I'm finally sick of Windows.

I've decided that Microsoft wants to win the award for "Biggest Asshole" and i'd like to try another OS. I haven't had much experience with other OSs so please help me to decide which one is the best. I just want something that is incredibly capable and versatile that doesn't take me forever to figure out. Please help a noob.

well after looking in the internet for an hour i know that X is the pretty gui and that somehow i must get to boot without X to install nvidia... Here's my question, Where can I find help for a total ass-whipped-noob on SLACKWARE... omg

Could try the Slackware forums. Slack isn't exactly known for being a noob distro. I heard you have to write your own init scripts and everything.

>>42

You heard entirely wrongly.

Better install ubuntu. Best noob distro ever imo. (not only noobs use it lal). They got a great wiki. check that out if you need some further help

Slackware is awesome. It Doesn't Suck (TM), unlike most other distros.

But it's not for a beginner. Stay far away.

>>45
I've asked other slack users about this, and haven't had a satisfactory reply. What is it about it that makes it so great?

>>46
It differs by user, but here's why I favour it (no specific order):

* It's fairly conservative, yet not insanely so. Net result is stability and security without being too far behind the curve. Debian was really cursed in this regard before they sped up their cycles.
* The filesystem layout is default. This has several benefits, like not needing --prefix, software being found where it's normally expected, fewer conflicts due to unusual paths, paths getting uglified if you do a source install, being able to find help on the Internet more easily, etc.
* Related to both above: it doesn't try to reinvent the wheel. Take Debian or SuSE, for example: they do all sorts of strange things to config files. What they do to Apache in particular is a pet peeve of mine, where they both split the file into several (each differently) and do wonky things with them. Thanks, but no.
* Mixing packages and source-compiles doesn't introduce conflicts. I've had problems when I've had to do custom compiles of software on other distros, because most package systems are amazingly stupid when it comes to external software. They're an all-or-nothing deal. Working around them is something I can do without. The drawback with Slackware is it won't protect you from yourself; you'd better know what you're doing.
* Minimalist install with whatever you want on top. There are very few required packages, so it's easy to vary from tens of megabytes to multi-gig. This comes in handy, particularly with older hardware. I've done the whole gamut, and due to the way the init system is set up it scales quite well.
* Nicer init system. Trivial, but there's this.
* Nice install system. Again, trivial, but some distros can't be installed with stdout redirected to a serial port or something equally unusual.

Generally, Slackware doesn't get in my way, while other distributions do. This is the key point.

The problem with most distributions seems to be that they're trying to anticipate and solve problems for me, but they consistently backfire. Instead of KISS they have this Not Invented Here syndrome. This doesn't help.

Anyway, I hope that gives a general idea of where I'm coming from. Slackware isn't perfect, not even close (for example, automated detection of devices is... a bit thin), and it's definitely not for the majority of people (are you an actual sysadmin?), but it is for me.

PS. I don't use slackware for the desktop. I use XP and OSX.

>>47
Mixing packages and source-compiles

The conflicts caused by this is what got me off Slackware.

>>40
you should have partition your HD and run multiple OSes.

Keep XP while trying to tackle a new OS.

>>50

Yeh because buggy unusable NTFS support is ftw amirite?

Has anyone tried http://www.pcbsd.org/ ?

>>49
I'm not certain I follow.

Imagine for a moment that I need a custom compile of some application (X). I do that, yay, all is well. Now let's say I want to add some other software (Y) that depends on X.

With Slackware I install it and I'm good to go. All the other package systems I've dealt with begin screaming at this point. They believe that X isn't installed, and they want to install it. You can't install it, because that'll break your custom X, so you have to force these package systems to ignore the error (permanently).

Realistically I'd just make a package for whatever distro and roll it out, but I can do that in Slackware too. However sometimes it's not worth the effort, or I'm not interested in dragging in the entire X tree as a dependency which is actually optional in compile, and this is where danger will robinson sets in.

Since Slackware, by default, installs applications in a sane location, I don't see how you'd conflict. Just set /usr/local/* before /usr/* in your paths and you're good to go.

Maybe I missed something?

>>It seem the Darwine project is now trying to add CPU emulation so you don't need to recompile a program, but since OSX is moving to x86 anyway, I think that's a dead idea.

Kinda sucks for those of us with PPC Macs and no immediate plans to upgrade.

In any case. If you're sick of Windows, your two realistic alternatives (IMHO) are buying a Mac or installing Ubuntu Linux on your PC. Going with the Mac will cost you, but will be easier to figure out. Despite a couple of minor stupidities, Mac OS X really is quite intuitive, but don't expect absolutely everything to be done exactly the same way as on Windows. A lot of people mistake "user friendliness" with "working exactly the same way as what I used to use".

Ubuntu will be a lot cheaper, since you won't have to buy the OS or a new computer to run it on, but has a bit more of a learning curve. That said, of the Linux distributions you could choose, it has about the best focus on usability, and is based on Debian so it has about the best package management out there. You will need to spend some time figuring it out, but you do with anything new you try. It won't take you terribly long, I can say that much.

There's a few other operating systems around; Plan 9, the BSDs, GNU/Hurd, etc, but Linux in some form and Mac OS X are currently the best options for those new to a non-Windows world.

well what i had was windows(ntfs btw) then mepis and fedora core then i had a virtual partition with knoppix xandros and games knoppix

if your gonna go without windows i'd reccomend fedora core or xandros(note my install was useing the freebsd mbr but the fedora core mbr will work as well)

www.kanotix.com . You'll have to translate it using babelfish or something, but it's definitley worth it.

This one comes with the power of debian, but the ease of not using command lines for installations (for newbies).

I personally thought it was wonderful. It's based off of Knoppix and comes only as a Live CD, though, once inside, you can permanently install it to your hard drive. It's worth a try.

>>56
Yeah Kanotix is pretty nice. I used it to install Gentoo because it was the only decent LiveCD at the time with x86_64 support. I did find that it failed to propery set up my eth0 - gave me a ridiculously low MTU, so I couldn't do shit with the internet until I'd figured out what the problem was and run ifconfig to set it to the standard 1500.

You don't need babelfish for the site btw, there's a language menu :P

Overall Slax is probably my favourite livecd at the moment.

OS X

wut is the best for porn downloads?

>>59
Internet Explorer on an unpatched version of XP with no firewall or virus scanner.