LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Newbie (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/)
-   -   Best Linux OS to start off with ; (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/best-linux-os-to-start-off-with-%3B-614715/)

Hb_Kai 01-19-2008 05:16 AM

Best Linux OS to start off with ;
 
Hi, i`m going to be starting learning more about Linux sometime soon and i was just wondering because of the vast amount of Linux operating systems there are, which would be the best by anyone`s reccommendations to start off with learning.
I was yesterday checking out Knoppix STD i think it was but it said on the site it`s more for "proffessional" linux users and not n00bs, so i guessed i`d best leave that one alone. lol. But could anyone help please?

Thanks ;

I`ve also just realised that i posted this in the wrong forum, sorry about this.

tommcd 01-19-2008 05:55 AM

IMO you can't go wrong with Ubuntu:
http://www.ubuntu.com/
Ubuntu is easy to use and has a great (and very large) support community:
https://help.ubuntu.com/
http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Gutsy
http://ubuntuforums.org/
Ubuntu also has a live CD so you can try it before you install. Write back if you have more questions.
One piece of advice: After you get Ubuntu (or any distro) installed and up and running, take it upon yourself to learn basic terminal commands. Knowing the command line will be a huge benefit in the long run, especially if you decide to try other distros.

sycamorex 01-19-2008 05:58 AM

Try different distros and stick with the one you like best.
There's a website distrowatch.com including descriptions and a list of most downloaded distros. If you
choose any of the most downloaded ones, you can't go wrong. I was trying different distros for 1 year until
I was happy with the ones I use.

HTH

Hb_Kai 01-19-2008 06:14 AM

:d Thanks for your help. I already have a Ubuntu Live CD but i was wondering if that`d be a harder one to get used to. And yeah, i already guessed about knowing the command line.

I just have a couple more questions.

After installing it on a second partition on my hard-drive would it still be able to read Wireless Internet Connections using my wireless internet card i already have on my Windows partition?
And would it also be able to read the windows partition so i can take files from it and swap them over etcetera?

sycamorex 01-19-2008 06:59 AM

Quote:

After installing it on a second partition on my hard-drive would it still be able to read Wireless Internet Connections using my wireless internet card i already have on my Windows partition?
You've got windows drivers on your windows partition. You'll just need to install linux drivers for it on your linux partition.
AFAIK, there are still some slight problems with the wireless so it might involve some researching into how to install them (it all depends what card you've got)

Yes, you'll be able to read data from your windows partition

pixellany 01-19-2008 07:29 AM

on many modern distros, the wireless works "out of the box". eg Ubuntu, Fedora, PCLinuxOS

Also, modern distros can read and write to NTFS

The "getting started" link below might help.

tommcd 01-19-2008 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hb_Kai (Post 3027984)
:d Thanks for your help. I already have a Ubuntu Live CD
After installing it on a second partition on my hard-drive would it still be able to read Wireless Internet Connections using my wireless internet card i already have on my Windows partition?

Try booting up the Ubuntu live CD and see if it recognizes your wireless card. As others have said, it depends what kind of chipset your card uses. Atheros, Ralink, and Intel have linux drivers. Some Broadcom chipsets will work with linux drivers. If your card is unsupported in linux there is a linux program called ndiswrapper that can use windows wireless drivers in linux. This is not an ideal solution, but it often works well.

Hb_Kai 01-19-2008 08:13 AM

Ehm. Okay. Thanks. Sorry for all the questions, but, why would it not be an ideal solution?

Do you mean, just because it`d be better to run it properly without using any program to make it run?

pixellany 01-19-2008 09:00 AM

"If it works, it's OK" (We used this a lot in the motorcycle repair shop---ca. 1960: Mostly British bikes, for which you had to wait many weeks ordering parts. Often, we gave up and made our own.)

The point? It is cleaner to use native Linux drivers, but if you can't find one, then Ndiswrapper lets you use Windows drivers. I doubt if there is a serious downside.

You will find purists here---those that feel somehow unclean if their system is not all open-source native Linux code. The pragmatist just wants the box to work.

ehawk 01-19-2008 12:50 PM

http://www.mepis.org/

BEST HARDWARE RECOGNITION/CONFIGURATION. Debian-base allows use of huge debian package repositories. Known for stability. Proprietary codecs and apps pre-installed and configured. Good help forums. Touchpad, wi-fi, bluetooth, power managment. Live-evaluation CD. Easiest installation of any distribution. NTFS no problem. Like mint but better hardware recognition.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 PM.