I will detail out my requirements:

1. Should be very resource efficient:

My netbook is powered by a low power Atom processor clocked at 1.6 GHz with a RAM of 1 GB and has no discrete graphics card (only mobile Intel 945 express chipset). I tried running a copy of Windows 7 but the machine becomes terribly slow. I did a research on the internet of suitable alternatives and I hear about Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Joli OS, Linux Lite, CrunchBang, Zorin OS, SolusOS, Sabayon, Linux Mint, Bodhi etc etc and the list is never ending. I would love to hear if you guys could help me narrow down from my requirements further below.

2. A decent GUI still:

Note: Kindly open the links I linked with certain OSs, it has the GUI to make what I'm talking about clearer

I know UI and performance dont go hand in hand, but I will rephrase my question as which distro has the best performance to visual appearance ratio? Ok that's a bit subjective. I mean what are some of the distros that runs smoothly on lower end machines yet doesnt trade visual quality too much? This netbook is for my sister (for academic purposes) who is used to Windows world and it is very difficult for me to convince her to use an OS without much fancy icons, shiny menu bars and all that. I will try to post a picture or two to convey what I want and dont want. For instance the lightweight Puppy Linux looks little outdated. Desktop itself of most Linux distros I find on the web looks really good (partly aided by stunning wallpapers) but once you explore inside to see the menu bars and tool boxes etc they are quite archaic. For example PCLinuxOS looks stunning from outside but not so inside. I dislike LXDE variants either. I find Ubuntu and elementary OS particularly stunning. Linux Mint is quite appealing as well.

I know there are hundred different variants of each OS and everything can be customized to look like anything but I want something that's decent out of the box. May be I'm wrong to ask for OS as eye pleasing as heavy, top notch distros of Linux world but I'm just trying to convey what looks pleasing to my eyes. My friend has a Slackware customized to look stunning but I'm not that expert at all. I'm just beginning to explore Linux.

3. It should be OS alone:

Every distro I have come across packs tons of applications. I want an OS that is free of built-in softwares. I want the ability to choose what I want. Not that I can't keep uninstalling built in ones, but I prefer the default to be nothing and would want to build from there. I want the OS to be just a host not an app store. It's a little strange Linux world does this.

Of course it should have a window explorer/file explorer whatever it is. I do prefer to have all the system level frameworks, libraries etc pre-installed like flash/java etc. What I mean is I dont wan't user level applications to be bundled. A built in calculator, an image viewer and a web browser would do, at best.

4. Zero learning curve:

As I said the netbook is for my younger sister, and even the guy who will set this up for her who is me is really illiterate when it comes to Linux. I would like the whole experience to be just as straightforward as it is when one is dealing with MS Windows or MAC OS. Something that will never ask her to do command line coding! It is intended for absolute beginner. I have read good things about Ubuntu, Knoppix and Linux Mint..

5. Very easy to install additional softwares:

I need to make this a separate point. As a supplementary point to previous two, I will have to install my own preferred softwares and I need it to be a breeze. I have seen software installation attempts in Linux few years ago which required command prompt to do so! I hope to see distros which dont require that, and where it is possible to install softwares by few clicks, something that takes me via a wizard or some kind of walk through.

What doesnt matter:

1. Size of OS or installer: be it 700 MB or 4 GB, it's alright.

2. Booting time: I'm not adamant on all-round performance, let it take any time to load, but once loaded it should not be memory hungry or hog CPU.

3. Configurability, flexibility: not needed at all. At best she might change wallpaper, nothing else.

4. Release cycles: the release cycle of the distro itself doesn't matter at all. That said, I don't want a dead or inactive project.

5. Desktop environment, window manager : it doesnt matter. Let it be anything that meets my requirement. To be frank I dont even know what desktop environments or window managers are

I say either Ubuntu or MINT, Ubuntu is easier. Yes it gives you programs which you're claiming that you don't want; however when you decide you want to do stuff, you'll be happy that those programs were pre-included with the distro. The problem here is you're saying you want pure simplicity, but full control. Well, you're going to have to learn a "little" Linux to be able to exert some control and tune a distribution to what you want. Ubuntu will install and load right into it's user interface from the get go. From there you can alter it however you wish. Or you can try a bunch of Live distributions.

Ubuntu will include OpenOffice which you'll need to read and write documents. As well as an email application and a browser.

1 members found this post helpful.

The processor speed and memory are much the same as for my desktop, and better than my laptop, so you don't need anything lightweight. "Low power" in Linux terms means a lot less than it does in Windows. I've seen 111 different distros over the years, rangling from the brilliant to the dire, so here goes.

Do not bother with Ubuntu. It is most unlikely to work, as the installation disk has very poor support for Intel graphics. Even if it does work, it will perform badly.

Stick with Xfce or Mate for a desktop. They are not demanding, but not too spartan for the new user. I'd say Mint: no-one ever seems really unhappy with Mint. If the installation disk doesn't start, reboot and use the failsafe option. The software management programs these days list the programs and you just click on one to select it and click on "apply" to install. You can also search for items, like "video editor".

Why do you not want applications bundled? What harm will they do? Any distro that just installs a bare system will not be a beginners' distro. This is not Windows, where the more you install the slower things get.

Why should she not want to configure things? The panel will be at the top or bottom of the screen; she might like it in a different position: even at the side, with a wide screen. It's also nice to set up keyboard shortcuts using the Super (aka Windows) key. I have Super-c for a calculator, Super-s to search for a file, Super-f for a file manager, and so on. Linux is all about configuration: getting the computer to work in a way convenient for you, rather than resigning yourself to working the way it expects you to.
This is what my desktop looks like:
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/8290/1am8.png

The experience of using Linux will not be like that of using Windows, any more than it will be like using OSX. It will be different, and you must accept that. But it is not difficult. In sensible countries, they use Linux in schools. The people who have trouble are "power users" of Windows who have a hissy fit every time their cherished experience proves irrelevant.

1 members found this post helpful.

You know this made me think about the one big thing I do for every desktop I'm running. I configure hot key sequences (other than the default) to allow me to swap to the next workspace in the given direction. That, to me is highly important and probably one of the biggest draws to Linux for me. I make my editors and shell prompts almost full screen sized, and further, I am working on more than one item at a time. Therefore each workspace has the apps up on it that relate to that activity. There's even a scratch workspace where I experiment, or one where I surf the web. But whether you're more a typist or more a mouse user, the capability to have a screen sized workspace is very helpful.

David is right, the experience will be vastly different from Windows. And I like your desktop there David!

I'd pick Crunch Bang or Arch Bang in that system but the GUI might be the show stopper.

1 members found this post helpful.

That sounds like you are a perfect candidate for trying a tiling WM. I would recommend to give i3 a try.

No operating system will make an Atom 270/Intel 945 system run like a modern quad-core with dedicated GPU. That said, Linux is an excellent choice for older hardware.

I personally use and recommend Xfce desktop environment. You can see some of its potential here: http://xfce-look.org/

All Linux distros have the capability to add/remove applications, and furthermore, unlike in Windows, there is no harm or "bloat" in having a few apps pre-installed that you never use (unless you have a very tiny hard drive and need the space).

Most Linux has at least some learning curve.

Most distros these days have GUI software centers. One nice thing about Ubuntu/Mint family is the "PPA" system for getting additional software repositories.

Based on the 5 requirements above, my recommendation is: Linux Mint with Xfce desktop.

(As far as which Linux Mint Xfce, if you want stability and long-term support, your best bet is Mint 13. If you like the latest software, even though it might be a little buggy, then use the current release.)

2 members found this post helpful.

Mine

Matching Netbooks. Different Distros. One is Window Manager. The Other Is Desktop enviorment.
Take you pick.

2 members found this post helpful.

@rtmistler, @DavidMcCann, @Germany_chris, @snowpine, @rokytnji

Thanks, it was all really helpful! I've zeroed in on Mint (both Mate and Xfce), Xubuntu, Slax (both suggested by a friend) and Bodhi (for Enlightenment and its minimalism). I will try them all!


I'm trying to get rid of pre-installed softwares because it will give me more trouble if I have to uninstall later for another choice. I better start from nothing. But ease of installation of new softwares is all I'm talking about. For instance Ubuntu comes with OpenOffice, but I prefer LibreOffice (for its auto color scales and data bars in Calc), so Ubuntu is giving me extra work. Moreover I hate it when OS decides (at least partially) which softwares I should use.

Is the 111 you mentioned a random high number? Or have you really kept the count of distros you have tried? If so amazing number! And you desktop looks terrible! :P

AntiX full iso comes with Libreoffice. It is Debian.

Shucks, just watch the videos.

Check your facts; Ubuntu switched from OpenOffice to LibreOffice back in 2011.

The phrase "Linux distribution" is derived from "to distribute." So, by definition, when you install a Linux distribution, you are letting someone else choose what software you should use. The people who design distros put a lot of thought and testing into which applications they will include; why not follow the advice of these experts and trust the software they pick? (If you really don't want experienced Linux experts making these decisions for you, then I recommend Linux From Scratch.)

Oops I got the wrong info, but from this thread. Nevertheless I was making a point there, with a flawed example.



Thanks for the info on terminology.



I need not buy them, simple. No matter the expertise of one, it's not going to match the taste of another. Isn't it the same experts who bundle softwares along with Windows? They may be correct, but I like to choose for myself.

You quoted snowpine's totally apt comment that you ought to go with Linux from Scratch.

Bear in mind that you're building this not for you, but for a family member. You'll have to support it. That generally goes some of following three ways, I'm sure there are more:

1. They get into it and constantly ask for changes or start doing changes their self. Either bugging you too much for your taste or frustrating you because they change it, break it, and so forth.
2. They don't really get into it, depend 1000% on you and frustrate you because they don't care.
3. You rule whatever they're doing fully, they become indifferent and really don't use it because it's just not helpful and you're too pushy.

Hey, it's nice of you to do. Why don't you make them a system, show it to them and ask if they like it? Or ... you're into Linux, right? You have something already, right? Show that to them and ask them if they like it and would use it. Let them use your computer and see if they even like it, or what they'd do differently.

It doesn't take 1 hour or 1 single day to evaluate a system, especially one you're not familiar with and decide if it's something for you. Think about your evolution in using Linux. How many years experience do you have? How much time have you spent at it? I gather something North of a few hours. Your sister will need some time to soak it in, use it, and really use it for a good week or two before she may ask, "Well, how do I put <the most current hunk star guy's picture> up as my background?" Or, "How can I view a movie that someone sent to me in an email?" "How do I do twitter?" Give her a chance to even consider those questions.

With Linux you have every right to be choosy; and there are options where you don't have to install, un-install, tweak; however the more choosy you are, the more effort you have to put into it to create the full package on your own to match your choices. And as snowpine says; LFS gives you that full control.

IMHO, why not make sure this is the right thing for the intended user, as a first step?

There's also nothing wrong with saying to a user that they'd be on their own if they installed something other than what you are giving them.

Kind of still like slitaz for under powered stuff.