which linux?

[retsam]

Most of the newer distributions will also have a live CD version, like Knoppix. I know Ubuntu has one as well.

ya i heard somethig like that... but knoppix-std...has all the fun stuff built in...mmmm password hacking mmmmm

[Subtestube]

Originally Posted by wnd

I use Debian GNU/Linux sid myself, but from what I've heard, I'd recommend Ubuntu for people who are new to Linux. And just to start another war between Gnome/KDE, you may want to try Kubuntu as well.

I must admit, I used to really really always go with KDE desktops, but Gnome 2.0 is a real step up. I really like Ubuntu under Gnome. Much moreso than I did before. It also doesn't feel totally like it's trying to be Windows any more, (more like it's trying to be MacOS ;P), which I quite like. These Desktops need to find something to set them apart a little, whilst still being very usable.

[wnd]

Originally Posted by Subtestube

I must admit, I used to really really always go with KDE desktops, but Gnome 2.0 is a real step up.

I always prefered GTK+ (~Gnome) applications over QT (~KDE) because of their looks. IMO GTK+ 1.x was rather awful but not as horrible as QT at the time. I like the "clean look" of stock GTK+ 2.x, but not the current trend of following Gnome UI guidelines which seems to give less control over things. On the other hand I still dislike KDE for it's default look: color gradients, rounded edges and such, but configurability tends to be better. While I don't use either Gnome or KDE as a desktop -- actually, I don't use a desktop at all, just FVWM2 -- I still prefer Gnome applications over KDE for the small number of applications I regulary use. Now that I think of it, there are only three applications with a GUI I regulary use: Galeon, X-Chat, and Rhythmbox. I'd love to use AmaroK instead of Rhythmbox, but for some reason AmaroK always stops playing after certain time.

Anyway, to the real reason I decided to post. ;-) Taking about Ubuntu reminded me about this post at slashdot: http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.p...2&cid=13885558

[i.r-fool]

Originally Posted by Daneel Olivaw

I know that Fedora carries a huge amount of drivers, you probably don't have to worry about that. Linux is very mature now.


Though an ATI card for Linux might not be a perfect fit.

So, does that mean that even though my motherboards website doesn't have linux drivers, Fedora has it's own drivers? Are they generic or something? Forgive me if I don't understand, I'm still using windows and I've never touched or seen linux b4 but I'm starting 2 get very interested. BTW is it possible to have a dual boot with windows and linux? Also, my LCD screen's specs includes windows and mac, but says nothing about linux, will it be an issue? does linux have different resolutions or displays etc?

I've found Simplymepis and Ubuntu to have the best stability on my nforce3 rig, and some of the friendliest user support on their forums. As far as drivers, Mepis and ubuntu bothe support my chipset out of the box, but getting 3d on my 6800gt required a little work...still easy tho. As others have stated, 99% of linux os's are free so dld and burn a couple. I keep a spare hdd set aside just to road test new releases. Beware tho...linux is VERY addictive

[bier]

hey guys,

please keep in mind that 'linux' means the KERNEL only...

so you are not searching for 'a linux'.. you are searching for 'a linux distribution' like debian, fedora, suse, gentoo, slackware, ... they all run the same 'linux' - there is only one 'linux' - the kernel. ;-)

so you are not searching for 'a linux'.. you are searching for 'a linux distribution' like debian, fedora, suse, gentoo, slackware, ... they all run the same 'linux' - there is only one 'linux' - the kernel. ;-)

Very true, however ,with all due respect , searching for, learning about, learning to comfortably use a linux distro for the very first time can be daunting and confusing. Matters of syntax aside, I think we all know what i-r is asking. Peace...

[holmes]

For a new user I'd recommend Mandrake(Mandriva)/SuSE.. although I've heard good things about Ubuntu as well.. Download a couple distros and go with one that makes you happy.

[uOpt]

FreeBSD.

Outside of that, Fedora Core 4 is my favorite "real" Linux distribution.

Fedora stopped overly messing with integrated software (kernel in particular), they are getting better about it and concentrate on doing it in few selected places they find important. On FC4 I find I don't have to replace kernel, X11, bash, xterm and compiler anymore.

I *hated* Ubuntu, jesus that is one screwed up Unix. Debian is too old from a package standpoint. Gentoo is a whole OS built around a useless microoptimization, not to mention it doesn't even boot on my dual Opteron. So that's that.

Never tried Suse or Madrake because I see no reason to pay when all the others come at no cost. The major factor here being that I want to hand out CDs to all my friends, which doesn't play to wel if they are $60 apiece.

So, does that mean that even though my motherboards website doesn't have linux drivers, Fedora has it's own drivers? Are they generic or something? Forgive me if I don't understand, I'm still using windows and I've never touched or seen linux b4 but I'm starting 2 get very interested. BTW is it possible to have a dual boot with windows and linux? Also, my LCD screen's specs includes windows and mac, but says nothing about linux, will it be an issue? does linux have different resolutions or displays etc?

As stated, Linux has matured alot last couple of years and 'most' distros will 'just work' right out of the box. Dual booting...i've done it on seperate and on the same hdd's. And if I can get it to work...well . I've never tried an LCD yet. What I would suggest is to go to [url="http://distrowatch.com/[/URL]. To the right are listed a ton of distros..click on one and at the top you will see user and distro supported forums where just browsing should answer most of your questions. Best of luck and if you don't mind the learning curve you'll have a ton of fun, as wwell as a powerful os.

[uOpt]

Hm I just checked Fedora Core's 4 kernel to verify my so far unverified assumption that they don't mess with it that much anymore.

2.6.13-1.1532_FC4 has 106 patches relative to Linus/kernel.org 2.6.13.4, not counting the .4 patch itself.

The recently checked in 2.6.14 only has 93 so far.

I wonder why the things looks more solid. In the case of 2.6.13 you could argue that the Linus kernel was actually screwed up.

In any case, the Ubuntu kernel on my notebook didn't leave one stone on the other, so FC either has a point with the patches or they are more careful not to mess up things.

Hasn't the fedora crew slowed the release cycle way down just so they CAN take more care? Not up on FC since the FC2 days. Been pretty much debian since then. Sorry btw, not trying to hijack a thread..