Pink Poogle Toy Forum

I'm seriously considering switching to Linux. I don't know which one would be the best for someone who's a newbie with that OS. I want something that doesn't require much, if any, technical skill and would be just as great as the one that is, in terms of functionality, security, etc.

Fedora is easy to use imo.

http://www.youngcoders.com/thread11647.html

hope that helps

Mandrake is a good distribution for the new Linux user. There's loads of free online support given by other users via forums (http://www.mandrakeusers.org). Mandrake also has full RPM support, which makes installing software a lot easier than having to compile it from source. I currently run a dual boot WinME/Mandrake 10.1 Official system and couldn't be happier with it.

As for any distribution of Linux being easy enough to use without any technical ability...it really doesn't exist. The learning curve is very different from Windows, as you're going to have to use the console (command line interface) at some point. Patience is rewarded though, as Linux is so much more configurable and adaptable than any version of Windows.

As linux said, Mandrake is probably the best distro for begginers. But let me tell you something: things WILL go bad. You WILL fail at some things. Don't expected the easy road of Windows. However, once you start learning from your mistakes instead of making them, you will be amazed by the power of BASH scripting, intelligent memory management, no viruses, extreme flexibility and... welll, Linux.

Have fun.

Thanks for the help, people. I'll definetely take a good, hard look at Fedora and Mandrake.

If you don't want to give up the Windows features and and look, I suggest Linspire 4.5, it's also quite easy to use.

http://www.linspire.com

i honestly can't believe any linux user would go so low as to use winME
BTW once u get used to linux (if that isn't an oxymoron) then i recommend Gentoo.

It does sound odd to be using an older legacy OS and a new Linux distro on the same box, so I totally understand you poking humor at it. Dual boot is an unfortunate necessity for me due to several reasons - the most irreconcilable being the implementation of audio production/mastering applications (translation: still need to be a slave to Direct X). WinMe is also the last Windows version that doesn't need to run WDM audio drivers, and as such, is more flexible for sound hardware. XP and 2000 are just too clunky to run a decent SAW without overcompensating via significant hardware overhead. Maybe one day I'll buy that Mac I've been thinking about and get rid of my Windows partition altogether...

To keep this vaguely on topic: Dual-booting can be a good way of providing a "safety net" while you're learning to use Linux. Some people can not be without a working PC, and running a version of Windows in tandem with Linux can save you if you mess something up on the Linux side and don't have time to fix it right away. Gaming compatibility is another strong reason to dual-boot, as Direct X is a necessity if you want to play most of the newer mainstream games. Just don't let the availability of Windows allow you to ignore learning how to use Linux better.

That's how my computer is. There's a Linspire harddrive as well has a ME drive. But we run it because we don't like XP, my dad has had many a problem with XP.

XP isn't all it's cracked up to be. ME can be a very stable system for certain tasks, in the same manner it's also weak at some other tasks. That is valid to, say, all OS's in the world, even Linux.

I dual-boot Windows ME/Fedora currently and my box works better than when I was dualing Windows XP/Mandrake.

It's all a matter of knowing what the hell you are doing. Sadly, that's something very few users realise (or care, since they can just "call the tech guy", after all).

Thanks for the link. I've actually read about that OS before in a PC magazine. I never really looked into it, though. I'm currently viewing the demo.

About the conversation that you other guys got into concerning Windows ME and XP:

I used ME for simple tasks such as browsing, checking e-mail, the occasional game by which doesn't require much resources, and word processing. My computer still ended crashing a lot and having the blue screen a lot despite the fact that I constantly ran a virus scan, made sure my firewall was operating correctly and keeping up to date, defragementing, clearing outdates files, and all the other tasks by which you need to perform to keep your computer healthy, and I didn't install new programs often. Also, my computer specs should be well above the necessary requirements to run Win ME without any problems. I have 128MB or PC-133 RAM, 910mhz Athlon processor, and a 28.4gig hdd.

Since using Win XP, I haven't had any issues since. My computer still has that load time increase by which you could expect when installing a lot of programs on a windows-ran machine. >.> Since I don't use XP for anything but simple tasks, I haven't had any problems with it. I'm thinking about having a dual boot system with XP and one version of Linux. I've read some information about how I would go about making a dual boot system. I'm still a little confused, but I know how to work in the BIOS and through the start up boot disk menu to reformat and all that. I just haven't performed a partition before. Does it require a third-party program?

Setting up a dual boot machine isn't that daunting of a task if you're going to do a clean install of both OSs and you shouldn't need any third party partitioning tools. Just backup the data you'll want later and chart out what you're going to allocate for each OS. Use FDISK to create a Windows FAT partition (leaving enough free space for Linux partitions) and install Windows on it like usual. Most Linux distros will have a partitioning tool that runs when you install it. From there you can setup the Linux partitions (do some research/google on this because it's not as simple as it is on Windows i.e copying everything on a single partition) and install the boot loader. The boot loader is what gives you the option of selecting which OS you'll boot up to when the PC starts. If you install Linux first, Windows will overwrite the MBR and in turn, the boot loader - if that happens, most distros allow you to reinstall the boot loader if you boot up from the first CD of the distro package. If you want more detailed instructions or info that is more relevant to the particular distro you're going to install, search around on Google and I know you'll find plenty of information.

If you want to keep your current Windows installation, then you'll have to obtain third party partitioning software that will allow you to resize your current partition(s). Some warn that it isn't foolproof and may result in data loss, but I cannot speak from experience, as I've never done it that way.

I think I have ammend my eariler recommendation of Mandrake, as 10.1 Official does have it's problems. It's an oddly timed release that some users have had problems running. If you don't have any problems with paying for an OS (or can find a way to obtain it for free *cough*bitorrent*cough*), you might want to check out SuSE (by Novell). I'm planning on installing it this weekend and have heard plenty of good things about it from first-time Linux users.

Have you given any thought to burning some Live CD distros and seeing which one you like? Live CDs allow you to boot into Linux from your CD-ROM without having to install it on your HD, so it's easy to check out a distro without commiting. Live CDs need a decent amount of RAM on your system to run, so compare system requirements against your system to see if they are an option for you (or run a Live CD on a friend's PC if you don't have enough RAM).

Hope this helps