BleepingComputer.com: Best Linux?

With so many Linuxs around what is the best one for a person new to Linux to use, that is easy to set up and install, doesn't cost a lot (as I was told by a Linux dealer Suse in a box set would cost $129 Austrlian) and can be use on a IBM computer that has 64ram, 6.2mb hard drive space and is pentium 2 400mzh?

And since someone mentioned Lindows has anyone heard of Xandros and Phat and are they any good for a person new to Linux?

PS As IBM is not much help how do you setup Linux on a IBM computer without a operating system on the computer?

Thanks

I use (daily for about 5 years) and "highly" recommend Mandrake for new Linux users.The ease of install is comparable to Windows.Insert CD,boot and follow instructions.
Now in my experiences with distros I found Suse to be a pain.And the latest version will NOT install with less then 128Mb RAM. And you will need more then 6.2mb hard drive ( I know you probably mean Gb). P2 400 is enough to run Linux.

You can also look into a "LiveCD" such as knoppix - What is knoppix?

I have no knowledge of Xandros (except that it exists). I used Phat way back before I knew what Linux was all about and found it difficult.Now they are charging for it and it's just not worth it when so many better ones are free.

http://linuxiso.org <-free Linux downloads,but be sure to check out Knoppix...best way to check out Linux without making ANY changes to your current system.

Thought I would my two cents. Ive tried several distributions, here are some of my thoughts.
Suse 9.0 I like the layout, but most of the sites are in German so help and info in very limited
Then to RH Fedora I also like it but the information is available but there is so much that I didn't have time to work on the little things.
Then to Slackware 10. A very good distribution if you really want to learn the in's and out's of Linux ( why not? beats watching TV) Most all info is in the four CD's great stuff.
One has to search for Linux instruction and find info on how to use terminals, editors ect. I'm using both mandrake 10 and Slackware 10 on a triple boot with windows 98se.
Haven't decided if I like one over the other. Have some minor problems which I don't know if it is my computer config or the distro.
Do a search for Mepis, Ive heard some very good things about it. I'll try it some day.

To me the real value in Linux will be realized when one becomes knowledgeable in its workings to accomplished your personal needs.
I also purchased my distos from a computerguy.com in Canada, not much money and he supplies unlimited troubleshooting on all distros. Haven't had to use him yet as I'm still learning what questions to ask.
Enjoy
Newbe Gary

From yesterdays's Langa list newsletter

200 Linux distros http://www.frozentech.com/content/livecd.php
Top Ten
1. Mandrakelinux: http://www.mandrakelinux.com/en/ftp.php3]http://www.mandrakelinux.com/en/ftp.php3[/URL]
2. Fedora Core:http://fedora.redhat.com/] http://fedora.redhat.com/[/URL]
3. SUSE: http://www.novell.com/linux/suse/index.html
4. Debian: http://www.debian.org/
5. Ubuntu: http://www.ubuntulinux.org/
6. Gentoo: http://www.gentoo.org/
7. Slackware: http://www.slackware.com/
8. Knoppix:http://www.knoppix.com/
9. MEPIS:http://www.mepis.org/] http://www.mepis.org/[/URL]
10. Xandros: http://www.xandros.com/

And you can find even more here:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22live+cd%22+linux

BTW, for Live CD versions, and for any "ISO" based software downloads,
you'll need to know how to turn the ISO file (a kind of image of the CD
contents) into a usable CD. Your CD burner software may have a "make cd
from image" or "burn CD from ISO" or some such command in it; or you can
learn more about the process here:
http://www.google.com/search?q=burn+iso

I use the latest version of Mandrake community, which is a free download. I do not know much about the other systems, and was thinking about eventually trying out Red Hat's Fedora project, which is also free. Both seem to be good systems for newer users. Could someone compare Red Hat Fedora to Mandrake in the sense of usability for new users? I think that RH Fedora offers a large range of programs that are beneficial. I do not know much about SUSE or the other linux based programs except for they are out there. When I made my choice a while back, I went with something that was free, so I could try everything out. This way, incase it was too much for me, I didn't invest my money into it. Good luck-
John

I've used Suse 7, 8, 8.1, 9, 9.1 and 9.2 and found that 9.2 and loading it as a network install was the most simple way. The cost was great. "FREE"

Redhat 9? I wasn't impressed with it.
Fedora was fine to learn on but I got frustrated with trying to get java to work right and then networking or connecting to my wifes computer was a pain in the ass too.

With Suse, Everything configured correctly the first time,
XMMS, JAVA, KOPETE, SMB.

Everything worked great the first time.

I just love Suse 9.2

just make sure that if you do the network install, Make sure you KNOW what kind of network card you have, and make sure you have a broadband connection.

This post has been edited by Doug.Gentry: 14 February 2005 - 12:18 AM

Mandrake and Suse for me, both excellent.

i used to have the mandrade version but i now use ubunto which is very simaler............ either way they are all better than windows

hi'
as I use Linux since 94, I'm going to give you my top 5 ... rest is only bad copy!

1.Suse the 9.3 version is the best they made!
2.Slackware for it's stability
3.Debian for it's own way
4.Red-Hat ... began with it version 5 ....
5.Mandriva(ex mandrake)

for me all the rest with a very few exceptions are loosy tries
I mean for a desktop work ...

btw, Linus Thorwald use Suse ;)

francois

hi'
and please, use Gnome! the one and only gnu interface

kde looks like windoz now

webjoyz

SuSE is now at version 10.0 and if freely available for download. SuSE10 with KDE is the best I've tried. I'm also running Fedora Core 4 and Kubuntu.......just don't like Gnome and Nautilus.

Mainly because of Yast, I'd recommend SuSe as a good distro for newbies and old hats alike.

As for space requirements, my installation is using 2.25Gig of a 10 Gig partition. Let's see XP do that

MOD EDIT: Please do not double post. USe the edit button instead.~g

govirgil, on Dec 2 2004, 12:39 AM, said:

Definitely start with Mandrake, or Red Hat. After you're well acquainted with how the system works, move on to slackware. Slackware still reigns supreme among distributions IMO.

I would agree with most of the people here when i say i would recommend Knoppix as well

Oh boy! Distro war!
I'm a Debian user. And I won't recomend it to anyone who is just getting started.
If you want a quick and painless intro to Linux.
Grab DSL(Damn Small Linux}. DSL
It's 50mb, runs like a raped ape as a Live CD or USBkey drive .
Runs fast enough to catch said raped ape as a hard drive install.
You can also install it right into your Windows. Its slow this way but since I added DSL to my 67 year old mothers Windows. And got her to open all her email with DSL I don't have to go remove all the virus/spyware/crap every week. And that's a good thing.
Another nice feature is with most DSL installs adding new apps/programs is a 3 mouse click process.
The web site doesn't recommend the myDSL extensions for some hard drive installs but I've found most work flawlessy.
One more bit of DSL info. Two years ago I installed DSL on a P11 200 with 64 mgs of EDO ram, for a buddy of mine to use as a second computer. I also had sitting on the bench a brand new Windows box -AMD XP2500
(Barton core) 750 mb PC2700 ram(333 FSB), and a virgin install of XP-Pro with SP1.
Just for fun I timed loading some pages from Google Image search.
This was using Internet Exploiter on the XP box and Dillo on the DSL
20 out of 20 searchs DSL was faster.
Using Opera on the XP box and Dillo on the DSL
18 out of 20 searchs DSL was faster
Using Opera on the XP box and Mozilla on the DSL
14 out of 20 searchs DSL was faster
Not at all scientific, but pretty damm impressing to watch

Have a peek at DSL I think you'll like it.

I too have use DSL and find it pleasent. I prefer Puppy Linux. Like DSL it is a 50mb file that will run from a FAT32 drive (Windows). It has two other options. First it can run strickly from RAM if you have 256mb of RAM. Talk about fast. Run Puppy or DSL from a RAM drive just for surfing. Both come with a suite of software. I run mine at work to surf the web. When I am thru I just reboot and it's like it was never there.
Option two. If you have a burner on the computer you can save in multi-session mode. It will even prompt you when it's time for a new disk. When you exit just save your data, including bookmarks, and mail to the CD-R for the next session.
It's amazing that MicroSoft will soon have to ship windows on DVD only, to get the whole OS on one disk, but you can get a snappy little operating system and programs that will fill most needs on a 50mb credit card CD. And it's free.

This post has been edited by acklan: 21 December 2005 - 09:46 AM

Oh I'll agree with you about puppy. I have a couple of different puppy discs. Beatrix is a nice smooth little Distro too.
The reason I push DSL on *nix-newbies is its easy, quick learning curve. Lets face it most windows users have no idea what a script running in a shell is. If one is an absoulte beginner with any OS with DSL they can change the eye-candy, install some toys, and still get a glimpse into what makes *nix run. All within an hour.
If I need a Live CD to troubleshoot I use Knoppix most of the time. But in my view Knoppix is intimidating to newbies. Just too much stuff with strange names and funny icons for most windows users.
I'm not saying DSL is all anyone needs as a desktop OS. Far from it. But to get your feet wet in *nix I don't think it can be beat.
I'm also rabid about Opera instead of Firefox.
I know blended scotch is a waste of good whiskey, and blondes are more fun.
Just my opinions.
and opinions are like asses, everybody has one and they all stink but mine.

It is rather nice to see a civil and polite distro war for a change.
Now its time to go see about some breakfast.

Later
R