Ask Slashdot: Easiest Linux Distro For a Newbie 622
anymooseposter writes "My mom is taking a computer class at the local Community College. she asks: 'I need to download a Linux OS and try it out for class. The assignment is to use an OS different from what you normally use. Well, since I use Windows and OS X, the assignment suggests Linux. But, my question is, what is the easiest version based on Linux for me to put on CD and try? I saw several on the web. Any thoughts off the top of your head?' What Linux Disto would be easiest to set up without having to resort to dual booting and/or driver issues?"
Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:3)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
DON'T run Linux under Windows. Just don't.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not? AndLinux makes Windows tolerable. :)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah but you're one of those who "gets it" - that the OS is just a platform to run apps. If an os runs the apps you want and doesn't continually fuck up (and contrary to what some would have you believe, i can count the number of rebuilds i've needed to do with windows for my own systems on half of one hand in the past 3 years - and thats including a hardware upgrade) - windows vista / 7 fulfil this purpose.
If linux runs your apps, go for it. The OS is merely a platform.
Re: (Score:3)
The OS is merely a platform.
Spoken like someone whose experiences with different platforms goes all the way from WinXP to Win7.
Ubuntu is of course an entire distribution, not just an OS, but then the same can be said of every Windows release I have worked with, from Win3.0 in 1990 onward. So they are comparable. In addition to the basic operating system, Ubuntu provides a reasonably good security protocol, excellent update management services, several good options for backup managers, and easy access to an extensive on-line library
Re: (Score:3)
The OS is merely a platform.
Spoken like someone whose experiences with different platforms goes all the way from WinXP to Win7.
Or maybe spoken like someone who, like myself, has used more-or-less every release of Windows (save for Vista, praise the Lord!) going back to 3.0 (consumer and server). And just about every release of the Mac OS (or, pre-renaming, "System") back to the 512k. And releases of Linux from Red Hat 3.3 (not RHEL), Mandrake 6+, Mandriva, Ubuntu back to Badger, SuSE 7-10. Solaris 9-10, AIX 4.1, 5.3, and 6.1, HPUX (though I *wish* I could say I hadn't). And BeOS from early Dev releases through PR versions to RCs to
Re: (Score:3)
"You've almost got the right idea. You just need to turn it around: Windows as a VM under Ubuntu. "
Genuinely interested here: Why? This seems to be the common consensus on the intarwebs, and I've yet to experience anything that would make me agree.
Just going off of other comments here, Windows is better for running games, while Linux is more of a work type OS - so why not give the gaming OS bare-metal access to hardware while keeping Ubuntu in a nice VM?
Works perfectly here... and with the right drivers (un
Re: (Score:3)
Excel used to be amazing. But that was version 1.0 and on the Mac.
Now it's a big pile of UI vomit, just like everything else MS does.
but thats how i started in 1996 (Score:3)
if not for the crazy people who put linux ontop of a FAT filesystem (dont ask) i probably wouldnt be the successfull IT profes.. i mean .. homeless nutjob i am today.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. If you want both on the same machine, install it dual-boot. If she's running Windows on an Apple she could run it triple boot.
Of course, if you're just trying it out most distros let you run it from the CD without actually installing it.
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Insightful)
why not?
Because.
The answer involves things far beyond newbie's understanding.
Re: (Score:2)
The answer involves things far beyond newbie's understanding.
Not all of us here are newbies, and while I may agree with you... I still want to know why YOU think it should not be done.
Re: (Score:3)
1. Because Linux under VM is subject to all flaws of Windows, including atrocious resource management exacerbated by VM restricting resources by itself.
2. Because Linux under VM is completely dependent on Windows networking, what robs it from most of its superior functionality.
3. s/networking/filesystem/
4. VM, even best ones, introduce annoying UI quirks that user would attribute to Linux.
5. User will never learn anything about Linux if he will have Windows environment to do everything he does, even if sett
Re: (Score:3)
You're completely missing (or ignoring) the scope of the question being asked: "The assignment is to use an OS different from what you normally use."
Running something that looks like crippled Linux under Windows, is not "using OS other than Windows".
Re: (Score:3)
what do I know I'm from marketing.
Quoted for truth.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not really doing much to support your case by simply repeating yourself. "The answer involves things far beyond newbie's understanding."? Well, thanks for insulting my intelligence, but lets pretend for a second that I'm not an idiot; that I'm am capable of, after extended googling, approaching an understanding of your argument. Maybe then I could appreciate "No, never, don't do it," for it's own merits, rather than adhering to a dogmatic belief that Alex Belits knows what he's talking about.
Using sm
Re: (Score:2)
1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is. VMWare creates another layer that passes all I/O through Windows, thus creating an even worse abomination than Windows itself. This is why Microsoft supporters are still yapping about poor Linux performance, or UI, or networking -- they all "use" Linux in VMWare.
LiveCD (Score:3)
Why doesn't anyone post the most obvious answer. Get Ubuntu and run it off the CD/DVD without installing it (LiveCD). She can play with it all she wants and every time the computer is turn off it resets everything and doesn't bother her Windows or OS X setup at all and it doesn't need to save stuff to just play around with it and do most normal things like web surfing and such.
That is so much simpler since she isn't probably going to keep it around after the class assignment is over.
Re: (Score:3)
That's disgusting.
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
Ubuntu is the most well-known distro for newbies, but I'd almost suggest Linux Mint which is just as easy but with less quirks.
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Use a LiveCD, rather than running it virtualized.
Other than that, I'd have to agree. Normally I loathe Ubuntu... for Linux, it's sluggish, and somewhat erratic in how it's developped. But from a new-to-linux perspective, there's really only a handful of distros I'd consider to be in the same category as Ubuntu for general ease of installation/use. A great many are as easy to install but aren't as usable, and still many more are far more usable, but nowhere near as easy to install. For a basic project like t
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:5, Informative)
there's really only a handful of distros I'd consider to be in the same category as Ubuntu for general ease of installation/use
I see you've never installed Windows. Every Linux distro I've tried (Except Red Hat, and that was back in 1998) was brain-dead simple to install and completely painless, even Mandrake back in 2003.
Try typing in that forty digit key with 1s and ls and 0s and Os. And sit there having to click "yes" or "no" every two minutes for a solid hour -- with a whole lot of reboots. Then installing every application you'll need to do any actual work.
Compare that to installing ANY Linux distro; two screens of choices (only one with many distros), wait 1/2 hour with no babysitting (maybe change the CD) and one reboot, and you have a ready-to-use, functional machine.
Comparing installing Linux with installing Windows is like comparing driving a modern car with a model-T hand cranked Ford (Windows is the model T). People only think Windows is easy because they've used it all their lives. Those of us that cut our teeth on DOS (or even earlier machines, like a Sinclair or an Apple II or a Commodore) know better.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, I've installed every version of Windows since 2.0, every version of MS DOS there is, and some variants like CP/M. I have also installed almost every version of MacOS since 7, and dozens of different renditions of Linux, starting with Slackware 2, and have even rolled my own (1.7MB floppy, for use in a diskless system as a gateway/router). For spice, I have also installed BeOS (the original, as well as Haiku), AROS, and QNX. The installer for Windows 7 is much easier than Ubuntu's btw... you put th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And then how long to install the applications you need? Plus install the updates, plus install the anti-virus, plus, plus...
You can't compare installing WIndows 7 to installing a Linux distro.
Oh, and if the machine is not the newest, Windows 7 may not have drivers for it -- you may have to hunt down and install a network driver,
Re: (Score:3)
And then how long to install the applications you need? Plus install the updates, plus install the anti-virus, plus, plus...
I spend a lot of time doing this on Ubuntu as well, except for the anti-virus. Replace that with drivers and hardware that isn't working properly, setting the resolution, configuring wifi because Ubuntu does not support your networks encryption method, etc. Just because Ubuntu comes with a ton of free stuff pre-installed doesn't mean I want to use any of it. Probably the only thing I do use is Firefox, if only to download Opera.
Re: (Score:2)
Installed Windows 7 recently (Windows Vista ate itself on the machine previously.) It was about as simple as installing Ubuntu or Fedora. Might have actually been easier.
It was a far cry from Windows 98 installs.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, Microsoft's printed keys are actually pretty good. They are well-printed, and they use a font that is easy to read. Try decyphering the printed keys from anything by Atari or Infogrames from the early 2000's. I actually had to call tech support and send them a scan of my product key for Neverwinter Nights, because it was illegible... even they couldn't decypher it, and they sent me a new key by e-mail instead.
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
there's really only a handful of distros I'd consider to be in the same category as Ubuntu for general ease of installation/use
I see you've never installed Windows. Every Linux distro I've tried (Except Red Hat, and that was back in 1998) was brain-dead simple to install and completely painless, even Mandrake back in 2003.
Try typing in that forty digit key with 1s and ls and 0s and Os. And sit there having to click "yes" or "no" every two minutes for a solid hour -- with a whole lot of reboots. Then installing every application you'll need to do any actual work.
Compare that to installing ANY Linux distro; two screens of choices (only one with many distros), wait 1/2 hour with no babysitting (maybe change the CD) and one reboot, and you have a ready-to-use, functional machine.
Comparing installing Linux with installing Windows is like comparing driving a modern car with a model-T hand cranked Ford (Windows is the model T). People only think Windows is easy because they've used it all their lives. Those of us that cut our teeth on DOS (or even earlier machines, like a Sinclair or an Apple II or a Commodore) know better.
I don't know why I still consider this a technical forum. Almost everything you said isn't true. Windows 7 installs from a USB stick in about 15 minutes (longer depending on the performance of your system). The only choice is where to put it and installation completes and the system reboots. Windows starts and then some configuration questions are asked and I assume are required on other platforms (account name and password, date and time, and yes, choosing to enter the Windows license key or not). I feel like I'm leaving something out, but after these steps the system is up and ready for use. Because my hardware is relatively static, I created a small text file that makes installation silent. I boot from the USB stick and return to Windows ready to use. Then I can use it for as long as I want without doing anything other than patching. Or not.
I could compare that to my experiences with trying to install Linux on a set of raid disks without a wizard a few years ago but I assume it's better now so I won't condem the entire Linux platform on my bad experience (ancient history now). I also started on some of those systems you mentioned and got to be quite the DOS batch file developer along with higher level languages. I simply use and understand Windows because of the apps I develop/run and you didn't. That doesn't make Windows a less viable platform or me ignorant on the available options.
And I prefer to install only the programs I want to use. I hear of people who have issues with not keeping everything patched or turning off unwanted services. Possibly FUD but I'm not a Linux guy.
Re: (Score:3)
And I prefer to install only the programs I want to use. I hear of people who have issues with not keeping everything patched or turning off unwanted services. Possibly FUD but I'm not a Linux guy.
This is either FUD or you're talking about Windows. With Windows every application needs to run it's own update service in the background or annoy the user for updates when they start the program. The difference couldn't be more stark with Linux where the system update handles all the programs you've installed (s
Re: (Score:3)
What Win7 image are you using? I seriously didn't know Win7 came with an official option to put it on a usb stick for install. Also: How big does the stick have to be?
Now when you install Linux, you arrive at a machine ready to go. With office and internet applications already installed. When I install any version of Windows I will still need to install drivers and applications afterwards. If you don't have a fresh install, but a new machine and/or a restore to factory you can't start installing, but rather
Re: (Score:3)
Is there finally an option in the Windows installation to leave the bootloader alone?
Re:Ubuntu + VMWare Player (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm happy for you and the wonderful experience you've had. I haven't been so lucky.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The vast majority of hardware detection issues on Linux have been because of hardware vendors.
Re: (Score:3)
there's really only a handful of distros I'd consider to be in the same category as Ubuntu for general ease of installation/use
Try typing in that forty digit key with 1s and ls and 0s and Os. And sit there having to click "yes" or "no" every two minutes for a solid hour -- with a whole lot of reboots. Then installing every application you'll need to do any actual work.
I don't think you understand the difference between difficult and merely tedious. The former involves some sort of unknowns that need to be figured out and overcome before the task is over -- the latter involves doing something you know how to do but either many times or with a lot of waiting.
This is one thing that I think separates the nerds from regular people -- a regular person will instantly pick the grind-it-out way to accomplish something (think cutting and pasting lots of excel cells) because they a
Re:Ubuntu on USB Flash Disk (Score:5, Informative)
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/FromUSBStick [ubuntu.com]
Re:Ubuntu on USB Flash Disk (Score:5, Informative)
As opposed to a LiveCD I would recommend installing it on a flash drive instead. The flash drive can be written to, so it can behave more like a real OS (allow you to persist files and settings after a reboot) and its just quicker than CD/DVD.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/FromUSBStick [ubuntu.com]
Yup. And this should do the trick: http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] runs on windows and Mac.
Re: (Score:2)
Why Ubuntu? She's familiar with OSX and Windows, I'd suggest something using a KDE desktop, which isn't that different than either one. Gnome is kind of weird if you ask me.
Kubunu iis a good one, combines Ubuntu with KDE. Wish Mandriva wasn't dead/dying, that was my all-time favorite.
Re: (Score:2)
I think choosing one that's very similar is a great idea, small changes are a lot easier than big ones after all. Maybe if she's able to figure out she can do everything in Linux that she can in the other OSes she'll stick with it.
I heard knoppix is decent... (Score:2)
...if you don't plan to actually install. Alternatively, go download the Ultimate Boot CD [ultimatebootcd.com] and boot to the GUI for Parted Magic, which contains a browser, a command line tool, and a whole bunch of hard disk drive diagnostic and recovery tools, among other things. It's also useful for a bunch of other recovery and diagnosis stuff that doesn't use Linux, so it's good to have around for when the computer has a problem. I use it probably daily at work.
Re: (Score:3)
Knoppix (Score:2)
Can be used without installation in CD and DVD versions. Can also be installed to memory stick and to disk. You can have a persistent data area on a memory stick or a partition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu. (Score:3, Informative)
Ubuntu. Current version (11.04). Use "Classic" desktop instead of Unity.
Also see http://www.unixmen.com/linux-tutorials/linux-distributions/linux-distributions4-ubuntu/1540-top-things-to-do-after-installing-ubuntu-1104-natty-narwhal [unixmen.com] .
OT: your sig (someone please mod me as such) (Score:2)
I see you haven't met Rority or Gumal.
Linux mint live CD (Score:5, Insightful)
By FAR the easiest and most comparable distro out of the box to Windows is Linux Mint. All of the good parts of Ubuntu with none of the broken stuff. It also comes with all the restricted multimedia drivers that make things easy to use in Microsoft land.
Re: (Score:2)
I second this. Ubuntu is a great place to start if you've already made a decision about using Linux. However, if you're unsure, Mint is the best choice. It's pretty, relatively small, and comes with all the drivers/plugins you'll need to avoid the first kiss of dependency hell you might otherwise encounter. If you want to ease someone into Linux, I'd say Mint is the best choice.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd suggest Ubuntu instead of Mint, if only because of the large number of helpful people in the Ubuntu forums
Re:Linux mint live CD (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Linux mint live CD (Score:5)
Ubuntu + Wubi (Score:5, Informative)
Ubuntu using Wubi is pretty brain dead easy to install. No partitioning required, it lives inside your Windows filesystem and handles adding itself to your boot menu.
Performance is slightly degraded, and bugs can come up with regards to hard reboots, but really it's the best option I know of if you're not running off a USB stick or DVD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I recommend Linux Mint [linuxmint.com], it's based on Ubuntu and Wubi, and it will always track Ubuntu (and Ubuntu will always track Debian), but it doesn't try to remain ideologically pure -- so it will have many of the most common drivers/codecs (even proprietary drivers/codecs) already preloaded onto it.
Here she can download it from this link [linuxmint.com]. It comes with an installer and an uninstaller. It can run from a DVD/CD, but there is actually no need to even run it from there. I recommend you just use the installer and the un
Just go with Ubuntu (Score:5, Insightful)
Now let the flaming begin
Re:Just go with Ubuntu (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. My grandparents, my 80 year old (retired air-force mechanic) neighbour, my Aunt and Uncles all use Ubuntu and have never even used a CLI.
In my experience non-technical people have no more difficulty adapting to Ubuntu than they do upgrading from XP to Win7. Additionally, Gnome's drag n drop threshold is great for people with shaky hands, but I would suggest increasing the window border size for ease of resizing (1px resize regions?! Are you MAD?). It seems the biggest hurdle keeping average folks from using Linux is just lack of exposure.
Once I introduce them to the Application repository ("Oh, so it's a free App Store?", yes Grandma, to you it is...), and set updates to install automatically they're all set. Hell, it's so easy that my Grandpa "accidentally" upgraded to the latest LTS version.
I even install Linux instead of Win7 for my friends and family: "Try Linux out first; It's free, so why not? If you don't like we can always buy the Windows7 upgrade later." Even if someone goes with Windows, or OSX, there's no real reason not to have a Linux boot option just in case the other OS gets hosed -- This has saved me "urgent" weekend visits more times than I can count, and some folks choose to stick with Linux afterwards, heh.
Now my friends and relatives call me just to talk instead of also guiltily dropping hints that they need me to fix their computers...
Re: (Score:3)
Just go with Ubuntu. Its designed to be friendlier for beginners...
And Mint is based on Ubuntu and even friendlier and more complete for beginners. #2 on Distrowatch hit ranking, just behind Ubuntu and ahead of Fedora, Debian, openSUSE and everything else, and not by accident or as a shiny new John ny-come-lately.
Start with a LiveCD (Score:4, Insightful)
Whatever distribution you choose, start with a LiveCD and boot from that. You won't have to make any changes to the computer at all. If you can install to a USB pendrive [ubuntu.com], it will be reasonably quick, too.
If the computer is reasonably hefty, with a modern processor and at least 1 GB of memory, I'd try Kubuntu 10.10 because I think the KDE desktop looks more like what someone used to Windows would expect. Otherwise, try Ubuntu 10.04LTS for the GNOME experience and avoid Ubuntu 11.04. It has an entirely different desktop environment (Unity) and is probably too buggy for someone whose never touched Linux before.
I haven't used Fedora in quite a while so I'm not competent to discuss its current incarnations. I've never taken to OpenSuSE, but I'm sure others here will tell you why to use that. Mandriva is likely to get some endorsements as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Try Edubuntu? (Score:3)
You might have her try out Edubuntu. It is pretty different than just another OS, but I think it does a good job of showing how Linux can fit a specific niche in a really interesting way.
They also have a "Weblive" version where you can play with it for 2 hours online before even downloading. That's here [edubuntu.org]
Linux Mint (Score:5, Informative)
Linux Mint [linuxmint.com] is easily the most Linux-newbie-friendly distribution I've ever used. It also scales well to an experienced user. It uses an Ubuntu base (unless you use Linux Mint Debian Edition but I strongly advise against that for a newbie).
Depending on hardware capabilities there are heavyweight (Gnome, KDE) and lightweight (Xfce, LXDE) versions.
You can install it using mintinstall (wubi) from inside Windows (you need to use the CD version for this, but it's then very simple to upgrade to the DVD version once you're inside Linux Mint). Doing this means you can dual-boot without repartitioning - for your mum this sounds like the best option.
Re: (Score:3)
i just sent my mom a dell mini w/ mint on it,
for many of these same reasons.
The problem with Linux Mint (Score:3, Informative)
I changed my mother from Ubuntu to Linux Mint around a year ago, and very quickly had to switch her back due to the endless cries of "it's doing something strange!". It was indeed doing something strange -- in around a 2 week period I came across at least two updates that insisted upon pushing Ubuntu branding to core parts of the system. What is the problem with this? Well, frankly -- some LM in-house programs broke, as they weren't expecting this change, but it was their own update system that allowed it t
LFS (Score:3)
Use LFS [linuxfromscratch.org], that will teach you!
On a serious note, the Linux distribution choosers/selectors [lmgtfy.com] out there can answer your and similar questions.
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu! (Score:2)
Gentoo (Score:4, Funny)
Gentoo - By far the easiest!
* no need for a mouse to install it!
* don't have to boot a live cd
* don't have to dual boot (just have it take over)
* no hard to understand buttons - if you can read, you can install it!
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, for fuck sake!
It's not even that Gentoo is hard to install, but maintenance can drive any newbie insane if he will want to use latest version of anything.
Pah! Kids These Days! (Score:2)
But yeah I guess go for a Ubuntu live CD or something. You probably don't want to try to actually install the OS on a computer that's currently in-use, since doing that without clobbering something tends to be a bit of a chal
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the local Community College? I doubt they have anything more powerful or bigger than a 10 year old Dell server running Win2k (and no less than three different rootkits).
LoseThos (Score:2)
Why waste time with Linux when there's LoseThos [losethos.com]?
Haiku (Score:2)
http://haiku-os.org/ [haiku-os.org]
https://www.haiku-os.org/get-haiku [haiku-os.org]
Re: (Score:2)
DOS? (Score:2)
DOSS Hell (Score:2)
Good books (Score:2)
Once you choose a distro you will need to get familiar with the command line to really get in to Linux.
I found this to be great for beginners: Introduction to Linux by Machtelt Garrels [fultus.com]
Does anyone else have useful books to share?
Knoppix (Score:2)
Download the ISO, burn it to a CD, reboot [knopper.net].
NOT Ubuntu -- try Mandriva. (Score:2)
Everyone's going to suggest Ubuntu. But every time I've tried Ubuntu I've run into countless problems with it detecting hardware -- especially network cards. And every Ubuntu liveCD I've ever tried has been complete garbage.
Go with Mandriva. The LiveCD is excellent, the installer is the best I've ever seen, and every set of hardware I've ever thrown at it just works, straight off the install. None of the endless hours of screwing with things like Ndiswrapper that you get with Ubuntu. And it's got excellent
Re: (Score:2)
They are all the same kernel.
They all use the same user land apps and daemons.
If you have problem with a device in one distro, you're probably going to have the same problem in others.
PnP on Linux pre-dates Mandrake.
If something like ndiswrapper is even in the discussion then clearly there are some basic driver support issues regardless of how well you dress up the hack in question.
Re: (Score:2)
Same exact hardware, on Ubuntu native network drivers wouldn't work; ndiswrapper wouldn't work, uninstalled it, reinstalled it, still no...uninstalled, installed from source...still no. Reinstalled Ubuntu entirely, removed ndiswrapper, reinstalled ndiswrapper from source, finally worked. On Mandriva? Installed Mandriva, network card worked.
Re: (Score:2)
They are all the same kernel.
They all use the same user land apps and daemons.
If you have problem with a device in one distro, you're probably going to have the same problem in others.
Not really, each distro heavily patches the kernel, Mandriva included, and not necessarily with the same patches. Plus as the distros tend not to come out on the same day they also often have different kernel versions. On top of that the userland tools to detect and set up hardware are not the same and things like automating ndiswrapper wifi driver installs tend to be better on Mandriva
I second Mandriva, I've been using it for close to a decade and it is definitely easier to set up than Ubuntu, plus being K
Re: (Score:2)
especially network cards.
You mean, WIRELESS network adapters made by BROADCOM, that you have in your CRAPPY LAPTOP, right? Right!
screwing with things like Ndiswrapper
No sane person would use ndiswrapper on his own hardware now. If wireless card is unsupported, replace it or don't use it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, WIRELESS network adapters made by BROADCOM, that you have in your CRAPPY LAPTOP, right? Right!
Yes, I mean wireless network adapters. Is there any OS/hardware combination in the world that has trouble with wired? I figured that was kinda assumed. And yes, I mean broadcom adapters in my "crappy laptop". That's why I use Linux, because I can buy the cheap hardware and have it still perform better than the guy on the $2000 machine. Besides, that's what's in damn near every laptop I've ever seen. I know exactly two people who don't use Dell machines...and one of them just broke their HP and is looking to
Is there extra credit available? (Score:2, Insightful)
After all, the summary just said "an OS other than what you usually use", it didn't say it had to be Linux. And most of the people there will likely go with Linux anyways, so why not be different?
She really should roll her own... (Score:2)
Recommend Pinguy (Score:3)
For me it just saves time having to tweak things and install lots of packages.
Same as it's always been... (Score:2)
Ubuntu LTS (long-term support) (Score:2)
LTS is the version Ubuntu release every two years that promises long-lasting support, and is more geared towards entreprise. You loose some bells and whistles, but gain a lot of reliability and documentation.
Ubuntu "regular" value their users' time too little. I'm typing this from a brand-spanking new 11.04 install, and I'm already semi-pissed at it: Ubuntu is the only OS I know arrogant enough to force you to have your OS launch bar on the left side of the screen.No moving it to the bottom, top, or even ri
Mom... eh? (Score:5, Funny)
Qimo Linux is the best way to start (Score:3)
And the best way to start? By the hand that rocks the cradle! Qimo linux is geared towards young children, but is so simple even a Parent can use it!
Look for anything that talks about... (Score:3)
Linux Mint (Score:3)
Another vote for Linux Mint 11, maybe try pinguey which is supposed to be even easier.
Re: (Score:2)
That will work until Ubuntu upgrades the kernel, which messes up the Grub, which makes Ubuntu inaccessible.
It would be better to run Ubuntu as a LiveCD IF she has enough RAM (4GB or more) and her CPU is fast enough. (dual core 2.2GHz or better) than use Wubi. IF things detect and run well she can install it as a dual boot. Or, better yet, give Ubuntu the whole HD.
Personally, I prefer Kubuntu. So would she, because Win7 copied much of KDE 4.5's look & feel in VISTA and Win7.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to recommend a non-current version of Ubuntu, at least do it right -- it would be the latest LTS [ubuntu.com] release (10.04). Not that there is a good reason to run it on a personal desktop, as 11.04 is fine as it is, except for the choice of default desktop environment.
Re: (Score:2)