I am very much confused about which OS should I install on my laptop ?
I am having lenovo core 2 duo t6600, 2 GB ram, ddr3 laptop.
My requirement is,
1. I want to learn using linux.
2. I wanted to make my career in linux.
3. I really dont like unity desktop environment of latest ubuntu.
4. I am not very expert of linux but I wish to install linux(64 bit)
distro first on my laptop and then windows 7(32 bit) inside
linux using virtual box.
5. I am again and again asking about which distro to choose.
6. I am confused between '.deb' distros and red hat distros.
7. please answer me in detail. finish all the trouble at once.

I am very much thank full to you !!!

Please reply my question.....

Point for point:

1. Learning Linux is great. There are a lot of great tutorials on the web
2. That's great also.
3. Don't blame you. Neither do I.
4. With just 2GB RAM, 64-bit is not necessary, 32bit will access up to 4GB RAM with a properly built kernel. Start with 32bit.
5. Choosing a distro is very much subjective. But since you don't like Unity, that certainly leaves out Ubuntu. You info shows you use Debian, stick with it. It's pretty stable and will provide you with a good start.
6. See your other post which I replied to:http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...eb-4175414374/
7. I hope this is the start to the end of your troubles.

1 members found this post helpful.

towheedm
thank you very much for this reply.
I removed debian(64 bit) yesterday from my laptop since I was unable to get anything about it....

I confused between fedora, mint, ubuntu, openSUSE, etc...

If I have to go with debian then I first need to learn about all the information it ask at the time of installation.
It is very much detailed OS.

By "career in linux" you mean being "System administrator"?
OR
Linux Device driver writer?
Linux Networking administrator?
Linux Database administrator?
Front end developer for Linux?

What exactly?

If you are interested in Linux System/Networking Administration:

- Install CentOS. It is said to be a free version of Red Hat.
http://www.centos.org/

- Get this Michael Jang's book, and start following it:
http://www.amazon.com/RHCSA-Linux-Ce.../dp/0071765654

After 90 posts you should know:
1. Different questions need to be in different threads.
2. "Please read my question carefully..." is a horrible title.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

2 members found this post helpful.

That's correct.
I apologies for my question.
I am currently having fedora, mint, debian, ubuntu, kubuntu cds.
Would you recommend any among them or centOS is better?

1 members found this post helpful.

Many people don't like Unity, and as a result I believe many people are fleeing Ubuntu. I certainly know I am (and have been for a long time)...

As towheedm mentioned, 32-bit is fine for around 3GB of RAM. With a 2GB system you are fine with a 32-bit distro. However, unlike Windows, 64-bit Linux has been around, used, and debugged for a very long time. Personally, I am very concerned about system stability, and I have zero reservations about using a 64-bit Linux OS today. Remember that you can always install 32-bit libraries and run 32-bit executables on a 64-bit system. I have been using 64-bit Linux OS for over 6 years now, and have not run into a single instance where having a 64-bit OS has held me back in any way. I honestly see absolutely no reason to run a 32-bit linux OS in this day and age assuming the hardware can support it.

As towheedm said, choosing a distro is very subjective, nobody can pick one for you. Personally, I prefer rpm over deb, which limits me to the rpm distros. Keep in mind this has nothing to do with which one is better, it's all about preference. In my opinion CentOS/RHEL is too outdated even when it's as new as can be. Meanwhile Fedora is too experimental, and has too many stability problems. Fedora used to be great, up until around F15, when it started going downhill fast. Therefore my distro of choice is openSUSE. It's fast, light on resources (currently only using 300MB of 2GB on a little 4 year old ASUS EEEPC netbook), and zypper is a pretty great package management program.

In the .deb world Debian is nice, and Salix seems to be a pretty decent derivative of slackware with a nice package management system. If I were to ever make the transition to .deb, I would probably start with Salix.

Don't make the mistake of confusing a distribution with its desktop environment. It can be hard to discriminate between the two, but make an effort. The distribution controls everything from the kernel you're able to run, the package management system you have access to, to the packages you can install. The desktop environment controls what everything looks like. Just because you don't like the default DE for a distribution doesn't mean the distro is useless. If you like everything else about it then you can always just run a different DE. For example, I think Gnome 3 is absolute crap. Unredeamable, unforgivable crap. I refuse to run gnome3 on any system, ever. However, that doesn't mean distros that provide gnome3 as available DEs are useless...you can always choose another. I think the KDE DE from openSUSE 12.1 isn't too bad, and I think the XFCE DE is even better.

The nice thing about Linux is it's all up to you. With Windows, if you want to use the newest wifi drivers you have to use the newest OS (as an example). With Linux, you can use whatever wifi drivers you want with whatever distro you want, whatever kernel you want, and whatever DE you want. There's infinite variety...which can often confuse and intimidate newcomers, but once you get used to it you will start to appreciate and respect the variety available to you.

1 members found this post helpful.

You haven't yet answered my questions.

Again, if your aim is to be a Linux System/Networking Administrator, then
perhaps there will come a day when you'd like to have some Red Hat
Certifications for getting preferences in jobs and all.

Red Hat is not free.
CentOS is said to be a free clone of Red Hat. So, ...

suicidaleggroll
You answered me very beautifully.
thanks a lot.

to anisha,
System administrator job I would like to prefer.

In that case, Centos is recommended as its a free version of RHEL, which is pretty much the biggest commercial market share distro of Linux.

Learning is good... There is a distinction between 'I want to learn Linux' and 'I want to learn something else, but I will use Linux to do it'. If this was a question, that distinction could cause confusion, but, as it isn't, maybe it won't.

I don't know how you would know this, without a little experience using Linux. But you say that you know this already, and knowledge, when well based, is good, too.

A common enough position, but it hardly takes us or you much further forward: Don't like Unity, don't use Unity (either on a 'buntu, or something else). If you are really targeting sys admin, liking or disliking one particular GUI environment really isn't something that should distract you much.

Well, get expertise! You have something that you want to do, start researching and understanding how to do the thing that you want to do. It may or may not be a worthwhile thing to want to do, but you want to do it, so work on understanding it, You'll have to do this kind of thing time and time again if you follow your currently preferred career path, so the sooner that you get good at it the better.

And what good do you think that will do? There are many distros, and most are good for someone, or some group of users. To find out which are best for you, you'll have to work at it. Grab a few Live Cds and get going! Asking 'again and again' isn't helpful.

Why, for what purpose? Firstly, the world does not divide neatly into those camps (heard of Slackware, Gentoo, Arch, Suse? Going a bit wider, what about the BSDs? Solaris and HP/UX?) If you find a distro that works for you, you have found a distro that works for you. You may, after some years of experience, be able to make a generalisation such as 'I prefer Distros which use the deb packaging system' ...or maybe you won't be able to do that, but expecting that experience to be here today without doing anything to get it is unreasonable. And, anyway, it is only a preference; whichever you decide suits you best, assuming that one does suit you best, there will always be examples of the other approach working well for other people.

Is there some detail about how .deb works that is concerning you? If so, explain what that is and ask an actual question. (Not clear what you mean by a 'Red Hat distro'; the Red Hat distros are the ones that say 'Red Hat' on the tin. There are related distros (Fedora, Centos Scientific) and there are distros that use the same package management format (Suse, Ma*), but why that should be getting you massively concerned at this stage is unclear. Perhaps your concern is with the package manager, which is something different?)

The trouble, well this trouble anyway, will be finished when you have learnt sufficient for this not to be troubling you any more.

You don't actually ask a question in these posts, you just make a succession of statements. And, as previously commented, the thread title gives no useful information and is a very poor thread title both generally and for a thread in which you start by asking no questions. The convention is that the title gives a least a clue as to the theme of the thread.

4 members found this post helpful.

use this tool for an idea.

http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/

Then use it. I see a lot of posts by you from windows machines.....

Puting 'the cart before the horse' there.

That shouldnt be an issue, you can install different DEs. IMO *buntus are not good distros for lerning at all.

Shouldnt be an issue.

towheedm has given you some nice links to read on this thread-

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...eb-4175414374/

If you 'want to learn', you cant expect every answer to be given to you (and in many cases there is not 'single answer').