 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
what OS to use?
| View Poll Results: Which OS do you prefer??? | |||
| Knoppix |     | 3 | 15.79% |
| RedHat 9 |    | 5 | 26.32% |
| Fedora Core 2 |    | 3 | 15.79% |
| Slackware |    | 8 | 42.11% |
| Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
Hello all! I've been here on these forums for quite a while... I was thinking of installing Linux on my box to dual boot with my win2k. I'm just not sure what to use... I never installed/used one before... I'm looking for something that's easy to install, configure, and has a nice GUI...
Any suggestions? right now, I have Slackware, RedHat 9, Knoppix & Fedora Core 2... haven't made up my mind on what to use yet... what are the advantages and disadvantages of each of them??
Any suggestions? right now, I have Slackware, RedHat 9, Knoppix & Fedora Core 2... haven't made up my mind on what to use yet... what are the advantages and disadvantages of each of them??
*-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
•
•
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 209
Reputation: 
Solved Threads: 12
Posting Whiz in Training
I'll be honest. I have a huge bias in the distro choice, and preach Slackware to all. :cheesy: But I will be as far and honest in the matter as I can.
Slackware. It has BSD style init scripts which are very straight forward when cusomizing system initialization at all different runlevels. It can provide a low resource friendly environment, or provide a powerhouse of an OS. I have used it on machines as low as 120mhz/16k cache w/32mb ram and 1gb hd (even running X with blackbox if needed) all the way up to 2ghz 512mb RAM and hundreds of GB storage. Besides obviously the lack of GUI with low resources, the core still performs quick on slow systems. The kernel comes AFAIK totally vanilla, so you don't have to worry about any custom patches interfering with something you want to add on later. The sources can all be downloaded to everything that was built for the distro including the compile options used from slackware. This enables you to build the same software as slackware ships it, while also adding your own compile time option. Very handy! Releases come about twice a year. I would say that the biggest downfall is the lack of corporate support. Lots of commercial software written for Redhat can possibly run on slackware (VMWare for example) with some minor modifications, but not much seems to work "out-of-the-box." For some, this is no big deal, but when you have dead lines and compliancey issues, blah blah, you get the idea.... then this isn't gonna work.
Redhat 9 is not a terrible distro but I have had way too many pains with dependencies and what not using the package system, and it seems that any time i build something from source it doesn't work as well as I know that it should. Also, Redhat 9's support life is almost expired. Many say that Redhat is great for newbies, when really it isn't too much different than any of the other mainstream distros. From what I remember, Redhat 9 didn't even come with an mp3 decoder, yet came with a plethora of multimedia applications and as I recall the SQL that shipped with it was broken somehow.
Fedora is something that I have not messed with much, but if you are interested in Redhat, then you might as well just move over to Fedora.
Knoppix would be great for testing out your hardware to see what you can get working in linux before you actually install it.
I would boot up Knoppix to see what hardware is supported, and then I would install slackware! I would recommend doing a full install. (Around 2gb) If it turns out to not be right for you, then just try something else.
Slackware. It has BSD style init scripts which are very straight forward when cusomizing system initialization at all different runlevels. It can provide a low resource friendly environment, or provide a powerhouse of an OS. I have used it on machines as low as 120mhz/16k cache w/32mb ram and 1gb hd (even running X with blackbox if needed) all the way up to 2ghz 512mb RAM and hundreds of GB storage. Besides obviously the lack of GUI with low resources, the core still performs quick on slow systems. The kernel comes AFAIK totally vanilla, so you don't have to worry about any custom patches interfering with something you want to add on later. The sources can all be downloaded to everything that was built for the distro including the compile options used from slackware. This enables you to build the same software as slackware ships it, while also adding your own compile time option. Very handy! Releases come about twice a year. I would say that the biggest downfall is the lack of corporate support. Lots of commercial software written for Redhat can possibly run on slackware (VMWare for example) with some minor modifications, but not much seems to work "out-of-the-box." For some, this is no big deal, but when you have dead lines and compliancey issues, blah blah, you get the idea.... then this isn't gonna work.
Redhat 9 is not a terrible distro but I have had way too many pains with dependencies and what not using the package system, and it seems that any time i build something from source it doesn't work as well as I know that it should. Also, Redhat 9's support life is almost expired. Many say that Redhat is great for newbies, when really it isn't too much different than any of the other mainstream distros. From what I remember, Redhat 9 didn't even come with an mp3 decoder, yet came with a plethora of multimedia applications and as I recall the SQL that shipped with it was broken somehow.
Fedora is something that I have not messed with much, but if you are interested in Redhat, then you might as well just move over to Fedora.
Knoppix would be great for testing out your hardware to see what you can get working in linux before you actually install it.
I would boot up Knoppix to see what hardware is supported, and then I would install slackware! I would recommend doing a full install. (Around 2gb) If it turns out to not be right for you, then just try something else.
PARANOIA:
A healthy understanding of the way the universe works.
A healthy understanding of the way the universe works.
Bloody Slackers! :cheesy:
Yes. Version 9 was the last official freely-distributed "Red Hat Linux" release before they went to the (not free) Enterprise line and spawned the (still free) Fedora project. Fedora is not a direct Red Hat product; RH supports the effort as a collaborative partner, but the Fedora project itself is not an "arm" of RH. Support for RH 9 and earlier versions will probably still be available for some time in the form of documentation on the RH support site, but direct customer support and development is definitely slated for extinction very soon.
RH pulled "out of the box" mp3 support to avoid possible legal issues; you can still add it post-install. "Dependency Hell" aside, it's a pretty good distro for those coming from a Windows world; the lastest offerings from SuSE and Mandrake fall into this category as well. All are very intuitive, and come with a couple of very slick choices of GUI environments (yes, in Linux you aren't stuck with one).
Absolutely. One of the most important things about installing Linux is to have all of the gory details of your hardware specs before you install. Knoppix makes this very easy because you can run it from a CD (before you actually decide to install to your hard drive).
oalee (shameless plug here; I don't think Dani will mind):
If you have questions about (or problems with) Linux, stop over to www.justlinux.com we'll buy you a beer on the house. :cheesy:
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by i686-linux
Also, Redhat 9's support life is almost expired.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by i686-linux
Many say that Redhat is great for newbies, when really it isn't too much different than any of the other mainstream distros. From what I remember, Redhat 9 didn't even come with an mp3 decoder, yet came with a plethora of multimedia applications...
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by i686-linux
Knoppix would be great for testing out your hardware to see what you can get working in linux before you actually install it.
I would boot up Knoppix to see what hardware is supported...
oalee (shameless plug here; I don't think Dani will mind):
If you have questions about (or problems with) Linux, stop over to www.justlinux.com we'll buy you a beer on the house. :cheesy:
Last edited by cscgal; Apr 27th, 2004 at 3:53 pm.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by DMR
oalee (shameless plug here; I don't think Dani will mind):
If you have questions about (or problems with) Linux, stop over to www.justlinux.com; we'll buy you a beer on the house. :cheesy:
*-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
•
•
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 468
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 18
Posting Pro in Training
I prefer slackware also...avid slackArse since it's inception in the early nineties. The GUI from slackware (if you even use it...something I haven't done in about a year) is just a normal KDE or Gnome desktop. The thing that gets most people about slackware is that you have to manually config most stuff. To me, this is most of the fun of linux. To most people, this isn't fun at all.
If you're looking for a distro to hit the ground running with and a nice desktop with sound detected right off the bat and preinstalled video drivers....you really only have two solid choices...which most people will argue with me on.
1. Knoppix - this distro has so much support and buzz about it right now that if anything arises it most likely will be solved within a couple of weeks. I myself hate this distro mainly because everyone likes it.
2. MEPIS - My choice for GUI Linux. I loved this distro and continue to love it. My sound was auto detected and installed. It detected a USB CDRW I had. It autoconfigged my video card. Fantastic Fantastic Fantastic. It did all of this when knoppix couldn't with the same computer. All I can say is...wow. It's a live CD just like Knoppix as well so you can try before you pseudo buy. Package management is through apt-get and debian sources...so it's very stable.
So, like I said...alot of people will think I'm full of crap on this...but I don't care. I've experimented with over 30 distros in the last year and found these two will be the best experience for someone who doesn't have linux experience. Like it or leave it...my two cents worth.
If you're looking for a distro to hit the ground running with and a nice desktop with sound detected right off the bat and preinstalled video drivers....you really only have two solid choices...which most people will argue with me on.
1. Knoppix - this distro has so much support and buzz about it right now that if anything arises it most likely will be solved within a couple of weeks. I myself hate this distro mainly because everyone likes it.
2. MEPIS - My choice for GUI Linux. I loved this distro and continue to love it. My sound was auto detected and installed. It detected a USB CDRW I had. It autoconfigged my video card. Fantastic Fantastic Fantastic. It did all of this when knoppix couldn't with the same computer. All I can say is...wow. It's a live CD just like Knoppix as well so you can try before you pseudo buy. Package management is through apt-get and debian sources...so it's very stable.
So, like I said...alot of people will think I'm full of crap on this...but I don't care. I've experimented with over 30 distros in the last year and found these two will be the best experience for someone who doesn't have linux experience. Like it or leave it...my two cents worth.
My Home Away from Home: Yet Another Linux Blog
Hello,
I have done extensive work with RedHat (from 6.2 on), MKLinux (on PowerMac 7100 series), and YellowDog Linux. I have tried Debian, and did not like it.
I use RH 9 on my main servers and firewalls, and Mac OS X on the desktop.
I was disappointed with the change of RedHat's philosophy to close down their line of linux software, even though they did launch Fedora. I plan on leaving my existing boxes at RH 9 / RH 7.3 until Fedora proves herself in Core 2, and so forth. Some of the packages in Fedora are not working properly yet, and I have production machines installed that I cannot "test" with.
I liked RH that I could bring down the installation .iso 's and create an FTP based installation scheme to install Linux on other computers over a network. I tried the same thing under Debian, and found it very troubling. Debian's online support is also quite scattered, and I ended up tossing the CD's that I burned because I didn't wish to invest the time to figure it out.
I agree with other posters that dependancies can be an issue for Red Hat systems. Using apt-get, the problem is minimalized, but still, one can run across various rpm's that need other rpms in order to install properly. Rumor has it that Debian handles new software installation easier, but since I couldn't easily install it, I have no first-hand knowledge on it.
On my RH boxes, I have not had a lot of trouble compiling programs. Have built netatalk by hand, and a few amateur radio things by hand, and the makefiles and such worked just fine. Also have a few homebrew C++ things running on the boxes, again without much trouble. RH does place programs in different file directories than other distros, but ln -s can take care of some of those issues.
I will most likely work with Fedora Core 2 when it comes out, and am also tempted to try out FreeBSD and see what that is about.
Just my $0.02
Christian
I have done extensive work with RedHat (from 6.2 on), MKLinux (on PowerMac 7100 series), and YellowDog Linux. I have tried Debian, and did not like it.
I use RH 9 on my main servers and firewalls, and Mac OS X on the desktop.
I was disappointed with the change of RedHat's philosophy to close down their line of linux software, even though they did launch Fedora. I plan on leaving my existing boxes at RH 9 / RH 7.3 until Fedora proves herself in Core 2, and so forth. Some of the packages in Fedora are not working properly yet, and I have production machines installed that I cannot "test" with.
I liked RH that I could bring down the installation .iso 's and create an FTP based installation scheme to install Linux on other computers over a network. I tried the same thing under Debian, and found it very troubling. Debian's online support is also quite scattered, and I ended up tossing the CD's that I burned because I didn't wish to invest the time to figure it out.
I agree with other posters that dependancies can be an issue for Red Hat systems. Using apt-get, the problem is minimalized, but still, one can run across various rpm's that need other rpms in order to install properly. Rumor has it that Debian handles new software installation easier, but since I couldn't easily install it, I have no first-hand knowledge on it.
On my RH boxes, I have not had a lot of trouble compiling programs. Have built netatalk by hand, and a few amateur radio things by hand, and the makefiles and such worked just fine. Also have a few homebrew C++ things running on the boxes, again without much trouble. RH does place programs in different file directories than other distros, but ln -s can take care of some of those issues.
I will most likely work with Fedora Core 2 when it comes out, and am also tempted to try out FreeBSD and see what that is about.
Just my $0.02
Christian
Hi!
Fedora is a nice and simple OS.
Slackware is nice but for a newbie the installation maynot be something to look forward to.
Fedora on the other hand is easy to install and use. As you are newbie, Install everything and you won't need to install new stuff for sometime anyway, so nothing much to worry about dependencies there .
Personal choices -
1) Linux from scratch
2) Slackware - I basically like it because I can install it on Reiserfs. Fedora gives only ext3 as a choice.
3) Fedora.
Regards
Amar
Fedora is a nice and simple OS.
Slackware is nice but for a newbie the installation maynot be something to look forward to.
Fedora on the other hand is easy to install and use. As you are newbie, Install everything and you won't need to install new stuff for sometime anyway, so nothing much to worry about dependencies there .
Personal choices -
1) Linux from scratch
2) Slackware - I basically like it because I can install it on Reiserfs. Fedora gives only ext3 as a choice.
3) Fedora.
Regards
Amar
Tech support for hosting companies..:)
http://ikonware.com - Be pampered with this control panel....
http://amarjyoti.com - I finally got my personal site running.. :-)
http://ikonware.com - Be pampered with this control panel....
http://amarjyoti.com - I finally got my personal site running.. :-)
I guess fedora's a top choice... I'll give it a try...
thanks all...
thanks all...
*-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
*I am the oceans.. Still, still yet always in constant *
*motion.Quiet but never afraid,Silent but always awake*
*And no God nor Man can control where you roam.. no *
*boundaries cast forever you last.... *
*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*
•
•
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 468
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 18
Posting Pro in Training
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by oalee
I guess fedora's a top choice... I'll give it a try...
thanks all...
Odd coming from an avid slacker...but It is unsurpassed for detection and ease of use.
My Home Away from Home: Yet Another Linux Blog
|
Other Threads in the Getting Started and Choosing a Distro Forum
- Previous Thread: embedded linux
- Next Thread: thinkin of switching to linux
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
You need to join our community in order to build your list of favorite forums. You can visit the forum index for a listing of all forums.
Related Forum Features
Latest Getting Started and Choosing a Distro Posts
age-related baremetal chrome cio cloudcomputing code commercial computers crystalballsunday desktop developers development distributions distro dsl elderly embedded forums google http://expertcore.org/ innovations jauntyjackalope kernel library linus linux microsoft multi-core netgear newbies openoffice.org operating operatingsystems parallel performance processing redhat routers smp studios system systembuilders systemintegrators terminalservices thecloud thinclients tools ubuntu users virtualization vmware webbased wikis windows xenon
