New, and looking for the simplest version of linux.
 

I am wanting to replace windows xp on my home built P.C. I would like to ask the community to suggest the simplest version of Linux to start with, where to download it from, and the basic instillation instructions. Hopefully from there I can begin the long process of becoming proficient. Thank you for your input and advice in advance. Lancil

I would suggest 'Linux Mint'.

I would recommend Linux Mint, Mepis or Zorin OS. You also should have a look at this article, so that you go into the change with the right conceptions: Linux is not Windows

I would advise you to keep XP and dual boot Linux. Just shrink the XP partition and use the rest of the drive for Linux. I give myself about 5GB of free space on the pre-existing Windows partition when I install Linux on a new computer that comes with Windows. Windows comes in handy when I go to coupon sites that require a Windows-only printer program in order to print coupons.

Like RockDoctor, I think replacing XP may not be best. If XP is what you are comfortable with, then you may appreciate the opportunity to fall back on it later. Here are some alternatives you might consider.

Boot Linux from a live CD and play with it from there. This way you can try many distros and gauge how well you like each without risking your existing Windows system. You can also get some idea of how well each distro likes your hardware configuration, and what problems you may have before installing Linux. One disadvantage of live CDs is that the OS will not perform very well because it has to frequently read from the CD, which is much slower than reading from hard disk. The other disadvantage is that any customizations you make while running a live CD disappear when you reboot.

Install Linux on a virtual machine, such as VirtualBox, inside Windows. Running Linux in a virtual machine is definitely the least risky option. You can do anything you want to virtual Linux without any possibility of impacting your existing Windows system. One disadvantage is that you aren't testing Linux against your physical hardware, so you don't get the benefit of that experience. Another disadvantage is that properly setting up a virtual machine and getting any particular distro to work with it sometimes requires a bit more technical knowledge than simply booting a CD. Finally, a virtual machine will never perform as well as bare hardware, so don't expect to set any speed records.

Dual boot Linux with Windows. You can try Linux on your real physical hardware, and you get maximum performance. There is a real danger to your existing system though, because editing the partition table always entails some risk. Even though most installers make setting up a dual boot system pretty easy, it is still possible to mistakenly delete your existing Windows system. So backup any data you care about to at least two external media before proceeding.

It all depends on your needs. The reason there are so many distros is because each tries to accommodate the needs of different groups of users.

I like Kubuntu for my personal desktop system, but there are many others worth considering. Try some of these places to help you choose.

• http://www.linuxquestions.org/reviews/index.php/cat/2
• http://www.lqiso.org
• How to Choose Linux
• http://polishlinux.org/choose/quiz
• http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc
• http://distrowatch.com

If you want to try Ubuntu:
Ubuntu home page
Ubuntu download page and installation instructions
Install Ubuntu within Windows (Wubi)

HTH

Hello ..I have been a Linux user for 2 weeks now and before never used it..
I downloaded Linux Mint Julia 10 LXDE..from Linux in the Directory and its not a live CD just a 4gb USB thumb drive..........
I was amazed at how everything on my new net book works...and during install easy....

I want to change to smaller distro...but now I will not ..because it all works so good and easy..not one driver issue...only sound but that was my fault ...all i did was untick mute button and it works..

My advice for what its worth ...Linux Mint and sit back and be amazed everyday..

Cheers

Fozzie

Mint (as above) or Zorin

I'm not doubting anyone, just curious. How are Mint or Zorin simpler than Debian? Do they have somewhat the same "goal" of Ubuntu in making it more even more user-friendly, only succeeding more at it and/or being more stable? I got to experiment at least Mint live someday.

I don't plan to change from Debian anytime soon, I just tend to get in some trouble when I'm installing and configuring it for someone else. I've managed to setup everything correctly on my own PC long ago and since then I've never had any serious, time-consuming issue, so I just can't remember how it was all set up in the first place when I try to do the same on a different PC. Perhaps Mint or Zorin could be helpful in this regard... got to take a look at it one of these days.

Wow, thanks for all of the quick responses. I think I will try Mint and see how it goes. Thanks again, Lancil

When i started i was very confused by the amount of distros.
Today i would say to myself (just starting):
Go for a distro either based on the rpm-packaging-system or for one based on the debian-packaging-system.
That would be Fedora or Debian (or any OS based on either RedHat or based on Debian).
If you use Debian or Ubuntu or Mint really doesn't matter much. LIke mentioned above Mepis is good, and it has a very friendly and helpful community.
I am far from knowing the bigger part of all the distros out there, hence this is as far i can tell today.

side note:
same here.

Mint is pretty much ubuntu with a few tweaks, though IIRC it does come with all the codecs and DVD support 'out of the box'. ZorinOS is another tweaked ubuntu, in zorins case its just a lot more software installed stock. Things like WINE, but I'm not sure if all the versions of zorin have WINE as part of the standard install. BTW zorin is another 'pay to d/l the 'premium versions' OS-

http://www.zorin-os.com/premium.html

I really hate it when people use 'donate' when they mean 'pay'....

They might be slightly more usefriendly, for people with hardware with poor linux support. Its also easier to install the ATI/AMD or nVidia drivers with jockey-gtk than it is to use the command line like you do in debian, not that its that hard to get the closed GPU drivers going from command line.

I've never found any ubuntu based distro to be as stable as debian.

Mint comes with all codecs and Flash already installed, usable out of the box. Zorin OS' aims especially at the Windows user, it even somewhat mimics the XP start-menu and has wine pre-installed. I gave the rc of the upcoming version 5 a try in Virtualbox and find it somewhat handy for "converts".
Both are based on Ubuntu, but in my eyes they do the job of being newbie.friendly far better than Ubuntu.

Thanks. I thought that Mint was initially based on ubuntu but had changed to debian somewhat recently, that was the main reason why I asked. Perhaps it's the other way around. Or perhaps my mind just made that up/got confused with some other distro.

Hello,

Have a look at their website http://www.linuxmint.com/. Normally all Linux Mint editions are based on Ubuntu but they also have a LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) which is based on Debian testing and is a rolling release. Although being based on Debian testing, LMDE is very stable in my opinion. I've been using it for a couple of months on my work laptop and hasn't failed me yet.

Kind regards,

Eric

Also, you might want to read this http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Hi,

And to add one more, pretty complete and very 'understandable', is this one: http://www.tuxradar.com/newtolinux

Kind regards,

Eric

That is not true anymore. They have changed the base of the XFCE edition to Debian and will do the same with the Fluxbox edition. They may change the other community editions, but currently no decision is made about that. Have a look at the FAQ on this page.

Hi,

I don't quite understand what you mean. Aside from the normal Linux Mint versions they have a LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) which includes Gnome and some time ago they also provided one with Xfce which has the same base, Debian testing. Could you clarify a bit on what you mean with 'not true anymore'?

Kind regards,

Eric

Ubuntu and its offshoots are about as simple as you can get...or at least I thought so until I came across Doudou Linux. :)

LMDE that is based on debian testing is neither stable nor newbie friendly. Just have quick look at lmde forums, i was shocked to find so many people with limited linux knowledge stuck at command line after an upgrade. LMDE might be easy to install but maintaining the system is a different thing. Things break often, upgrades are daily - nothing what a stable, user friendly distro should be. It's an admirable goal to be a stable rolling distro but lmde is still far away from that.

Did anyone pointed to Fedora yet? Or Pardus?

And many more to chose from... just read reviews available, download it and run in Live mode without installation.
Whatever you feel like your home - go on with installation.

I think one problem with questions like "what is the simplest Linux" is that simplest has many interpretations. Simple to me implies a working keyboard, mouse, sound, display; printing, wireless, and webcams should be, to borrow a phrase formerly used by Microsoft, plug-and-play. To some users, simple requires the ability to play mp3s and DVDs without any tweaks (Fedora fails here, but adding the rpmfusion repositories is an easy fix).

Should a newbie start with a stable but conservative, slow-moving distro (Debian, CentOS) or go for a fast-moving, bleeding-edge distro (Fedora, Ubuntu, Arch, etc...)? My personal approach to learning Linux was something on the order of fix it until it breaks, but I realize not everyone would like to go that route.

FWIW, I'll go on record as recommending Fedora.

I just meant you statement that all versions, except LMDE, are based on Ubuntu. As you can see from the link I provided the Fluxbox edition will also change to Debian Testing as base, and the other community editions may eventually follow. I just wanted to correct that.

Hi,

Thanks for the clarification, I was incomplete on my statement as you mentioned.

Kind regards,

Eric