If I wanted the distro with best multimedia support, like support of WMV, Windows Media Files, Quicktime, Flash, RealPlayer, all the usual commercial technologies already in place, which commercial distro should it be?

Xandros?
SuSE?
Linspire?
Mandriva?

I would put them in this order. The top being likely the best at supporting non-free formats.
Linspire
Suse
Xandros
Mandrake

Thanks, exactly what I need.

Although I didn't need Linspire being the most expensive, but I guess there's a reason they can sustain it. I'll look for a bargain

There's a new version coming out in April, Linspire 6.

Linspire will build on Ubuntu ahead, usíng KDE and Ubuntu will get the CNR technology from Linspire.

All the codecs are supported all free Linux Distro also. We have to update those packages from their repositories. I play all the multimedia stuff in Ubuntu,Debian,Fedora.

Why use commercial Linux distributions while there are thousands of free distributions that also include the ability to play media formats.

Suse is evil. Novell owns Suse and Microsoft owns Novell. Ok, "Microsoft owns Novell" is mean. Microsoft is friends with Novell and Novell is friends with Microsoft. Two evil empires.

I use Gentoo.

I commend you on recognizing that commercial distros are the right idea for fresh Windows converts. I recommend Linspire. Step one is getting it up and working. Getting a commercial distro as your first Linux experience is ultimately sensible.

I have no problem with Linspire's buisness plan of including non-free pieces and charging for that convenience and support. I do, intensely, dislike the Ubuntu (et. al.) tactic of including as much non-free stuff as their community will let slide by.

I hope you will make it your business to learn how to truly manage your Linux application, and that in a year or so, you'll be interested in getting a truly "free" distro and setting it up yourself. OTOH, if you just want to use it, not manage it, commercial distributions are the right way to go.

if you are transfering over from windows, then I dont believe you really need to pay.
I was a windows user once, and i felt right at home with PcLinuxOs
i switched over to other ones, because PcLinuxOs was extremely unstable at that time. But, now, PcLinuxOs 2007 works perfectly.
I recommend you wait until the PcLinuxOs 2007 final release, download that, burn the image, and install it

also:
suse annoys me sometimes with its media thing
im not sure whats wrong with it, it just doesnt work
PcLinuxOs works GREAT with media, it just cant play purchased iTunes songs
it can play Mp3's without complaining, and i think WMA, WMV, and other Windows Media formats. I suggest you try it out for a bit, and see how you like it

You may be a "senior member" of our forums, but comments like this seem very juvenile. People that choose "pay-for" distributions should not be discouraged on the sole basis that there are zero cost distributions available too.

Yes, Suse is working with MS. But Suse does not now, and will not ever, own Linux. In the ocean of Free/Open Software, Novell is big whale, but even it cannot change the way the tide flows.

Also, we should never consider a debate of "pay-for-Linux" VS "cost-free-Linux". ALL Linux distro's are PAY-FOR. You and I choose to pay with our time, by learning. Others choose to pay with money, and have things a little more automated.

GNU and Linux is about choice. We should discriminate against choice, we should encourage it.

Moved: This thread is more suitable in Linux Distributions and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

I wouldn't use Linspre if someone Paid me.. It is Gawd awful slow. I don't care to much for any of the "commercial" versions of Linux... if I were going to choose one though, it would be Xandros..

The Commercial Mandriva 07 is the slowest version of Linux I've ever tried(or a very close second to Linspire). I used Suse a long time ago (around version 6.xx?), and while I didn't like its interface, it did work.

I'm pretty sure Xandros plays MP3s and DVDs w/o adding codecs, but I can't remember for sure. If you decide on Xandros, I'd get the premium version. It comes with a free copy of Crossover Office, which is a commercial version of Wine, that works quite well(at least for the few programs I use Crossover for).

Personally, I'd never pay for Linux again, Ubuntu is way to easy to set up. I hope Ubuntu never touches CNR.. It sucks compared to Synaptic.

IGF

We should debate over pay for Linux. Linux is free. It is the same thing with water. Water is free, so why are we paying for it. All Linux distributions are not pay for. Linux is a hobby. Linux users improve it because that is one of their hobbies.

It is best to donate to projects but not to distributions. Distributions that are paid for is really putting a black eye on the Linux community. It is these paid distributions that make users think Linux is too costly or they thought Linux is free and they then return to their present OS being disturb. Projects makes Linux stands out because of the uniqueness of the project. It is these unique projects that people should donate something. Donating to distributions is not worth it because distributions come and go.

Paying for a distribution does not mean that the distribution will be easy to use while using its automated tools. Eventually, the user have to do hands on work using the command line. I have not seen or used a program that automates setting up devices and programs with out intervening it because it came across a problem that does not have any common sense to skip and move on.

Paying for a distribution may also support development. There are many companies that PAY developers to work on Linux to improve it and then donate that code back to the community for use in the kernel and other projects. I would never make the claim that no-one should be paid for working on Linux.. Saying not to support paid for Linux distributions is basically making that statement. I wish all developers could make a living coding for a project they really love..

RedHat pays Linux developers, Novell pays Linux Developers, HP pays Linux developers, Sun pays Linux Developers
IBM pays Linux developers, Ubuntu, Linspire, etc.. etc.. the list is very long, of companies that contribute to Linux by paying developers. Linux is NOT a hobby to these large companies, some of which are basing their futures on Linux in the datacenter. I would never begrudge them an opportunity to make back their investment. Doesn't mean I have to pay for Linux, or I'm not grateful to people that donate time coding, writing documentation, helping others in forums, we're all part of the community..

If you really looked into the contributions to the Linux code base made by some of those 'pay for' distributions you might be surprised how much they actually give back to the 'free distributions' and community at large.