Best Linux OS

[sash1]

I see so many versions of Linux: BSD, Mandrake, Redhat, etc.

In your guys' opinion, which is the best. I don't want to have to do a lot of programming, but I want to be able to get the best idea for the Linux OS.

Thanks,

~Aunix

P.S. I am a real newbie with Linux, so if this sounds dumb, it should.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Solaris.

 

[pcmark]

Mandrake is good for newbies(I'm one too). The installation is simple, there are plenty of apps available for it, etc.

 

[trmiv]

I'm a Linux newbie, and I went for Mandrake. I like it so far.

 

[CTho9305]

<< Solaris. >>


BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT! wrong answer

he asked for a linux OS (distro), you gave him a unix.

I would recommend Redhat 7.2, or possibly mandrake.

edit: and solaris you'd have to use 8, cause Sun decided not to release 9 for x86 yet
solaris is NOT a newbie OS. bsd isnt' that great for newbies either (and it isnt' actually linux).
anyway, n0c knows way more than me about *nix.

 

[monkied]

Suse and Mandrake have the easiest installs in my opinion. I like Suse better because they support more HW, but Mandrake already has gcc/g++ installed for compiling your code. For some reason, I havent gotten Suse to compile yet. If it only had gcc/g++ working properly, I'd use Suse, but till then, I got Mandrake running.

 

[FOBSIDE]

it all depends on what your plan for your machine is...i prefer to use redhat because its simple enough where i dont have to think too much. if youre new to linux, just use something thatll hold your hand like redhat or mandrake.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<<

<< Solaris. >>


BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT! wrong answer >>



It was a joke. There is a quote out htere somewhere of a Sun exec saying Solaris was their version of linux. Tongue in cheek of course. And since this poster decided to lump BSD in with Linux I thought I would throw Solaris out there. Of course he could have saved himself a lot of trouble by searching the forums and not asking this STUPID question. Kind of like the other thread he started that I replied to.



<< he asked for a linux OS (distro), you gave him a unix.

I would recommend Redhat 7.2, or possibly mandrake.

edit: and solaris you'd have to use 8, cause Sun decided not to release 9 for x86 yet
solaris is NOT a newbie OS. bsd isnt' that great for newbies either (and it isnt' actually linux).
anyway, n0c knows way more than me about *nix. >>



I learned more on OpenBSD than I did on any linux. Quicker too. Slackware was the linux distro that taught me the most. No hand holding. No pretty gui to do the work for you. Just vi, plenty of documentation, and a prayer (later on switched to alcohol which seems to work better).

 

[avedis]

I prefer SuSE Professional, I have SuSE 7.2 Professional, Comes with alot of stuff, not too hard to install.
I'd recommend it. I've used mandrake also, It's very good for a beginner I believe.
Just my 2 cents.

Avedis

 

[CTho9305]

<< I learned more on OpenBSD than I did on any linux. Quicker too. Slackware was the linux distro that taught me the most. No hand holding. No pretty gui to do the work for you. Just vi, plenty of documentation, and a prayer (later on switched to alcohol which seems to work better). >>


slackware rocks. but its hard to start with (I did). vi is awful its the worst interface / set of commands I've seen in my life! and to me, it didn't look like he wants to deal with slackware

 

[n0cmonkey]

<<

<< I learned more on OpenBSD than I did on any linux. Quicker too. Slackware was the linux distro that taught me the most. No hand holding. No pretty gui to do the work for you. Just vi, plenty of documentation, and a prayer (later on switched to alcohol which seems to work better). >>


slackware rocks. >>



It definitely does. Between that and Debian Ive found a couple of distributions I can actually stand.



<< but its hard to start with (I did). vi is awful its the worst interface / set of commands I've seen in my life! >>



Its one of the most powerful command line text editors out there, if not the most powerful. And if you want to say Emacs is more powerful you are right, but its not a text editor, its a religion unto itself

As far as pico goes... Grow up.



<< and to me, it didn't look like he wants to deal with slackware >>



He doesnt have to. I was just putting more information out there. I learn better when I am challenged more. Slackware was a challenge where Mandrake was not. Ok, mandrake was a challenge, but Id rather not be fighting with the OS.

 

[sash1]

too many posts in such a little time!

Thanks,

~Aunix

and, lol@n0cmonkey... heh, Solaris.

 

[KenCleanAirSystem]

<< vi is awful >>



You realize, of course, that with those three little words you have commited what amounts to blasphemy in the better part of the Unix world

Edit:
Oops, almost forgot to answer the original question ... if you just want to check Linux out to see what its like then go with Mandrake, RedHat or Suse. If you want to learn then go with Slackware or Debian. Not that you cant learn with the Mandrake and the like, they just dont force you to learn.

 

[Sunner]

n0c, ain't the Solaris == Linux joke getting a little old?

Anyways, to answer the original question, Debian, if Slack dumps the SysV/BSD init hybrid they're using now, I might look at it again

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< n0c, ain't the Solaris == Linux joke getting a little old? >>



So is this thread topic.

 

[Bremen]

<< You realize, of course, that with those three little words you have commited what amounts to blasphemy in the better part of the Unix world <http://forums.anandtech.com/i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif> >>

So, RMS uses Emacs... um, you're right, better stick to vi ;0)

 

[Chatterjee]

red hat 7.2 would suit you just fine... i just hate the fact that you get stuck having to download both CDs

 

[her209]

redhat is a good starting point.

 

[Mitzi]

I personally like SuSE.

 

[SPB]

Dude, 100% go with mandrake 8.1. It will by far be the easiest way for you to get started. Other wise go with whatever floats your boat. For instance red hat is a "cool" name for an os so choose that one. Or do you like the name suse better. After doing the linux thing for about 5 months ive found that it really doesn't matter which dist. you go with, in the end they are all the same just different names. Serriously though, mandrake is the easiest to install and set up, hands down, and can be made as good as any of the others after you get the angle of the dangle down. Learn some C and you can OWN any of the dists..

 

[Sunner]

<< in the end they are all the same just different names. >>


Uhhh, no.
Debian uses APT for packges vs RPM for Mandrake, Slack uses their homemade BSD init vs SysV for most other distros, those are some of the bigger differences between them, but there are many others.

 

[NiPeng]

Personally I think Debian is one of the best but installing and running it may be a bit tough for a first time linux user.
So I would recommend you RH or Mandrake.

 

[thornc]

What about Redmond Linux?

If you are willing to pay, go with Suse. If not try redmond, redhat or mandrake.... for a first time date they are
ok!!

Or better yet a small distro like icepack or peanut, everything installed and pre-configured from the start!!

 

[Nothinman]

Debian uses APT for packges vs RPM for Mandrake

Just a nitpick, but Debian uses dpkg and .deb files for it's packages, APT is a front-end that runs dpkg for you. There is atleast 1 RPM distribution that comes with APT, Connectiva IIRC.

 

[Sunner]

<< but Debian uses dpkg and .deb files for it's packages, APT is a front-end that runs dpkg for you >>


Blah!

Anyways, mixing RPM's and DEB's on the same install seems like a good way to hose your box to me