Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What's The Easiest Linux Distro For A Newbie?
joseph Kramer -- a long-time user of both Windows and MacOS -- comes to Slashdot with the ultimate question:
I've been lurking here for years and seen many recommendations for a Linux flavor that works. What I'm really looking for is Linux that works without constant under-the-hood tweaking (ala early Windows flavors, 3.1, 95/98). Does such an OS exist? For the record, I am not an IT tech. I just need something to work with the mechanical equipment it controls. Any recommendations?
When it comes to Windows and MacOs, he describes himself as "fed up with their shenanigans." So leave your best answers in the comments. What's the best way for a newbie to get started with Linux?
When it comes to Windows and MacOs, he describes himself as "fed up with their shenanigans." So leave your best answers in the comments. What's the best way for a newbie to get started with Linux?
The answer in my opinion is Mint, there shouldnt be tons of constant fiddling... However it is important to understand, Linux is still very much a power-user operating system... So far i havent seen any distro worth its salt that does alot of hand holidng.
It's linux. And there isn't any tweaking you need to worry about.
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Elementary OS: https://elementary.io/
Ubuntu for me is the first thing that comes to mind.
I have not actually installed it on a computer though I have a few times booted from a disk with it to do some hardware maintenance when I was having some hard drive issues and overall seemed to be relatively straightforward.
and if you want the best user experience, install it from floppies.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I just need something to work with the mechanical equipment it controls
Apparently you just don't need a run of the mill desktop linux distro, but some special purpose to control some hardware, right ? The good news is that all linux systems are more or less equivalent for that. The bad news is: what is you equipment ? Does it support Linux ? Do you need to write software for it or are you provided drivers ? If the latter you should ask your hardware provider what they recommend, not us.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Obviously.
then try Linux Mint - it seems to be the most popular and the highest rated among new users. But if you don't mind reading a bit before making a decision, then maybe this link will help (includes screenshots): http://distrowatch.com/dwres.p... Have fun!
No, Linux is something fundamentally different from MacOS.. open.
Just Debian, no derivatives.
I've had the least trouble with Debian. Mint just doesn't seem to like me, and I don't like Ubuntu.
Building Gentoo from source was fun, Fedora just didn't feel right, FreeBSD wouldn't even work in Virtualbox, and I've yet to experience the pleasure of Slackware.
If this is to control manufacturing/industrial equipment, you really should be employing someone with skills and experience. /advice
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
I would choose Kubuntu for its normal Windows 7-like start menu (incorporating type-search for applications, and organized submenus). The distro also has several things to get you rolling, optionally installing flash and mp3 proprietary extensions, a driver installer to get proprietary things like ATI/Nvidia and WiFi up and running. Firefox and LibreOffice are ready to go, and typing "updates" or "software" in the menu will get you more programs to install.
In 17.04 (beta 2 from a few days ago) the awkward "K" branding has been removed from KDE plasma, giving the startup and menu a more unified feeling.
At noob level, probably the most challenging thing is to make and use a bootable USB of the distro, and for that, the ISO plus Rufus or Unetbootin will make the flash drive, and creative pounding of function keys on boot will get your PC to start live off it.
Android, or ChromeOS. Both are based on Linux, after all. But otherwise, Fedora. Everything about Ubuntu is weird.
You say you don't want to spend time tinkering. As we don't know what specific software/hardware you will run, only general advice can be given. So generally speaking, if you go with the flow and use the most used distro, that will maximize chances that any 3rd party software you use will work with it. Even if something goes wrong, you have the largest chance of being able to Google your way to a solution. So, then consider Ubuntu (or another mainstream Linux distro).
Here's how it works in Linux.
Either you're very lucky and Linux works for you out of the box and you don't have problems with your hardware or you're very unlucky and you have troubles with your hardware and software.
I'd recommend that you download Xubuntu/Mint LiveCDs, run them and verify that your PC works (including your GPU/peripherals like printers and scanners/networking like Wi-Fi/LAN). After that you may proceed with the actual installation. If you want to spare yourself from frequent OS upgrades, please install an LTS version of a chosen distro.
Linux even in 2017 is not exactly a friendly OS with zero problems, the truth is to the contrary. Unless you're content with the software your distro provides, you'll have to teach yourself command line and Linux CLI commands.
Also make sure you read this article - it has a lot of wisdom in regard to Linux and its inner workings for a beginner like you.
I suggest running Knoppix from a CDROM or DVD.
Unless you specifically tell it to it's not going to change anything on your hard disk. You are not going to mess anything up by accident.
If you want to keep stuff save it to a USB disk, or even run Knoppix from a USB disk.
I've seen a lot of people who had never used linux before run knoppix with no trouble.
Look, I'm sure some of you clicked on this post in bewilderment, expecting to see some hypocritical pro-Ubuntu argument from a known digerati eliteist here. You're not gonna find one. But the answer to the question is Ubuntu.
The problem is that the question is wrong. Like many such users, their actual biggest problem is just not knowing how to ask the right questions. The question "What's the easiest Linux distro for a newbie?" was formulated by someone who wanted a Linux distro that would not leave them running in terror, frightened and disgusted of all open source software forever. While Ubuntu (or Mint, or whatever... something even more absurd) may indeed be the easiest for new adopters to understand, it's a far cry from a good example of the pinnacle of quality in open source software that they want and need.
Since Mageia is a fork from already very user friendly Mandriva and has a very friendly community and forums, nice and translated documentation I also found it very easy to use. I even install it for some non-techies and they still use it without any complain. I just showed them how to update if there is an update icon in tray for it.
They also have a strong and very dedicated QA team. They even write advisories regularly which is very very rare in independent distros.
Not Arch. But I would recommend it if you were willing to dive into a world of fuck you, because you will eventually climb out victorious and full of knowledge. I'd say it's worth it.
Just don't be like me and accidentally delete all graphics card drivers, and be forced to download them through the text only webbrowser.
I think you will get as many answers as there are users on /. My preferred distro is Debian, simply because that is what I am used to. It is fairly conservative in that it doesn't dance exactly on the bleeding edge, but I have yet to find anything missing; I may just be a rather conservative linux user, of course. You could probably go for any of the popular distibutions and avoid tinkering, if that is what you want - it is more a question of which ones to avoi, in that case, since there are some that are made specifically for that purpose; Gentoo springs to mind.
But I have to ask: Why do you want to avoid tinkering? Even if you choose a distribution that doesn't require it, all Linuxes invite it; it is very open to playing around with the system. And unlike Windows where it is a pain to try to go under the hood, in linux it is more pleasurable.
See the desktop and new features: New features in Linux Mint 18 MATE
Chrome OS is not a full OS. It is a "lightweight OS designed primarily for web-based computing within a browser window."
Is the Chromebook Really Just a "Google Spyware Machine"?
The best one is the one the person uses you are going to ask for help. e.g. if you have a cow orker that uses Debian, and he is somebody that will be helping you, use Debian.
When I started I had nobody to ask and Google did not exist yet, so what I did was try out several of the large distributions at the time and the one I likes/Worked was S.u.S.E. (Now openSUSE).
So take a weekend and try out several of them. If you can not make a weekend available, you won't like changing OS and you will be a User (nothing wrong with that), not an admin on your own machine. Ask why you want to move to Linux and find a pre-installed system or let somebody else install it. As you won't tinker with your system, but just have it working, that would be the best solution.
The more important question is if you want KDE, Gnome or XFCE. And when you have decided on that, look at how to install new software and how upgrades are done.
I like YaST from openSUSE, because it is consitant for a lot of different things, not just installing software. You can also easily install XFCE, Gnome and KDE at the same time at the beginning to check them out.
I dislike Ubuntu for the main reason of how they handle root situations. Yes, I know you are able to change it, I just don't like how they treat it as default.
So try out several of them. https://distrowatch.com/?langu... will give an idea of popularity.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
As a Teacher of Windows and Ubuntu to the elderly, Ubuntu Mate 16.04 is by far the best people friendly distro. It is so much like the 6.04-10.04 that we all used to love but with all the new bells and whistles. I get more complaints that Mint its a little harder to find stuff in. I'm close to 70 and don't program. Most of my students are older than I. Thanks to all of the Linux family everywhere for making life so great at our age.
UBUNTU -- Comes with GNOME - EASY WINE INSTALLATION and - Firefox -- BEst
Who are you and what are you using your PC for?
I started in 1979 on an Apple II, graduated to CP/M and then MS-DOS. In 1991 I decided to try that newfangled Linux thing and never looked back. The important thing, however, was that I was driven by my needs; in 1991 my need was a Unix clone that could run an certain program. I then found that an Unix environment suited my other needs of that time much better: LaTeX/BibTeX was superior to MS-Word for writing my thesis, the command line and the Unix tools supported the experiments I needed to run so much better than MS-DOS, X was smoother even in 1991 as MS-Windows or the Mac... where should I stop?
So if you use your PC for writing 'simple' texts, internet and games, Ubuntu or Mint will serve your needs as well as Microsoft or Apple, but certainly not better. If at any point you need to get off the trodden path, the power of the Unix environment will get you forward regardless of the Unix flavour you use. Heck! An Macbook wil work in that case!
Paai
And before I answer it, one thing in advance: It won't go without "tweaking". Yes, Linux went a long way from its "CLI only" days that became "CLI only, but we have some kinda-sorta frontends for some of the things, and a few of them actually work" to what we have now, a system that you can mostly configure without ever touching a command line.
Linux is still, though, an operating system that retails its command line roots. In other words, every GUI does, CLI can do better. Or easier. Or faster. Or with more options. Eventually, you will open that terminal window. We know you will.
Linux is also not a "fake it 'til you make it" OS where you guess your way through the menus, hoping that eventually you will find a way that lets you do what you want to do. Unlike Windows, where there are usually a few ways you can reach a goal, some more intelligent and efficient, some less, there is usually only one way to do something in Linux, and it needn't be the most intuitive one depending on the angle you're approaching from.
So, with this all said, the question which Linux distro is the right one for a newbie is answered by answering two questions:
1. With what Linux distribution will access to webpages on the internet work out of the box with near 100% certainty?
2. Which Linux distribution has the most informative and best Google-findable "how do I do stuff" pages?
The answer to those two questions would be Ubuntu. Yes, Mint works too, but Mint is a tiny bit different, and the last thing you need as a newbie is to wonder whether some cookbook you just follow is wrong, whether it's something on your end or whether it's one of the few things that differ between the textbook and your copy. And yes, Mint is a good system and in some areas actually better than Ubuntu, especially when it comes to support and tweaks for home entertainment, but I'd still stick with Ubuntu. Simply because you have a solid amount of good and helpful advice at your disposal that works for YOUR system.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Updating Linux has become quite painless by now, at least for the Desktop distributions. Basically it's like with Win10, just that you can decide not to if you feel like and it usually doesn't shoot your system in the boot.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
XUbuntu is very easy to install and maintain. It has a familiar Windows-like file manager and toolbar, and does away with the horrid UI that comes by default with Ubuntu. I've used that on a daily-driver development machine for a number of years. Download at http://xubuntu.org/
Protect your browser with the Force Safe Search add-on
Ubuntu and Mint both try to be newbie friendly and are large enough. ..well, back in 2.x days you used to get a question how you wanted to merge configuration files and stick with what you had or get the new one or whatever and that kinda felt like a pain. I don't know how it handles if you've done any changes and that's likely when you get the most problem with it (which may still not be a problem.)
Normal Debian which they are off-spring of (Mint grand-children) would likely do too though I know
OpenSUSE work just fine.
Fedora likely work just fine too.
Where they separate is how you upgrade, Debian can update from one version to the next from within the running system, I think Linux Mint used to suggest that you simply reinstall the new version but by doing that you of course need to keep your /home and any other files you want to keep separate or backed up. The advantage with the later approach is that you can introduce any changes whatsoever, including really large ones and the system will still work and it won't be a problem. If you keep some old stuff around you need to know how to migrate it to the new.
There also exist rolling distributions or releases from those who use numbered ones where the OS constantly evolve and you just upgrade all the time. Then you likely get more upgrades and in the case of trying to decide what to do with old configurations and such maybe you'll get more work there but you will never have to deal with going from one version to the next of the whole OS instead.
Multiple of them also don't want to include non-free software by default but remain clean/more clean from that and as such you may not get the proprietary video drivers, Adobe Flash, video and sound codecs and such installed from the beginning but information about how to get that software installed too is readily available so it won't be a problem to install it.
There's some other distributions why try to be the most friendly and easiest and would include such stuff too but the problem with those is that they will be smaller than the ones mentioned above and maybe they just die off or get updates slower than the large ones or will lack the documentation you want at some time or what you find isn't exactly matching the system you've got and so on.
Someone mentioned FreeBSD too before but FreeBSD isn't Linux, FreeBSD/Linux to some degree would be but you likely meant GNU/Linux. There's step by step guides for how to upgrade one version of FreeBSD to the next to there shouldn't be a problem as long as you follow that to do that either. Maybe a few more commands but you're unlikely to run into an issue doing it so it will likely carry on very smoothly anyway.
Someone also mentioned ChromeOS but if so then why not go full-blown Android instead? Though I think they was supposed to merge. Running Android wouldn't be the worst choice. Valve should just release a version which adds upon Android if necessary to make the Linux games run on it too.
What's The Easiest Linux Distro For A Newbie?
Just Debian, no derivatives.
I've had the least trouble with Debian. Mint just doesn't seem to like me, and I don't like Ubuntu.
Building Gentoo from source was fun, Fedora just didn't feel right, FreeBSD wouldn't even work in Virtualbox, and I've yet to experience the pleasure of Slackware.
If this is to control manufacturing/industrial equipment, you really should be employing someone with skills and experience. /advice
The first thing the person asking has to to realise is that this is a very loaded question about religion. You might as well ask which Christian/Muslim/Jewish sect has the 'one true' interpretation of it's respective religion's scripture. Having said that the parent is partly right, Debian or one of it's many derivatives is pretty easy on newbies, or at least as easy as Linux can be but then so is Fedora. Suse is also a good choice but less popular because it is meant to be a bit more Microsoft compatible and having anything to do with Microsoft is to Linux geeks what sunlight, holy water and garlic are to a vampire. When I worked with Suse I liked it because it has YaST setup and config utility which is a bit reminiscent of AIX's smitty (SMIT) command and lets you do lots of system configuration changes in one place and if you have to interact with Microsoft systems then Suse might be a good choice for you . For those looking at the enterprise sector you might want to consider CentOS which is functionally and (mostly) binary compatible with the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) offerings. I'm sure there are other Linux distos that are worth mentioning but these are the ones that I have worked with the most and think are good for newbies because of their features and/or community support. If you strip away all the sectarian bullshit that surrounds Linux distros the best advice you are left with is go for a big and widely used distribution like Debian/Ubuntu or Red Hat Fedora simply because there are lots of users and therefore lots of forums, blogs, help pages howto guides, etc... Of all the things that are mostt valuable thing to any Newbie the most important one is extensive community support. Suse and the host of Debian and Red hat based distributions all have extensive and helpful communities, especially the last two. You can always move on to something less widely used or hostile to newbies later.
If you're looking for ease-of-use and Out-of-the-box experiences, ElementaryOS is working with that exact goal in mind. https://elementary.io/ It's still in beta, but I've used it for a few years, though recently switched to Arch, but have been using Debian, Mint, etc for many years before that. ElementaryOS is the linux distro you can easily give your mother and not worry about her breaking it, while still retaining all power-user options.
Reading is not a strength on slashdot. The submission says "I just need something to work with the mechanical equipment it controls", which seems to indicate that custom software is at play. In that case, especially if it is a non-standard interface, Linux may not be an option.
For general use I would recommend Ubuntu, too, but this does not seem to be general use.
I changed my video card to one that had HDMI audio. If I want to use my fancy sound card, I need to prevent the system
from defaulting to the HDMI interface. What's worse, even though the old sound card modules load on boot, the system
(Mint 18.1) fails to make the old interface available in any of its configuration options. Blacklist the HDMI module? Now
I don't get any sound configuration interface at all. I fumbled around on the forums for days. Nobody had a solution that
that worked, much less one that a noob could grok. Fuck Mint. Fuck Systemd, Fuck Debian. Not necessarily in that order.
What I'm really looking for is Linux that works without constant under-the-hood tweaking (ala early Windows flavors, 3.1, 95/98)
Really? if you think those didn't need constant tweaking, you have a distorted memory of using them (or you never used them at all).
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
You know... if he's fed up I think he knows a thing or two about operating systems. Maybe he should have a look at OpenSUSE.
ruurd
You also need to consider the Linux desktop and proprietary drivers in addition to selecting a distro,
Most distros support multiple desktop environments such as Cinnamon, MATE, XFCE, KDE, and Gnome. They have various pro's and con's but my favorites are MATE and XFCE. They both have reasonably modest hardware requirements and, for me, they are both similar enough to Windows to make life easy for a newbie. (BTW, you usually pick the desktop by picking the right ISO from the distro's download site).
Proprietary driver support is (for me) also important. I don't want to start a flame war but, for me, its important to support drivers provided by your hardware vendor. I like Nvidia graphics cards and I want them to work to their fullest potential so I install Nvidia's proprietary drivers. Some distro's make this painless and others require you to figure it out for yourself. You don't want to manually manage vendor drivers if you're a newbie.
The distro that best addresses these requirements for me is Linux Mint with the MATE desktop.
It's difficult to come up with a solution without knowing what the problem(s) is (are).
1) What is wrong with the apps you are running where the systems require "constant under-the-hood tweaking"? and what type of 'tweaking" is required?
2) You say you need "something to work with the mechanical equipment it controls". Are there apps to control the mechanical equipment that run on other platforms?
3) You are "not an IT tech". Who is going to plan, install, configure, and test the new platform?
4) Do you have managements' buy-in to do a wholesale change in the control of the mechanical equipment?
5) Can you afford the downtime required to install, configure, test, and move to production, the new platform?
6) ...and the outages while you, or someone else tweaks and adjusts the applications and operating systems?
7) Is there networking involved?
8) What is your back up plan and how do you test it?
9) What is your roll back plan?
10) What do you do in the event of a failure?
11) Who is creating the project plan?
12) How critical are these systems to your business?
These questions will lead you to the next set of questions, and they will in turn lead you to the next set of questions, and so on.
You need to better understand the requirements before you can come up with a solution. Everyone here is going to recommend what they think is best, or their favorite Linux distribution. They are all good recommendations based on their understanding of your problem, but they may not be the best solution to your problem(s). I like Centos and Puppy. The Ubuntu derivatives were too restricting for my personal tastes. If I'm on the system, I'm god. On those systems, I'm god, but I have one hand tied behind my back. I'm not saying they are bad, just not for me.
In addition, you can get Knoppix which incredibly allows a full system to run of a CD-ROM!
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Windows 10
I've been lurking here for years and seen many recommendations for a Linux flavor that works. What I'm really looking for is Linux that works without constant under-the-hood tweaking
I think the question really requires taking a step back and looking at what a distro is and does. Because if you're coming in from another OS I'd say there's three levels of changes and the distro-level is probably the least important.
1. Applications: Do your applications run under Linux or do they have functional equivalents like web services you'd be happy with. If you've heard about WINE, then stop because Windows emulation is full of quirks. It's a tool for users that really, really don't want to run Windows even if it has 10x the issues of running Windows software on Windows. No distro is going to help you if after banging your head on GIMP and Krita you realize that no, I really need Photoshop or anything else with less than a platinum rating on WINE. And even then it can break in the next update.
2. Desktop environment (DE), this is pretty much how the OS part of the interface will look like for you. No matter which one you pick it won't be like Windows or OS X. If a distro ships a DE, it'll probably look and feel pretty much the same across distros. If you don't like Gnome or KDE on Ubuntu there's not much point trying them again on SuSE, Mint or Debian. Granted, a few of these are almost like picking distros as I'd take Mint for Cinnamon and Ubuntu for Unity but far from all.
3. Quality of packaging, testing, support, upgrades, security patches, availability of backports and third party repositories, release schedule etc. basically a lot of the boring housekeeping and problem solving. For the most part, this is what distros do - they take what developers have made and wrap it up in packages for you. But if the developers haven't made the apps you want, you'll be tweaking your work process a lot. If they haven't made the DE the way you want, you'll be tweaking your OS interaction a lot. A good distro doesn't create fuss for you, but it doesn't really mean it'll work for you.
I'd just start with Ubuntu with Unity (the default) only because it's super common and see if you get past #1. If you do and don't like Unity I'd try Cinnamon, KDE, Gnome and XFCE, as far as I know they're all available as packages on Ubuntu. If you find something that looks right for you I'd move on to #3 and ask "What distro is the best to run [Cinnamon/Gnome/KDE/Unity/XFCE]?" Though I suspect that the answer will probably be one of the Mint or Ubuntu spins in most cases. There's not much point in going outside the beaten path if you just want to get started.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Preferably those with long time support (LTS).
The same OS that makes you go into settings to run programs not downloaded through its proprietary services?
Crap like MacOS is the reason why Linux is so popular among tech savvy people. We're tired of it.
Installing an OS yourself will always require a little more tweaking than using the one preintalled. Any Linux distro you can download will always loose to Windows/MacOS in this regard. So buy a computer with Linux preinstalled and the tweaking needed to get the hardware working will already be done.
But to be honest, don't we all do the tweaking mostly because it's allowed, not so much because it's required. So a distro that forbids tweaking might be required to really compete with Windows and MacOS. So, ChromeOS maybe. Otherwise you might be doomed to tweaking hell.
on Raspberry Pi 3 computer https://www.raspberrypi.org/ . It is an OS and a computer with the link to the physical world via GPIO.
Without more details about this "mechanical equipment" we cannot give you an appropriate reply because we have no idea if any
Linux distro is even able to talk to and control this unknown "mechanical equipment".
If you're talking about a regular CNC mill/router/lathe then LinuxCNC should be appropriate.
#DeleteFacebook
No, you get to understand the Gentoo approach, and how to follow a step-by-step guide, but it doesn't actually teach you WHY you're doing it.
Eat the rich.
The best possibility is to find a version of Linux that does what you want it to, install it, then keep it far away from any and all internet connections. That is the only hope you have that it won't try to update itself, install new versions or discover that external stuff it expected to find has mysteriously been moved or deleted by the notional owner.
He was asking about Linux, not Windows 10.
Eat the rich.
I'm not sure what the OP means when he says "mechanical equipment it controls" but assume he means the PC and it's peripherals.
1st off. It depends on what you want from your Linux flavor OS. Seems to me you want to get away from the Windows shenanigans but coming from a Windows ecosystem myself. I couldn't stand the Ubuntu/Fedora update your distro every 6-12 months. Windows just updates until it's time to switch to a new version some years later (until Windows 10 that is to say).
I'm probably going against the tide here but having gone the rolling release way, I don't see myself going back for personal needs to a major distro like Ubuntu. Manjaro is an easy to use rolling release distro to start with and once you feel comfortable, you can move to Arch Linux if you feel you need to be more of a poweruser.
The same OS that makes you go into settings to run programs not downloaded through its proprietary services?
Crap like MacOS is the reason why Linux is so popular among tech savvy people. We're tired of it.
You are misinformed. [Ctrl]-O or right clicking when you want to run an unsigned app is all that's needed. and for people who are non-techies, it's a good proteciton against potentially malicious software
Right Click -> "Open" is "going into settings to run programs"? Really?
The phase you're looking for to describe people like you is not "tech savvy," it's "idiot savants." Emphasis on the idiot.
The best possibility is to find a version of Linux that does what you want it to, install it, then keep it far away from any and all internet connections. That is the only hope you have that it won't try to update itself, install new versions or discover that external stuff it expected to find has mysteriously been moved or deleted by the notional owner.
This is a laughable bunch of lies. Linux will *never* force updates on you, it is *always* up to you how/when/whether/which updates are applied. It's windows that now forces updates on you and breaks things, and you have to take complex and ever-changing measures to stop it.
This is one of the areas where Linux really excels. You have a *choice* of stable, mature versions, supported for up to 10 years (RHEL/CENTOS etc.) which receive only important security updates, or (if you want) you can have a bleeding edge version (which will break things) or something in between. *You* decide your priorities and choose accordingly. With Windows, unless you have the Enterprise edition, you pretty much get what you're given and like it or lump, and if it breaks stuff, hard luck.
TrueOS is not for a noob. I agree that it's the most user friendly BSD at the moment, but your'e going to have to fiddle and fight with it to get certain hardware to work. Also, due to the lack of video drivers and wifi support, it will not work on many newer computers.
I say this as someone who's been working on a desktop focused BSD since 2005. It's not there yet.
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
Joseph --
I run Linux as my Primary OS and have been doing so for 20 years now.
You posted a 'gotcha':
I just need something to work with the mechanical equipment it controls.
What exactly does that mean ?
How do you presently 'work with the mechanical equipment it controls' ?.
Is it a 'Windows-ONLY' App, a Browser-Based WebApp, what ?
If it is Windows-ONLY, you're stuck with that Windows.exe program.
Maybe it will work in WINE or a VM but you have to figure that out for yourself,
If it is a Browser-Based WebApp, you'll probably be OK.
Then there are all the 'oh yeah, I do that too' Apps like OutLook and Word and the like.
Those will annoy you too.
I run Slackware Linux as my main OS and VMWare Workstation for all the nasty Windows-Only tools I have to have for my job.
Slackware is a little more work to set up, but once it's configured, you'll not suffer WTF's where things suddenly stop working for no good reason.
HTH
-- kjh
If you are looking to surf the net, check email, stream movies/music, etc... then there are plenty of distros that work really well on standard hardware right out of the box. It's when you start tossing in non-standard hardware that you run into the problem.
You mentioned controlling mechanical equipment and if you have something that's not printer/scanner/fax then you would probably need to see what the manufacture of that hardware says.
I hate to sound flippant, but "it's complicated." To maximize the chances of a good user experience with Linux, we need to have an idea of what the Linux newbie wants to do.
This is not an easy question to answer off the top of your head because it requires you to anticipate things you might not do commonly but occasionally can be very important to you, like editing MS Word documents on an airplane or train (where you don't have a wifi or 4G connection).
Do you have Windows/Mac apps you will expect to run on your Linux box? What does your pattern of network usage look like -- do you mostly connect to a few wireless networks at home or the office, or do you hop around between hotels and coffee shops and three or four different work sites? Is your workstation even a laptop at all? How sophisticated are the documents you work with (I mean in terms macros, collaborative editing, templates, and the like -- I am sure the content you produce is plenty sophisticated regardless!). Are you watching video for fun or do you need to edit video for work?
Distrust any quick and simple answers from someone who doesn't show an interest in what your actual goals are as a user.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
I know there are comments here that mention Slackware as a joke but I'm actually serious. OK; maybe the install procedure could be intimidating, but then one could use a live variant such as Eric Hameelers' Slackware Live in its Plasma 5 or MATE variants. These could run flawlessly from an USB stick without the need for a complex installation procedure.
Slackware, contrary to what many people assert, is fundamentally simple and easy to maintain. Most problems could be solved with simple commands or by editing text configuration files; and problems are rare. The distribution is rock-solid, stable and fast. And in many cases is a "non-distro", in the sense that what you usually get is unmodified upstream software, without any "optimizations" (?) applied by many distros. It's the Linux distribution which is closest to a classical Unix and thus it provides a great learning environment, but its simplicity and stability means peace of mind and freedom to learn.
And Slackware shines as a learning environment: a full set of dev tools, a vast array of desktop environments (most of them provided by third parties but very up to date) and a simple architecture that just works. And whatever you'll learn, it will be applicable in just about any Linux, not just Slackware. Try it, and you will not be disappointed.
-- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
As much as I like FreeBSD, It's not really a workstation OS.
It's killer for server-side things, especially when run without a gui.
You can get a Chromebook and run packaged, maintanance free Android apps and games. If you want to develop, you can install Ubuntu/some other Linux disto as chroot (Crouton) without impacting stability/maintainance-free operation of the main OS.
Personally, the only version of Linux that is really user friendly enough for an newbie or an end user right now is Android.
Sure, most Linux distros now have a pretty GUI for everyday use and basic configuration changes, but there are still too many instances where you need to hand edit configuration files or do additional configuration from the command line if something doesn't work right. I know that your average Slashdot reader isn't afraid of the command line, but most end users and newbies are.
I've tried a lot of distros in my time including Arch and Gentoo and while I can get them all working there is something about Mint that just works out of the box and I'm finding now I'm older I actually like that in my computer. My real advice here though is just be prepared to switch from time to time and see what works best for you.
Great default settings, excellent hardware support, easy-to-use, nice graphic system tools, friendly community support. The Mageia6 release in almost ready to release, but I've been using it for quite a while without problems. As nice as it is, I'm surprised it doesn't get more attention; it deserves the attention.
They provide install DVDs and a Live DVD (Just don't install from the live DVD. Dues to size limitations of the DVD media, some useful packages are left out of the live DVD.)
https://www.mageia.org/en/6/
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
[nt]
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
"What I'm really looking for is Linux that works without constant under-the-hood tweaking (ala early Windows flavors, 3.1, 95/98)"
No such version of Linux exists that you can download. Such a system would require hardware that the OS was designed in tandem with (i.e., iOS or ChromeOS). Windows works as well as it does with most hardware because Windows is so pervasive in the world that hardware manufacturers design hardware to work specifically (or at least best) with it by default. Any version of Linux you can download does not have this advantage, and will require customizations to get it running "right." For every user on this page that says "X distro installed for me just fine" there are five people out there frantically googling answers right now because their sound or networking suddenly stopped working on their particular Linux install.
Though, I differ with your assumption that early Windows flavors needed no under-the-hood tweaking (I remember having nothing but problems with Windows 3.1/95, etc, back in the day).
It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
Does that newbie want to just be a user or does that newbie want to learn?
User? Ubuntu hands down or it's variants like Mint.
to learn to become an expert in linux? Slackware, because you have to learn how to configure everything with minimal di it for you tools.
Slackware you will have a far FAR better understanding about linux once you get going.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
You can take your MacOS HFS file system and shove it up as far as it will go...
Why in the hell does this topic become a reoccurring post every handful of months? I'm not opposed to fielding a ranty opinion that will be voted down, shit on or maybe even considered, but do we really have to feed the bear on this?
Maybe I'm just rubbed the wrong way on the justification for the question:
1) OP seriously references Windows 3.1/95/98? When was the last time you used a 'computer'? And we're really entertaining this?
2) OP asked and used the word 'easy'. Well, Linux isn't 'easy', it's a kernel. If you want your experience and interaction with Linux 'easy', then say that. If everything was easy, everyone would be doing it. That just tells me you're lazy; this isn't 1990's like the OS's you referenced FFS, there's PLENTY of OS's to find blog reviews on with about 30 seconds of actual search engine use, or just try anything -- most have a bootable CD or USB .iso and just try it yourself. If the damn thing did everything for you that you wanted out-of-the-box, then I guess call it a win for yourself. You weren't ever going to use it on a level minus full-out GUI anyway.
I don't even know what mechanical whatever you want to monitor, control or whatever. But chances are, your environment will be Linux distro agnostic. Maybe you should have just said and explained that part of exactly what you wanted to do in a Linux userland environment, and it wouldn't been such a BSD vs. RPM-based vs. Gentoo vs. Debian-based vs. Inbreeds-of-Debian-based flame-war again.
Linux as a desktop environment is a failed ecosystem.
I do still have some Linux servers
But for the desktop, the real answer is how dirty do you want to get? If you just want to use something that works, Linux is not your solution.
Linux is fine, and a great learning tool if you want to tweak, debug, figure out why things don't work, spend hours researching weird issues, and enjoy scripting / programming. Linux is (c) 30 years old, I was messing with in the '90's. Updates shouldn't break systems. I'm not talking minor updates, just patches. A bit over a year ago, I tried Mint on a laptop - any update past the initial install resulted in a failure to boot. Come on, really... Other annoyances, needing to install second processor support manually, no support for Netflix (supposedly this has been recently addressed - but how long has Netflix been around?), flaky WiFi driver behavior... These are all things that were "fun" to try and trouble shoot 10 years ago, now, not so much. As a 25+ year tech veteran, honestly, i'm tired of it. It's the pain I had over a decade ago and it's only improved visually, not logistically. I realize I'm coming across as a gumbly old guy, but at this point in an OS's life cycle, stability and compatibility should be expected - Unfortunately, that's not the case.
Definitely go with Mint. Maybe go with KDE window manager or something similar that isn't too jarring for those used to Win/Mac. It's pretty easy, considering, and they release new versions pretty frequently. Oh and the community behind it is also pretty helpful and extensive.
640k ought to be enough for anyone.
I can name dozens of distros which don't require tweaking - provided you have compatible hardware of course. Linux drivers are better than they were, but there can still be a few issues. Just grab any of the live distros and see how they work for you, and if you like it then install the full version.
Any of the *buntu distros
Mint
Mageia
PCLinuxOS
You don't come across as an old guy. You come across as what you are ... a person with no idea what you are talking about but either likes to pretend they do or is actually confused into thinking they do.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Everyone has their opinions, I would suggest trying some out on your own using live distros (CD/DVD or USB drive). I have been using linux since 1998 at home, and it is great. Live distros are a beautiful thing.
You can boot into a fully running OS and try it out without installing it. It will also let you know if it is compatible with your hardware. It will run slower than if you installed it, but it will run and you can get the feel for it.
As you read through these comments, you'll see names of distros. All of them should have live versions you can try out.
Try them to see which desktop environment you like the best, that would be a good start. I use Mint XFCE. There is also Mint KDE, Mint Cinnamon, Mint Mate. Maybe others now too. Some distros, like Mint and Ubuntu have specific packaged versions with these desktop environments as the default. Others don't and you would hvae to install them and try them out. You can also have different desktop environments on the same machine and switch between them if you like once you install it.
For a beginner, I would say to stick with Ubuntu or Mint, which is based on Ubuntu. They have good guides/documentation, and large communities. You can also check out distrowatch.com, which shows the most popular in terms of downloads. I am sure there are some of the top ones I haven't tried yet.
That is the beauty of it - take some time and try them out.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Add the Windows Subsystem for Linux feature and then go to a command prompt and type "bash". Done.
If you want something that just works, go with Fedora. We have all but switched all of our boxes to Fedora at work. 50+ workstations.
I'd say you can't really go wrong with Ubuntu at least as a basic introduction to Linux. Probably the first thing you'll wanna do is install Cinnamon desktop environment and use it instead of the default Unity one though.
Once you get comfortable with that, then you can try other distros that may be more optimized for specific jobs or for more experienced users.
HandyLinux is what my buddy uses for his grandparents' computer. It runs, they check email and facebook, and that's it.
p.s. It's in French so for English, you have to change the localization. I'm assuming that's straightforward.
My vote goes to Ubuntu-MATE, and its what I install to others in oem mode, so they can pick their own language/user/password on their own later.
Many people have used and loved gnome2 as a linux desktop, MATE is this, with bugs fixed and gtk3.
For newcomers the question comes: How you want your desktop to look like?: Windows like, Mac like, "linux" like? You just launch mate tweaks and have the desktop appearance rearranged with a single click (similar to Zorin).
There is also the Welcome screen; the must have things you need to do right after install. Proprietary drivers? Codecs? Language?, some extra app?, just click the green button and it takes you by the hand step by step. From it, you can single button install things like Chrome, Minecraft or Whatsapp.
Ubuntu-MATE only uses the normal Ubuntu repositories and can optionally use any PPAs you might need, so your support and access to software is the biggest. Unlike Mint, there is no extra layer on top and you don't need to deal with the dangerous Mint updater and certain "features" that make Mint too easy to break for a newbies. It also helps that you get updates immediately from Canonical and not after Mint reviews, and (hopefully) test them against their own changes from Ubuntu.
Artix
Your Linux, your init.
But that's where the bulk of usage is. In the last 2 decades, the only people who went Linux were those who knew and loved the various shells, programming environments, UIs and so on. Those who wanted something to simply work went the Windows or Mac route.
It's a different story today. While there's still no reason to go from Mac to ChromeOS if you've already sunk money into a Mac, people were unhappy first w/ Windows 8, and now Windows 10. But their choices - if they want to look at a Mac, they'll normally find it out of their budget - if they're not the Photoshop buffs but are just interested in email and websites. If they look at Linux, they'd have to be wary about what might not get recognized during the installation.
ChromeOS gives them much of their use case, and once it has the ability to run Android apps, they'd have a leg up over even Linux. Only thing - the Chromebooks currently in the market are vastly underpowered. It would be nice if ChromeOS DVDs were available, so that if one wanted to install it on an i7 w/ 8GB of RAM and 2TB of storage, one could, and not be restricted to those entry level toys. Another thing - not everyone wants to store everything on 'the cloud', so it would be nice if the OS allowed you to store your photos, music and the like locally, particularly if you're not using an 8GB SSD.
I've been using Linux for almost 20 years (I'm old you see). I suggest some flavour of Ubuntu, either Ubuntu itself, Xubuntu (it's light), Gnome Ubuntu (it's what I run) or Mint (although I was never really happy with this when I used it.... quite some time ago)
Is it even in alpha release yet?
I've built thousands and continue to build and support hundreds of systems across dozens of OS for quite a long time. If you want to say I don't know what I'm doing, or done - you're welcome to have any opinion you wish. My education and certs would beg to differ, but then again, people still believe the earth is flat, so carry on. If you would, however, indulge me and point out just 1 inaccuracy or contradiction in my prior post.
I'll say yes & no to this one. TrueOS is very simple to install, but you're right - it did not recognize my WiFi, and I use a standard Intel WiFi that comes with the chipset.
I have had upgrading issues recently, since February. I had originally ordered a DVD from OSdisk.com and installed it from there. The first few times, the upgrade was smooth, but in February, there was one, which after installing, my computer wouldn't boot. So I rebooted to a previous install, deleted that latest one and tried again. After a few times, I've given up.
Normally, I wouldn't bother, except that this latest release has support for Steam on WINE, which I want to play. Also, somehow, I'm unable to install any new software such as FreeCiv w/o installing to the latest release, which then invokes the above issues. I plan to at some point order a new DVD, which would presumably have the latest version, and install it from there. It's a shame, b'cos I never had these sorts of problems when TrueOS was PC-BSD. Lumina is great, but their updates leave a lot to be desired.
Quoting some Anonymous Coward: "The answer in my opinion is Mint, there shouldnt be tons of constant fiddling... However it is important to understand, Linux is still very much a power-user operating system... So far i havent seen any distro worth its salt that does alot of hand holidng."
A classic anti Linux Troll that could have been written in Redmond. It's understandably why you would post that anonymously. 'power-user operating system', you're taking nonsence. Straight out of the box, you get browsing, email, work processing and media player and that would have to be Ubuntu.
Okay, this is a serious questions and all us who know the power and importance of Linux should be give more complete answers. I see a few hear but none that feels complete so I'll give it a go:
For pure ease overall I would second the anonymous posting for Linux Mint. https://linuxmint.com/ It is overall the easiest to use for a newbies. The reason being that it has the best software package wizard/interface of the any distro I've seen to date. Runs virtually the entire Ubuntu spectrum, doesn't have odd experiments that we sometimes see in Ubuntu. I tend to prefer Mate (it's a bit older and uses fewer resources) but people wanting a more "slick" look will prefer Cinnamon. This is what you want if you are a pure desktop user. Especially for gaming. Plus Ubuntu has been caught doing desktop search data "deals" with Amazon (you can turn it off but it's not easy to find) so if privacy is a big concern, Linux Mint has to the best of my knowledge never given/sold data to Amazon. (see this link: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...). One thing I should point out, the Linux Mint team was until recently a bit laid back on security leading to their website being hacked. They are more diligent now but just something to bear in mind. But Linux mint is in my opinion the best distro for Windows Die hard users to look at to make the switch. (you have TONS of games from Gog.com and Steam.com for you gamers..) I'm not suggesting Ubuntu simply because Mint is more usable and when Ubuntu starting quietly selling user data to Amazon (they may not be doing it now, but once bitten), I felt they betrayed the community as they did not announce it openly but started doing it quietly and made the "off switch" as tricky to find as MS does with changing the default extension save option in MS Word/Excel.
That said, if you want similar ease but want to be able to do moderately easy admin style tweaking with a wide community help base, you use Mint Debian which uses a pure Debian file directory/location layout (Ubuntu and Linux Mint are Debian BASED but have a few tweaks/customizations that don't entirely match pure Debian specs but are compatible with the vast majority of Debian Linux packages/software).
once your are comfortable you can tweak the User interface to look like whatever you want. But...if you want a more Mac look/feel out of the box I'd suggest ElementaryOS. https://elementary.io/
ElementaryOs has the slickest look out of the box and while it says "for Windows users" I feel it's even easier for MacOS users making a switch. However, it is less mature which is probably why the packages are fewer and to expand that you need some knowledge a beginner would probably not have and the community base is significantly smaller (newer so this is to be expected.)
If you want a more server set of functions and flexibility, I'd suggest using Debian (http://www.debian.org) and set the login mode to Gnome Classic. It will disorient MS windows users at first but the transition is still easy and I've had office use it with no real complaints (just that it looks different but staff figured it out quite fast). The advantage that Debian has is it's a true server level OS (even with GUI) and the being the base of more "user friendly" distro has a HUGE community base that can get you through almost anything. I may be digressing a little but it's important to distinguish what you are using Linux for. others will say CentOS but for Windows users I'd say the Debian package system is more like what MS windows users are accustomed to as opposed to the RedHat package system which will feel more alien to MS windows users. Lots of business big wigs will say go RedHat based (CentOS, paid RedHat or Oracle Linux) and for some business solutions with specific business needs it is in some cases the only way to go. If you ever decide to uas a RedHat Pac
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
Last year I finally installed Linux Mint. As a long time Windows user (since 3.0) I found Mint easy to install and comfortable to use. Remembering not to operate in Windows auto-pilot, and keeping track of the new (to me) ways Mint handles certain things, were the two biggest challenges. Be aware software (even open-source) that is comfortable and familiar in Windows (or Apple) sometimes feels quirky in Linux. As well, finding alternatives to some Windows programs, like Microsoft Office, may be a challenge. Worth noting: after doing some investigation, I decided finding and learning a viable (for me) Microsoft Office Professional replacement required more time and effort than I wanted to invest. I decided to go dual-boot - Windows 7 and Mint. Having the two operating systems, on the same computer, did create a few small problems. Most were easily fixed, but I had to to learn to live with the date/time stamp conflict.
A very non-techie friend of mine installed Ubuntu 8.04 almost a decade ago and has only needed my help a couple times in that time period. Once he needed help with X config settings to hook up an old TV via HDMI. Another time it was a Comcast issue. Granted, my friend is on the high end of intelligence and he's not easily discouraged. His experience and lack of problems makes me believe Linux has been ready for the desktop for some time.
I'm assuming that you're not trolling, so here are a few things:
- Linux is command line only if you want it to be: otherwise, you have the widest choices of desktop environments to choose from. Some hold that bonanza of choices against it, claiming that users are left confused. If you want something like Windows, but lightweight, Razor-qt or LX/QT would be a good place to start
- If you are on a Linux command line, putting an '&' after your command and pressing enter will run that command in the background, and enable you to continue running other commands. Particularly if the first is something you know will take a while. There are other commands like bg or fg followed by the process ID that enable you to change the priorities of running commands. Incidentally, Microsoft too supports such things, using START and then the command name.
- Linux does have a lot of commercial software available for it, albeit at the server or workstation level. Things like Verilog or VHDL. The usual desktop software like LibreOffice is $0 only b'cos they are a lot worse than MS Office, particularly for Excel, PowerPoint and Access
Only thing you said that's right - the support. In Windows, when anything is broken, you call the PC vendor or take the PC back to the place you bought it, and they may help you. With Linux, since you got it for $0, there is no support involved unless you explicitly buy a short or long term support contract.
Wise people would know they should be spending their smarts on solving useful problems, as opposed to fixing carelessly crafted operating systems.
That's probably why most smart developers I know use (sadly, 2015 or prior) Macbook Pros for their software development work.
Sure, when you have to deploy on linux servers, you might have to tweak a little linux now and then, but a lot of that kind of deployment has been automated now.
Linux is fun for those who like to tinker with an OS, but it should be recognized that 99% of humans are not in that category currently.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
I keep hearing a lot of the same from other devs. If you want a Mint equivalent check out Korora.
Use that for maximum fun. ;)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I use Ubuntu on my work laptop and I'm definitely a "power user" so I can't comment on the easiest distro for a newbie, but I will say that the biggest issue with choosing your Linux distro is making sure that it will work with the hardware you're going to run it on.
For example, Ubuntu is a fantastic OS, but if you're using LTS (the recommended release) on a new laptop/desktop with Thunderbolt 3 or the latest Intel graphics - be prepared for some under the hood tinkering. This is exactly why vendors like sytem76 exist - there's no guarantee that off the shelf hardware will work with your Linux distro until the driver updates get back into the mainline kernels.
Second to mint is in my opinion, a tie between
UBUNTU or Fedora via Kororaproject.org or OpenSUSE.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Android is probably the least fussy, most widely used Linux based out there for consumers.
Seriously. Get an Android device and go to town.
Mint! It's awesome but does NOT actually smell like Mint.
Seriously.
Only boring people are ever bored.
You have to put your Chromebook into developer mode
And there's the deal breaker. The Chromebook firmware, when put into developer mode, practically invites anyone who turns it on to wipe the whole thing. At power on, it displays "OS verification is OFF -- Press Space to re-enable" (screenshot), but the owner's roommate doesn't know that she can push Ctrl+D to proceed with booting. Instead, she'll probably press Space, see a message to the effect "Reenabling OS verification will erase everything. Press Enter to continue" and do what it says.
I can handle the command line stuff. I can't handle the constant threat of loss of work that isn't committed yet and the use of the machine until I can return home to install media.
elementary OS gets my vote. Wikipedia entry.
I use it on my laptop, because I got it at a time when I had literally only an hour to install an OS, everything worked and I like the UI so I kept it. It's also easy to dive in to the console and the guts of the system if that is your cup of tea.
As one who came to Linux because I had to operate on computers in English (my usual language) but inside COMECON (Soviet times), I used Live Linux Knoppix, (3.5 inch floppies) it worked on any IBM the state companies owned, so I could disregard the Cyrillic keyboards, once I convinved them I was not 'adjusting' their IBMs.
This allowed me to get printers and machinery 'on line' while giving basic GUI applications and Terminal operation so I could print out instructions and controls.
Try Knoppix as Live Linux disc on old computer and see how it feels , then move to say OpenSUSE (very good contols in YaST) or Linux Mint (make sure you set up a root account on loading -if you intend to play with machinery) AND ensure your machinery can talk to Linux. A single proprietary driver fixed to Windows DOS or an IE6 browser could destroy any transfer unless you know what controls your machinery!
Regards Eion MacDonald
Read the first sentence you wrote. No need to read further. I certainly didn't.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun