntu--for reasons that somewhat mirror your distro requirements. It seemed the things I could use well were "might as well be Windows" distros that didn't really teach me anything whereas the really learning-intensive distros were just too hard to get going with. Ubuntu is perfectly in the middle. Love it.
posted by littlegreenlights at 5:35 PM on March 2, 2005
Fourth on Ubuntu. I've played around with it a bit and it's excellent. They really seem to get it. Everything seems to be well thought out and nicely integrated. I'm currently using Debian for my main desktop but plan to move to Ubuntu in the future (I previously ran Red Hat / Fedora). Knoppix is nice, but just be aware that there are more graphical desktop environments than KDE. In fact, I believe Ubuntu has a live CD version that's based on the GNOME environment (my personal favorite). You might try Knoppix and the Ubuntu live cd to determine your choice of Desktop environment and use that to help guide your decision. Most distributions support both, but some do one better than the other. For example, if you're going to be working in KDE, you might stick to somethign like Suse or Mandrake, whereas Redhat and Ubuntu tend to have better GNOME integration. There's lots of choices, so feel free to experiment.
posted by jnthnjng at 5:51 PM on March 2, 2005
posted by jnthnjng at 5:51 PM on March 2, 2005
Hi Locke, there are some previous AskMe discussions on this topic that I marked some time ago because I wanted to look into Linux as well.
posted by Lush at 6:00 PM on March 2, 2005
- Linux, yes, but which Linux?
- There are a ton of distributions and I was wondering if there were any that the community would recommend for a noob like myself.
posted by Lush at 6:00 PM on March 2, 2005
CentOS is a recompile of Red Hat Enterprise 4.
Very nice, higly recommended, free as a motherfucker.
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 8:37 PM on March 2, 2005
Very nice, higly recommended, free as a motherfucker.
posted by Mean Mr. Bucket at 8:37 PM on March 2, 2005
SuSE Linux has been very kind to me in the past. While I was impressed with Gentoo's excellent portage system, it had some major issues with my archaic laptop. Ubuntu will be the next Linux I try.
I feel though that I should tell you that in all ways I prefer the BSD operating systems. Cleaner, simpler, more stable and secure, each is directed towards accomplishing some goal. FreeBSD works towards optimization and desktop experience, OpenBSD works towards security and being a full whitebox router in every respect, and NetBSD works towards cross-compatiblity with every platform under the sun.
If you do not find what you are looking for in Linux, I would strongly urge you to give FreeBSD a crack. My preference is Open, but Ifor most of my machines I'm not looking for anything with a GUI installed, period. Good luck.
posted by Ryvar at 8:56 PM on March 2, 2005
I feel though that I should tell you that in all ways I prefer the BSD operating systems. Cleaner, simpler, more stable and secure, each is directed towards accomplishing some goal. FreeBSD works towards optimization and desktop experience, OpenBSD works towards security and being a full whitebox router in every respect, and NetBSD works towards cross-compatiblity with every platform under the sun.
If you do not find what you are looking for in Linux, I would strongly urge you to give FreeBSD a crack. My preference is Open, but Ifor most of my machines I'm not looking for anything with a GUI installed, period. Good luck.
posted by Ryvar at 8:56 PM on March 2, 2005
Ubuntu, Ubuntu, Ubuntu.
Not only do I like saying that out loud, it's also my answer.
Once you have learned to drive it, you will be able to move more or less seamlessly to the much more "grownup" Debian, on which Ubuntu is based.
The biggest advantages as a home system are:
- very clear and separate users, meaning I can lock it down from my daughter
- no virus problems to speak of
- no software costs
- few if any unexplained crashes or data loss
You didn't ask about disadvantages, but I would say annoyance for users who are unfamiliar with it but have to share your PC would be the biggest.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:17 PM on March 2, 2005
Not only do I like saying that out loud, it's also my answer.
Once you have learned to drive it, you will be able to move more or less seamlessly to the much more "grownup" Debian, on which Ubuntu is based.
The biggest advantages as a home system are:
- very clear and separate users, meaning I can lock it down from my daughter
- no virus problems to speak of
- no software costs
- few if any unexplained crashes or data loss
You didn't ask about disadvantages, but I would say annoyance for users who are unfamiliar with it but have to share your PC would be the biggest.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:17 PM on March 2, 2005
Ubuntu is a great place to start.
To pronounce it right: oo-boon-too, with the stress on the boon and the "oo" sound is closest to the English "boon"
(
posted by quiet at 2:04 AM on March 3, 2005
To pronounce it right: oo-boon-too, with the stress on the boon and the "oo" sound is closest to the English "boon"
(
posted by quiet at 2:04 AM on March 3, 2005
Another vote for Ubuntu. I've run almost all of the major distributions out there (Debian, RedHat, Fedora, Mandrake, SuSE and Gentoo) and Ubuntu beats them all when it comes to being userfriendly without being dumbed down. It's easy to install and configure, comes with apt-get for installing extra software, has ubuntuforums.org and wikis to help you with problems and packages for newly released software are made very quickly (I'm running the unstable version - which has been very stable for me since I installed it a couple of weeks ago).
posted by CKZ at 4:30 AM on March 3, 2005
posted by CKZ at 4:30 AM on March 3, 2005
It all depends whether you prefer GNOME or KDE. If you prefer GNOME then probably Ubuntu is a decent choice. Personally speaking, I find GNOME an unspeakable, horrible, unuseable mess. SuSE or Mandrake are the best choices for KDE. I run both without problems. Don't listen to the naysayers who claim RPM based package managers have problems. Both Mandrake's uprmi and SuSE's yast are as good as Debian's apt.
posted by salmacis at 6:57 AM on March 3, 2005
posted by salmacis at 6:57 AM on March 3, 2005
For whatever it's worth, you can install KDE on Ubuntu as well... it's just that it uses Gnome by default.
I actually really dig Gnome. Gnome really carries on the Mac UI tradition while KDE is kinda Windows-XP-ish.
posted by ph00dz at 7:40 AM on March 3, 2005
I actually really dig Gnome. Gnome really carries on the Mac UI tradition while KDE is kinda Windows-XP-ish.
posted by ph00dz at 7:40 AM on March 3, 2005
I have to put in two cents for Ubuntu too - I have tried SO many distros, and am very happy with Ubuntu's combination of easy setup, excellent hardware auto-detection, and of course the apt package management system - it's absolutely the easiest, and is the most fun I've ever had with linux. If you are running it on old hardware, please also consider not running KDE OR gnome, but instead a "lighter" window manager (unix for any desktop & menu & icon controlling software.)
There is now also an Ubuntu live-cd that you can download and try, as mentioned above, without changing anything on your hard drive. Please don't be surprised when everything is pretty slow to load though!
posted by wzcx at 1:56 PM on March 3, 2005
There is now also an Ubuntu live-cd that you can download and try, as mentioned above, without changing anything on your hard drive. Please don't be surprised when everything is pretty slow to load though!
posted by wzcx at 1:56 PM on March 3, 2005
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by white_devil at 3:18 PM on March 2, 2005