Trying out Linux

[freeze_sr]

I'm interested in Linux. Mainly curious. What is the best Linux to use ( i heard there are many versions, im not sure) for someone who wants to mess around and just want something new to play around with since i can't play with Vista yet.

Something that is almost as functional as Win XP.

[zeezee]

Ihave tried Red Hat 9 a long time ago. It was a good OS. But now Red Hat is not free I think.
You can go for Fedora or Ubuntu, which are free versions.
(I think :D)

http://fedoraproject.org/
http://www.ubuntu.com/
http://www.redhat.com/
:wave:

[eranga262154]

I've used Ubuntu 5.0 few years back. It's also a good OS. Now you can find the version 7. And also it is easy to setup than redhat actually.:p

[Lord Orwell]

ubuntu is the way to go, and it has a really neat desktop.

[eranga262154]

ubuntu is the way to go, and it has a really neat desktop.


Of course, it has much cleaner desktop than redhat. And also it is easy to setup, I got it clearly on my second attempt.

[RobDog888]

Thread Moved

[Lord Orwell]

not only that, but i am not sure what the OP meant by "nearly as functional as xp".
I guess after setting it up, he could delete 3/4 of the built-in programs, but he won't be able to lower security that far.

[grilkip]

I'm also on the Ubuntu bandwagon, the other mainstream distros are also userfriendly, but Ubuntu just has more of the little things that make desktop noobs like me happy.

[wossname]

I have nothing positive to say about Ubuntu. So I won't say anything about it.

Fedora has served me very well the last 18 months or so. It's excellent.

Alternatively, try CentOS.

[Lord Orwell]

do you use the gl-enabled desktop? Where everything is 3d or 2d-stretch and sizable?

[freeze_sr]

What I meant by 'as functional as XP' was something that has easy to use interface. (But i'm willing to learn) Many years ago I switched on a computer with linux, I did not know where to start or how to use it.

I'll start downloading Ubuntu since that seems to be the most mentioned.


Wossname, what problems did you face with ubuntu?

[eranga262154]

What I meant by 'as functional as XP' was something that has easy to use interface.

As I said earlier open source are not much familiar for me. But in my quite little experience on Linux, for your this requirement Ubuntu could be the best.

[Lord Orwell]

What I meant by 'as functional as XP' was something that has easy to use interface. (But i'm willing to learn) Many years ago I switched on a computer with linux, I did not know where to start or how to use it.


that's how i felt the first time i ran mac OS. And NO ONE can claim it is hard to use. You just have to learn where everything is.

[kregg]

I have nothing positive to say about Ubuntu. So I won't say anything about it.
Have you actually tried it? If you could give at least 5 really good reasons why anybody shoudn't use Ubuntu, I'll shut up about Ubuntu. Give me more reasons and I might just dissapear off the Linux Development part of VBF.

Fedora has served me very well the last 18 months or so. It's excellent.
Every time I've tried it, it has not been a "pick up and go" OS, something Ubuntu has pretty much been since I first tried it (6.06 or "Dapper Drake"). I've always had to edit the X11.conf file to get the resolution just right, I've had problems with sound (Sound not playing correctly, MP3s not playing at all due to lack of codecs, etc), but worst of all, every time I've used Fedora, any programs I use has to crash at least once; One multimedia program failed to start up at all, and that was all the time, not a one-off. It makes me wonder that if the Ubuntu distro was derived from the Red Hat distributions, would you have a different attitude overall?

For somebody starting off in the Linux world, I would suggest Ubuntu, because its pretty much as simple as anyone can get, but still has functionality. If any newbie had to go through what I had to go through with Fedora, they would've been put off with Linux within minutes and would miss out the brilliance of Linux. I've tried all sorts of fruity distros (some I can't even remember), but time and time again, Ubuntu comes out on top for me in terms of easiness.

However, I have tried CentOS, and if anyone bears any sort of grudge against Ubuntu, I would recommend CentOS. I was considering converting myself.

[kregg]

I'll start downloading Ubuntu since that seems to be the most mentioned.
If you are worried about burning ISO problems, or just lack a spare CD-R around, you can go to the Shipit (http://shipit.ubuntu.com) service online and order a free CD.

[CyberSurfer]

It never ceases to amaze me how easily provoked Linux users are when distros are on the table...for what it's worth, my vote goes to OpenSuSE...we use it on all our servers and I use it as my main desktop OS at work. I was very impressed with the latest 10.3 version, it was the only time I've ever seen compiz-fusion work out of the box!

[kregg]

I've tried openSUSE once and the package installer was terrible. I wouldn't shun the compiz-fusion thing working on openSUSE, because it seems all major distros are following suite. Ubuntu comes with compiz-fusion, and mine worked straight away, and I have onboard graphics.

But last time I remember openSUSE, it was very good for just the "get up and go" sort of work. Using distros, it really depends on the end user. If you're going to sit there all day doing office work, browse the web, and possibly listen to music (example) then openSUSE probably fares better than Ubuntu. If you're only into 1337 c0d, then probably Fedora or any Red Hat distro is crucial since they have lots of development packages on one DVD. If you're like me and want something different from the OS, then go for Ubuntu I guess.

Oh, and don't bother trying to do wireless networking on any Linux distros (to date - especially with WPA). They're generally confusing. If anyone can get connected to a Wireless WPA network with their distro, let me know. I have a laptop that has Vista on it, so it can be spared :D

[tr333]

If anyone can get connected to a Wireless WPA network with their distro, let me know. I have a laptop that has Vista on it, so it can be spared :D
I was testing out Ubuntu on my old apple powerbook, which has a broadcom chipset for wireless. All I had to do to connect to a WPA network was install gnome-network-mananger (now installed by default, i think) and install the bcm43xx drivers. It just worked for me (which doesn't seem to happen for most people).

[kregg]

I was testing out Ubuntu on my old apple powerbook, which has a broadcom chipset for wireless. All I had to do to connect to a WPA network was install gnome-network-mananger (now installed by default, i think) and install the bcm43xx drivers. It just worked for me (which doesn't seem to happen for most people).
I'll try that out later. Thanks for that :D

BTW which distro was you using?

[freeze_sr]

Ok,finally installed Ubuntu 7.10. Now I have a problem, Once I boot, then select ubuntu, it starts up loads a few lines of text, then goes to a blue & grey screen that says:

The display server has been shut down about 6 times in the last 90 seconds. It is likely that something bad is going on. Waiting for 2 minutes before trying again on display :0.

Once I press ok, it tries again then comes back to the blue&grey screen

What is the matter?

[grilkip]

Was this after a clean install or did you install some new software?

What's your hardware?

[freeze_sr]

Right after i installed. I never got to log in or to the desktop.

PC:
p4 3.0
MSI mainboard p4m900
integrated graphics
512 RAM

[wossname]

It never ceases to amaze me how easily provoked Linux users are when distros are on the table...for what it's worth, my vote goes to OpenSuSE...we use it on all our servers and I use it as my main desktop OS at work. I was very impressed with the latest 10.3 version, it was the only time I've ever seen compiz-fusion work out of the box!
I'd also lend my support to OpenSuse, forgotten about that one. Very good. Especially the software maintenance tools.

Kregg. Yes I've be subjected to ubuntu on more than one occasion. I will not be drawn on the topic further. :)

caveat:
However I do speak from the perspective of a programmer and not of a casual user. I tend to expect a lot from a distro and I am prepared to go a long way to ensure that my box is set up right.

[CyberSurfer]

I'm very much in that position too, however I've been very impressed with OpenSuSE 10.3 for that very reason.....I use Linux as my main desktop machine at work so have a rather length list of requirements from a distro and it's been absolutely straightforward in this case to get it to a state where I can use it happily. Almost everything was there by default and the few things that were missing were available as RPMs - I'm happy to compile software from source if needed but it's always nice not to have to.

[packetVB]

openSuse 10.3 has gotten my vote also.
Ive tried several distros to but was always put off by one thing or the other.
I think openSuse has got it right.
Bye bye windows.

[zeezee]

Hey people, sorry to tell this, but shouldnt we help the OP to solve his problem ?:confused:

He's having hard time installing ubuntu. Has anyone come accorss that kind of problem? I once came accross this using Knoppix. But cant remember how I reolved it.

@freeze_sr
What is your Graphics card chipset?

:wave:

[freeze_sr]

VIA Chrome9 HC IGP

It is integrated with the motherboard (MSI)

[zeezee]

well, I guess you are out of luck. This chipset seems to be not supported by Ubuntu or Linux :(

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B2DVFC_enLK221LK222&q=VIA+Chrome9+HC+IGP+%2B+ubuntu&btnG=Search
http://www.mail-archive.com/ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com/msg542865.html
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=504849


:wave:

[freeze_sr]

I did not know such a problem can exist.

[zeezee]

I did not know such a problem can exist.

Actually such problems exist. Not all hardware supports Linux. Some are very hard to get in linux. This was pointed out in some posts in this thread also.
I had a very bad experience with a Core 2 Duo Server where we tried to install Fedora 64 bit version. The actual problem was SATA controller. We had to wait till compatible driver was released. We even chaged about three Intell Motherboards.

SO first you would have to check for hardware compatibility. There might be dirvers out there, but you got to search.
Anyway in your case, a generic driver should work. I dont know about Ubuntu (I havent used it), In linux it could work like that (as I remember).

Is it possible to get a screen shot of the startup screen. Print Screen wont work. May be a Digital Camera Photo ? :D

And when it comes to this

The display server has been shut down about 6 times in the last 90 seconds. It is likely that something bad is going on. Waiting for 2 minutes before trying again on display :0.

see whether there are any options to change setting. In Knoppix, it was there. try entering 1 and pressing ok (Enter)

:wave:

[freeze_sr]

I reinstalled ubuntu earlier and this time while installing, when it gave a selection to choose the resolution, i selected 640x480, (previous installation i chose 1024x768)

Still it does not work. Now it just turns of and on my monitor a few times and just stays in a black screen, nothing mentioned.

Now know why windows is expensive - everything is done for you.

[zeezee]

Sigh
This VIA chipset is giving troubles all over the world.

Ok I think this driver should work.

http://www.viaarena.com/default.aspx?PageID=420&OSID=45&CatID=3220&SubCatID=182
But the problem is , can you give the driver when you are installing Ubuntu ? Like choosing third party drivers (RAID,etc...) in Windows installation ?

And try to set resolution to 800*600.

This is the installation guid for Ubuntu , try this and see any luck there. I searched but out of luck. :(

https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/installation-guide/i386/index.html

:wave:

[Lord Orwell]

I reinstalled ubuntu earlier and this time while installing, when it gave a selection to choose the resolution, i selected 640x480, (previous installation i chose 1024x768)

Still it does not work. Now it just turns of and on my monitor a few times and just stays in a black screen, nothing mentioned.

Now know why windows is expensive - everything is done for you.
hah if it did tech support wouldn't be necessary. Especially via chipset

[tr333]

I'll try that out later. Thanks for that :D

BTW which distro was you using?
Ubuntu 7.04 PPC. It should work the same for the x86 version too. All depends on what drivers are available for your wireless chipset.