• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Recomend me a Linux

#42
Dave said:
Kind of along the same lines...any of you Linux guys know of any other versions of Linux that will do the live cd option? I tried ubuntu, but was wanting to try Redhat or maybe a couple of the others before committing to one to have as a dual boot with XP.

BTW I have a 64 bit AMD processor in my laptop.
Click to expand...

There are some Fedora Live CD's roaming around. Berry Linux which is based on Fedora is pretty nice as well. SLAX is an option as well. If you liked Ubuntu and want something similar to it to try, there is also Mepis and Knoppix, which are all based off of Debian.
 
#45
Kubuntu vs. Ubuntu? I say Kubuntu for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, I very much prefer KDE over GNOME. That is the main advantage. The interface is still nice like Ubuntu, it already comes with a ton of applications, it is still easy to use, Beryl works much better with it Kubuntu, and it is very customizable. Out of those two I definitely say go for Kubuntu.
 
#46
Alright, I'm taking the plunge. As soon as I can get my hands on a cheapo used computer, I'm giving Linux a go.


Here's an odd question, though:

Is it pronounced "line-ucks" or "lynn-ucks"? I though it was the former, but when I was talking to some friends today, they all pronounced it like the latter.
 
#51
Kibuddy said:
Alright, I'm taking the plunge. As soon as I can get my hands on a cheapo used computer, I'm giving Linux a go.


Here's an odd question, though:

Is it pronounced "line-ucks" or "lynn-ucks"? I though it was the former, but when I was talking to some friends today, they all pronounced it like the latter.
Click to expand...

Good for you. The latter pronunciation is the correct one.

A great source for up-to-date Linux distro release info is Distrowatch.

For live CDs I really like dyne:bolic (music/multimedia), Puppy Linux (very small, ideal for old computers, lightning-quick on newer ones) and Knoppix. Knoppix is a great Swiss-Army-Knife tool, especially for tasks like rescuing messed up Windoze computers, setting up secure browser kiosks, or zeroing a hard drive.
 
#54
Dave said:
Kind of along the same lines...any of you Linux guys know of any other versions of Linux that will do the live cd option? I tried ubuntu, but was wanting to try Redhat or maybe a couple of the others before committing to one to have as a dual boot with XP.

BTW I have a 64 bit AMD processor in my laptop.
Click to expand...

PCLinuxOS has a Live CD.

Invalid Link Removed
 
#55
cgworkman said:
If you're calling it 'beginner' because it can be referred to as 'plug and play' then that makes no sense. Just because something is set up as easier to use doesn't make it beginner. Because when we get our systems set up they run the way we prefer--which is 'easier.'
Click to expand...

Actually, systems that are plug and play ARE beginner. It makes it easy for someone to plug in a cable, USB portable drive, ect, and it works straight away. So yeah, if things work where you just plug it in and it works straight away, I'd call that beginner level stuff. I mean, you could have X windows or you could try to set up your USB portable drive using the command prompt. Which one do you think beginners of Linux would prefer?
 
#56
YogSothoth said:
Actually, systems that are plug and play ARE beginner. It makes it easy for someone to plug in a cable, USB portable drive, ect, and it works straight away. So yeah, if things work where you just plug it in and it works straight away, I'd call that beginner level stuff. I mean, you could have X windows or you could try to set up your USB portable drive using the command prompt. Which one do you think beginners of Linux would prefer?
Click to expand...

That is nothing to do with plug and play. Plug and play means the peripheral identifies itself to the OS to allow the OS to do what it wants (e.g. load the driver). Its being command prompt or GUI is irrelevant to it being plug and pray.
 
#57
Dave said:
Kubuntu and Ubuntu booted up just fine, but I couldnt get my wireless card to work on them... :hmm:

Any ideas?
Click to expand...

Linux in general is behind on wireless... State what wireless card you have, and when i get out of class at 5pm I'll take a look if i can help you. Linux support for wireless is a little limited. :(

Personally i semi give up on wireless, i just have access point right next to the pc and connect my pc to wireless network through a rj45... So basically it goes PC>Nic(rj45)>Hub>Access point> Router>modem>Internet... So my room is wired but my house isn't. :)

Cheers
 
#58
YogSothoth said:
Actually, systems that are plug and play ARE beginner. It makes it easy for someone to plug in a cable, USB portable drive, ect, and it works straight away. So yeah, if things work where you just plug it in and it works straight away, I'd call that beginner level stuff. I mean, you could have X windows or you could try to set up your USB portable drive using the command prompt. Which one do you think beginners of Linux would prefer?
Click to expand...

Plug and Play has nothing to do with a beginner system. I've been using Linux for years and by no means am I a 'beginner.' However, if I plug in a USB driven diggy camera--would why I not want my system to automatically recognize and setup the correct parameters? Why have to extra work? Why do something 'extra' for only the sake of doing it? I have better things to do with my time than others I guess...

Using the command line does not prove one isn't a 'beginner.' I was using the command line (or console) within a week of installing Linux the first time. The designation of 'beginner' can mean many things--but just because a system is 'Plug and Play' does not prove anything. Not to mention that every system that can be setup up to be PNP can also be configured not to be PNP.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back