Hi all,

I'm new to linux but not to computers (over 17 years exp - hardware & software). Been thinking to tinker around with linux on a spare machine that I built as a backup.

I have the installation CD's for Red Hat Linux 9 and Fedora Core 1 both.
Which one should I install?

I've tried Fedora & it seems slow to load on my machine. So I think downgrading to redhat 9 would be okay or so. What is the general opinion?

My System Specs are as follows:

Intel Celeron 1.7 Ghz CPU
HIS Intel 845 Motherboard
384 Mb - 266 Mhz DDR RAM
Nvidia Geforce 4 - 440MX 64 Mb AGP Card
Samsung 120 Gb HDD/5400 rpm - Primary Master
Samsung SW240B CD/RW - Primary Slave
Seagate 20 Gb HDD/5400 rpm - Secondary Master
On board soundcard
USR 56.6K Internal modem
Dlink DFE-530TX Lan Card (via-rhine)

Fedora Core 1 takes over 3 min to boot up - Installation is workstation option, winxp pro takes 1.38sec to boot up :-(

Will the downgrade help? I'm not concerned about linux supporting my onboard sound card or modem (this machine is just for learning linux)

TIA
xytise

im sorta like you, obviously much younger though, been around computer hardware and software the majority of my short life, ive been dabbling in linux for a while without having a good reason to (except for all the free compilers and open source code from the net to look at)

i guess whats going on here is that RH is no longer an open source OS, since theyre the top money earner on the stock marcket and all, and RH9 is the last free (RH) release from the RH community, im glad ive got one, its sort of a benchmark in the history of linux. FC is the new open source OS from RH, it runs on my own box at home, why? i dont know, beyond the graphics, i have no clue what makes the two different, FC is supposed to be more experimental (beta kernel? ), but ive got a long way to go before that stuff starts to count to me ..
im thinking of getting slackware for my box at home, but i probably wont have the time to slog through it
...
why participate in an open source project thats destined to go commercial?

think bill gate's employees browse sourceforge.net and reap what they may?

ohyeah: linux just takes longer to boot, i think it has something to do with the modular nature of it all, you can edit your startup files so as not to boot sendmail and all that stuff that you may not care to have running, and youll boot up quicker

I am running RED HAT on a slower machine than yours and it runs brilliantly.

1.1 Ghz CPU
256 DDR RAM
GeForce 4 Graphics Card

It's a bit of a worry that Fedora runs like crap on you machine becuase I was thinking of upgrading.

Anyway, to say windows XP loads quicker would be accurate accept you have to remember that linux is loading a whole lot of apps in the background that you might not be using (remove them from startup to improve performance). Another thing I have noticed with XP is that it does load into the GUI pretty quickly but for the first 30 seconds it is still doing stuff and runs slowely for a while.

I would use FC1 as my main OS, then save a partition for trying out new operating systems every week!

I would do FC1 like SML... I didn't save a partition but I have 3 drives and just move the cable...

Red Hat is discontinuing support for Red Hat 9. Red Hat 9 was their free version of Linux. From what I understand the security patches and updates will only be available for another month or two. I use Red Hat 9 and right now when I click the up2date icon on the taskbar it automatically checks for the latest patches and updates. I would like to keep my computer secure by having the latest patches but will not be able to for much longer. When the patches are no longer available I will most likely switch to Fedora. Perhaps by then Fedora Core II will be out.

I will most likely eventually switch to Fedora. I have occasionally heard people say that Linux they was slow. Those comments always surprise me because on both of my computers Linux seems to boot up faster and run faster than Windows. I have never used a stopwatch so what I say is purely subjective. My old 266 MHz Pentium II computer with 192 MB of RAM runs both Red Hat 8 and Windows Millenium great. My only complaint is that OpenOffice is slow to start but runs great once it gets going. Other wordprocessors such as Textmaker start in a second or two.

My newer computer is an Athlon XP 2600+ with 1 GB of RAM. Red Hat 9 runs great on it although OpenOffice is slow to start on it too. On both computers I use the leaner and faster loading Mozilla Firebird browser instead of the regular version of Mozilla. I also use the fast loading but full featured Textmaker wordprocessor instead of the OpenOffice writer. Overall I always thought Linux performed better than Windows. Perhaps I was just lucky to have drivers that are working that well. I would definately suggest Fedora Core 1 instead of Red Hat 9. There are other good distros too.

Use Slackware, it takes 20 seconds to boot on my Athlon 850.

Hey Blinker that is a good idea for trying out new distros. I am buying a new cheap small hard drive this weekend!

Hello all

Thanks for the fast responses. This forum looks great :-))

I had to do the unimaginable!. Did a reformat of that 20gig , erased Fedora Core 1 and replaced it with Redhat 9.

Things work like a charm. I had the workstation option selected, but did indeed install the addons as well.

The boot times are now okay, faster than that for FC1. and things look nice on bluecurve. Openoffice loads faster on RH9 as compared to FC1 - a welcome addition, but not as fast as office 2k3 on my xp box.

Also tried using staroffice 7 for linux. That works like a charm on RH9. Maybe it's that commercial software is more optimized as against the freeware stuff, but staroffice is cheaper compared to what I had to pay for the office 2k3 license...

A lil tweak of the services could spice things up a little..

A lot of people I know do mention using slackware 9.1. Think I'll download the iso's and give it a shot as well...

A single system for a single operating system works for me. Multiple partitions might work for some, but I prefer to keep it simple and stupid! (Guess an age factor makes me do that!).

Time to build another box for slackware... hmmm... How about Pentium III - 733 Mhz with 256 Mb RAM and a 20gig hdd with a 52X Cdrom on an Intel 810 motherboard? Will slackware support it decently? (I mean boot up times etc. )

Thanks a lot for the positive feedback.

3 Cheers to Opensource

xytise