You can buy computer parts and assemble them yourself, thus making your own PC. It won't have any OS installed... It isn't very difficult. But if you think it is too much for you, you can always ask some friend to help you, etc...

I run Suse 10.2 as my secondary operation system after winxp home and it is much more better when xp.there is just a software i have get to get to run on linux in wine or in a 3 party linux app. befor i can dump xp.

Sup (Sea)Dog?

You sound much like myself. Over 20 years as an IBM System/Solution/Data Architect, playing with mainframes from before the 80's (that IS 1980's and NOT 1880's).

I first installed Linux in 1996......just after the Cretaceous period.....and on a 286 just for laughs (even though it was anything but fun at the time).

This will be my first and likely last post (nothing gainst ya'll, just more busy than a one legged man in a heinikin kick'n contest).

I thought the originator of this post would like to know just how appealing his question is.

There's so dang many flavors, bells, whistles and enough 'eye-candy' to poke yer eyeball out that I thought as a newly appointed corporate exec, I'd take these whiners here at work back to the future, implement some OS in place of what they've already got, and finally give them something to snivel bout!

Really though, kidd'n aside, I'd be very grateful if someone would give me a simple answer to the mind bending question of the day........and that is: What current Linux flavor would require the least "learning curve" (for current win xp users I'm talk'n), have the most look and feel of xp, have a fairly wide array of stable 'office like' applications, and lastly, almost NO command line requirements (I say that bearing in mind that this needs to be as 'painless' as possible from their point of view)?

What say ye?

Suse91pro, I've been feeling the same way for a long time, until I discovered VirtualBox. I just finished installing Mechwarrior 3 and 4, the only things I was keeping Windows for, into a win2k virtual machine that runs just fine on my Slackware desktop. Now I'm just waiting for VirtualBox to implement a feature to convert my existing Windows partition, that I hardly ever boot into, to a vdi file.

Mandriva 2007, maybe? I didn't test this distribution for a long time (didn't like it since they have spent more time polishing GUI, and I don't like GUI ) but it looks like a WinXP (just icons are different ). There is also a LinuxXP somewhere, but I didn't test it... As for "look and feel"... there are desktops that provide better "look and feel"

I must ask another question - which OS will provide more documentation and which OS will be easier to learn for a novice user who didn't ever use WinXP? I've never had that big amount of documentation on Windows.

And by the way...
I think it isn't very good that I started as Windows user. I love computer programming and I think that I could achieve more and I could have learned more if I was using Linux from the start .... Linux provides nice learning environment - I have source code for every utility, I can examine it, learn from it, etc... On Windows, however, I'm stuck with this "blackbox" - the program that works, but I don't know how exactly it works, and License Agreement prevents me from disassembling the program and learning what's inside and how in world it works and why it doesn't work sometimes...
Right now I'm thinking sometimes that using windows for such a long time (since 2001) prevented me from learning things I often need right now.
No matter what other advantages Windows gives, I think that preventing users from learning how system works isn't good. I know, there are many Development Kit's, etc, but, while studying all microsoft examples I've learned only one thing - they have nothing to do with real world and real programs... And the other problem is that all those SDKs are often quite big (300..500..700 Megabytes) and so they sometimes can be difficult to achieve/download/etc. Also, it's much easier to learn program by looking at the code, not reading documentation.

P.S. I'd like to hear/read comments on this, if possible

This is probably better answered in the newb thread, but I'll give it a shot.

"What current Linux flavor would require the least "learning curve" (for current win xp users I'm talk'n), have the most look and feel of xp, have a fairly wide array of stable 'office like' applications, and lastly, almost NO command line requirements (I say that bearing in mind that this needs to be as 'painless' as possible from their point of view)?"

Sounds like yer doin' fine with windows, but if you must......... the learning curve is partially a myth, in that it is an attitude. That is if you go into something with certain expectations and they don't jibe with what you experience - then bad things happen. I set up a linux box at my daughters school and the kids liked it but the teacher didn't like the fact that "on Windows you click twice to open a file and on Linux you click once". I didn't have the inclination to explain that in BOTH Windows AND KDE, you can set the mouse behaviour to your liking. The teachers' expectation was based upon his experience of an arbitrary setting like double clicking to open a file.

Anyhoo....enough of that.


Mandrake 10.0 and 10.2 have been very stable for me for the past two years as I run my business with it.

I have been tinkering with PCLinuxOS v .93 "Big Daddy" and am seriously considering a switch. It takes the best of Mandriva and tweaks it nicely for the newb user.


Kanotix is based on Knoppix and seems well thought out although there apparently is a glitch in the personell dept. that has left its future unkown. This was my second choice after PCLinuxOS.

Mepis is also in this category.

Xandros is a "pay for" distro that is also excellent and laid out to make the Windows user comfortable.


Suse gets high ratings although I've never used it.

Sorry, Ubuntu is up in the polls but I just think it's an average distro with a lot of hype and hysteria. The community seems very helpful and the documentation is better than average.

The three GRANDADDYS .....Slackware, Red Hat and Debian which are absolute rock solid, time tested distros that almost ALL other distros are based on, but are generally not as newb friendly as the aforementioned distros.

If you "make " people use Linux they're most likely going to balk. It's human nature. If you LET them use Linux you may have more luck. There will be a learning curve with anything.
"Fishing around" for the right distro only delays this process.

Hope this helps

I think you mean 386. There wasn't a port for the 286 processor back then (technically, there still isn't).

I am talking about the average users, I highly doubt the average user can build their own computer from scratch

Most XP-like? I'd have to say Linspire (formerly called Lindows.)
http://www.linspire.com/
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/LindowsOS

>> "... Sounds like yer doin' fine with windows, but if you must......... the learning curve is partially a myth, in that it is an attitude. That is if you go into something with certain expectations and they don't jibe with what you experience - then bad things happen. I set up a linux box at my daughters school and the kids liked it but the teacher didn't like the fact that "on Windows you click twice to open a file and on Linux you click once". I didn't have the inclination to explain that in BOTH Windows AND KDE, you can set the mouse behaviour to your liking. The teachers' expectation was based upon his experience of an arbitrary setting like double clicking to open a file. ..."

that teacher havent try some of the open file dialogs in linux ... that may get her really pissed off ... you better configured them all to double-clicks one before she switch back to windows ... ^_^

>> "Most XP-like? I'd have to say Linspire (formerly called Lindows.)
http://www.linspire.com/
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/LindowsOS

to think about it ... seems that every products are actually having the same kind of products web fronts ...


.

What is an "average user"? I"m no high-level hardware specialist, but I was able to put together most parts of my PC when I first time tried it. I think everyone can do this with a good manual. The only problem there can be with installing CPU/choosing the parts that can be combined, but hardly with anything else. And again - you can ask someone to help you...

Having assembled the hardware myself, there are times when I would prefer to be able to buy a set of hardware that is well supported by stock debian. As for having others help, I have found people surprisingly resistant to that idea.

hi,
vista started to show its holes like XP now well.

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3993153601.html

I think that this .ANI flaw gets out all my xp

regards,
Nirmal Tom.

The average user can't build their own system for the same reason they can't use linux: They're scared of it. I've been building computers for some time now and have found that it's pretty hard to actually screw something up inside there. Just pull out the screwdriver and start putzing around in there, once you get a POST put in a Linux disc (even Slackware is pretty easy to install if you choose full), then putz around with Linux for a while. Just play with it witout letting yourself get frustrated about what you don't know, read the documentations, and get on IRC to ask some question. Most of the easier distros have an IRC client with a desktop icon to take you right to the room for help. Took me about a week to be doing everything I did on windows except games better than I ever got them done on windows, about a month to get all my games running with Wine, within three months I was using slackware and CVS Cedega to make a gaming PC that shames the XP box next to it for speed and stability. I'm not some MENSA geek either, I'm an old drunk punk, it's not that hard to do if you don't let it intimidate you.

I am glad you have not had any notable problems with hardware setup, the most recent computer I put together did not work the first time I turned it on. After troubleshooting what seemed like everything, including the power supply; I finally found that the powersupply worked fine, the system board worked fine, but they would not work together (the PS wouldn't turn on). For people without lots of time, this type of problem can be a big headache - just as finding someone competent to do that kind of work can be.