I've seen all the bad ideas microsoft are building in to the core of their new OS and I think I might make the switch to linux sometime before XP becomes obsolete.
Ideally, I'm looking for a user friendly version, where I can download and install programs without having to mess with the internals and copying files around without knowing where the hell they're supposed to go. Something RPM based would be good, but without the possible hassels that follow RPM based distros' =/
Haha, well ok. I dont really know what I'm rattling on about here. So, any ideas of a decent distro for someone who doesn't want to get very in-depth with linux?
Name:
Anonymous2005-09-29 15:51
You're probably better off going for a Debian based distro because RPMs are shit.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 1:31
>>2
Yes, RPMs are crap. Dependency hell is one "feature" that should stay on Windows.
Mandriva and SUSE are two distros designed for Linux newbies. Debian and Ubuntu may also be worth looking at. Gentoo is probably too technical for you.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 4:19
>>3
Windows never had the dependency "feature", nor three gazillion versions of glibc, nor several versions of libraries for several programs, nor a complete ugly shitty mess of application files distributed over a hundred directories, among other things. That was invented on *nix.
>>1
You WANT to know where stuff goes. Like cock goes in here, only for apps. But it's really complicated in Linux.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 9:39
Windows never had the dependency "feature"
Actually it did. Don't you remember DLL hell? MS "solved" it by telling vendors to keep their dlls in their own damn directories. There are some who say Linux applications should do the same. Gobo is the distro of choice if that's what you want.
Incidentally the OP wanted suggestions on which distro to use, so your "zomg lunix sux use windows" trolling was completely unhelpful.
ubuntu is as easy to install as windows, and its just one cd. hell they'll mail you a free one. and theyve made basically everything as simple as possible for a first timer :) it also has synaptic, which is the best way to install programs ever in my opinion, it just lists everything available by catagory, or you can search for stuff. at least its logical compared to some other package managers. now, to feed some trolls: >>3
rpm's were a dumb fucking concept, it would be like if all windows programs came as zip files with none of the required DLL's, and i wouldnt really recommend suse, its truly shit now(tried the 9.x versions? 5 programs for the same fucking thing by default) >>4
o, windows had dependencies. ever try to run a program(after it installs "broken", dpkg style) and have it pop up saying it needs blah.dll to run? theres your dependency, and ive seen it whine about visual basic/visual C++(which half life 2 uses!) bitching that it needs versions x, but you have version y installed. then you install the other version, bam, 2 versions of the same fucking library. and you KNOW where stuff goes, it basically either goes to /usr/bin, /usr/share, or your home folder(which are pretty much the equivalent of /windows, program files, and my documents) >>5
lol you should have said they tried to fix it that way, what ended up happening is everyone stopped including the dll's for shit and you had to download them all the damn time from some DLLWORLD site
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 16:32
>>5
99.9% of DLLs are always backwards compatible, and you don't want or need need to know their version to load them. Ever had a look at /usr/lib? I have several versions of almost any important library, what the fuck is that shit? Who's the moron looking for specific library versions?
>>6
You only need to keep the latest version of them, and it's the software vendor's failure that it didn't come with them. You don't need to "install" them, just place them in the path. EXE directory if you want to keep them private.
And no, applications go in a hundred places at the same time, then they'll bite because some will try to link to libraries in /usr/lib which now exist in /usr/local/lib and so on. The FHS is a piece of shit. You can't keep an application with its libraries, docs (manpages), support files, etc. in a single directory and be able to launch it from anywhere (no Windows AppPaths equivalent). It's like Windows' %WINDIR%\System32 box of shit, only you have a dozen of them, and applications insist on throwing shit everywhere.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 17:26
Gentoo. Customize it however you like. Build from stage 1, 2, or 3, or just install. It has the best documentation, and the most helpful community. I never liked Debian because I always got grief from apt.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-02 22:07
Who's the moron looking for specific library versions?
Just came across one yesterday: Frozen Bubble.
It don't work no more.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-03 6:46
>>7
Still not helping the OP you know. Take your OS trolling to one of the 2^8 other Unix vs Windows holy war threads. This is a "recommend a distro" thread and guess what? Windows isn't a Linux distro.
>>8
Gentoo is wonderful for geeks like thee and me, but the OP wants to be lazy, I don't think he'll get past the "installation" such as it is.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-09 18:44
>>10
Acshully, while not strictly Linux, Microsoft has recently released what they call Windows Services for Unix, which adds most of the functionality of a unix over top of your windows 2k or xpPro. find it here
I am unable to reccomend it, or even really discuss its usability, since i'm using Gentoo Linux and haven't had a windows box for years now. I will reccomend gentoo. You will have to 'learn some linux' to get it going, but as >>8
said, it has totally excelent documentation and a very helpful community. In the long term, you will probably find this easier, since anything you do you had to learn about, and when you break something, you will already be familiar with all the resources you'll need to get it working again.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-09 19:32
>>1
you don't want linux if you just want to "download and install." not that your requirements are off in any way, but linux doesn't support an easy click and go function. either be willing to put up with some leg work or stick with windows. (btw anyone can learn how to use linux, but you do have to do your own learning). good luck
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-09 21:46
>>1
I'm thinking the exact same thing. Currently doing some lame school-project on Windows Vista, and doing research is just depressing. From what I read, articles from MS mostly, they are just sewing on a couple more pieces of cloth to their windows-quilt. Kind of sucks, since I'm a C# developer (say mono and die, it doesn't come close to the .NET Framework, unfortunately), but I made a decision to get off the sinking ship this week. Installed Core Linux a couple days ago, and I'm learning the ins and outs before adding more stuff to my system. Suppose I'll have to learn more C++ or some ugly crap like that now :/
If you're a gamer, Windows is what you're stuck with. However, Microsoft is adding their own fair share of bullshit to Vista, such as implementing opengl by having it going through directx first. I hope someone released something to fix that.
The thing about linux is that it, along with most if its software, has a much higher learning curve than windows. Regardless, if linux was a viable gaming platform I would use it.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-21 5:15
Vista will come bundled with digital rights infringement (DRM), bullshit bloatware you'll have to get rid of to become usable, yet another stupid MSIE, and other reasons why it'll be fucking slow and stupid.
"Lunix" isn't much better - it's full of legazy crap, you have to waste your time compiling and fixing code quite often, 99% of distros rely on the FHS, and you have to install a gazillion libraries and desktops to run what you want because it's so free.
My advice is to stick with tuned versions of Windows 2000, then Windows XP, for as long as your hardware works with them (tune = performance tuning, unbloating (XPLite might help), installing useful command line tools, etc), then we'll see if we can cut Vista down to something decent, or we'll all have to start thinking of moving to more decent, future Linuces for desktop and workstation use.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-21 17:04
yep, if you are a gammer, you'll miss win32, but for everything else, ubuntu is excellent. Call it math, word processing, programing, multimedia edition, net surfing, etc.
Name:
CCFreak2K!mgsA1X/tJA2005-10-21 23:45
Why is everyone all of a sudden going apeshit over Ubuntu? It's like the second coming.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-22 0:46
It's the "new thing".
People always go apeshit over new toys. Groupthink at its finest.
Name:
PenisLands!jmHUVdiJKc2005-10-24 7:15
>>24
GAMMER! GAMMER! BIG PENIS! BIG PENIS! BIG PENIS.
>>1
I switched over from Windows 2000 to Ubuntu linux this month. It does everything I need to do very well. Though what I do with a computer may differ to what you do. Here's a list of the things which are most important to me in using the computer:
Browsing the internet, talking over IM, listening to music, composing music, simple editing of images, watching some videos,
and playing some old SNES/Megadrive games using emulators, etc.
For those tasks, Linux has been great for me so far. Though it took some learning, the Ubuntu forums were a great help in getting stuff set up and working.
Name:
Anonymous2005-10-29 0:20
>>6
There are codes you can find on the internet to get LinSpire for free.