My basic Linux questions

[GHoosdum]

Since I've retired my desktop system from day-to-day use, I'm planning on redeploying it as a test bed for various systems and programs that I want to learn. One of these things is Linux.

Can you smart gents recommend a distro for me? I'm not afraid to learn something new, but I also want something that has the potential to become something of a future standard in the Linux world, i.e. something that has a lot of potential to become a possible future challenger for Windows. I know there are a poop-ton of distros out there, but it may be as simple as a specific desktop environment becoming the challenger in the future, rather than a specific distro.

Now, onto the other question: is it necessary that I run an nVidia card in order to use the GUIs, or is there some sort of reference driver that allows ATI cards to run without all the bells and whistles turned on?

School me up here! :D

[citrixmeta]

ive had alot of fun working with UBUNTU, i think the new one has xgl support now.

many people use ubuntu, so alot of the questions you may have, may already be asked/answered by searching google.

give it a go

[Enverex]

Gentoo is always good for the hardcore customizer. The phrase "become a future standard" doesn't really make any sense as the whole point of distros is that people like doing things different ways and when enough of those people come together they end up creating a distro. Any distro will run any other Linux packages, just think of it like using AMI Bios rather than Award. Looks different, doesn't things slightly different but has no real affect on the software running on the machine, etc. It's just how the stuff at the lower level is done. Think of the distro as the thing that configures the base system transparently (to the programs) to do things a different way. I can't really explain it too well but still you should get the general idea.

ATi has a driver for Linux just like nVidia does the only different being that the ATi one is crap in comparison. So you don't need to change anything you do and you wont lack all the bells and whistles, you just wont get as many FPS in Doom 3.

Ubuntu is nice, but it may be a little too... "bleh" for you. It's made for people that have never used Linux and aren't really smart enough to use any of the other Distros, heh (although I don't mean that everyone using it is a moron).

But yeah, differences from Distro to distro are: Where certain base files are kept, how the base system is maintained what package system if any it uses (to easily install popular software and their dependencies).

I can't really recommend a distro. If you choose to go with Gentoo then I can help you out but I don't really have enough experience with any others to say either yay or nay. Advantage with Gentoo is that say you installed it 6 years ago, it would still be the latest version and up to date today, yeah, nice that, lol it's because the entire system is modular, so everything is constantly upgraded, nothing left out. I'm running it on my Athlon64 X2 system right now, I'm also running it on my old Athlon 500Mhz with a 4GB HD happily (far faster than Windows 2000 ran). So that goes to show how you can make it to suit any need aswell (although that's more Linux than Gentoo, but Gentoo is all about maximum control and customisability so it does make it easier).

[citrixmeta]

Ubuntu is nice, but it may be a little too... "bleh" for you. It's made for people that have never used Linux and aren't really smart enough to use any of the other Distros, heh (although I don't mean that everyone using it is a moron).


i dont understand why people say that, i can install Ubuntu and get it up and running within 30mins.

trying to achieve the same task with any other distro will take longer and more complicated (for me that is), does that make me dumb? lazy?.. Ubuntu is as stable as any other Linux distro.

so, if it doesnt take long to install and is too easy to install, it makes it.... bad?


note: please dont get me wrong, im not flaming you

[citrixmeta]

setting up ATI drivers in gentoo (56k users warning)
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_X850XT_ATI_Drivers

Setting up ATI drivers in ubuntu dapper
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BinaryDriverHowto/ATI#head-5ead174a0b3294527486cd4d71ded66b40003f25

[GHoosdum]

Thank you for all the information so far, guys.

I'm definitely taking it all in. Keep it coming. :thumbsup:

[septimus]

Linux can be a pain to deal with, especially when the particular distro you are trying to install is "customizable" or "modular". Ubuntu's mission seems to be making installation and use as painless as possible yet be as powerful as all the other distros out there.

Its more or less made for those who want to USE their desktop with the Linux OS. I really would not bother with any other distro until you try Ubuntu out, it would probably end in tears. Or maybe just a format of the HDD ;)

What you might encounter on the interweb are alot of Linux elitists who are closet masochists who enjoy spending hours recompiling a kernel to add functionality obscura or tweak out meaningless performance gains on ancient hardware. Please ignore them.

[citrixmeta]

I'm also running it on my old Athlon 500Mhz with a 4GB HD happily (far faster than Windows 2000 ran).

is it reaaally far faster? are there any benchmarks to show this or is it a "feels faster" thing.

[Enverex]

i dont understand why people say that, i can install Ubuntu and get it up and running within 30mins.

trying to achieve the same task with any other distro will take longer and more complicated (for me that is), does that make me dumb? lazy?.. Ubuntu is as stable as any other Linux distro.

so, if it doesnt take long to install and is too easy to install, it makes it.... bad?


note: please dont get me wrong, im not flaming you

Oh I agree with you, it just doesn't have the level of erm, "control" that I like, it's probably overkil for most people and as I said, Ubuntu doesn't "have" to be for non-technical people, I was just thinking that if Ghood is like me then he'd prefer to have more... tweaking ability.

setting up ATI drivers in gentoo (56k users warning)
http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_X850XT_ATI_Drivers

Don't need a walkthrough for that.
"emerge ati-drivers" then change the graphics driver option in /etc/X11/xorg.conf to frglx instead of vga.

Linux can be a pain to deal with, especially when the particular distro you are trying to install is "customizable" or "modular". Ubuntu's mission seems to be making installation and use as painless as possible yet be as powerful as all the other distros out there.

Its more or less made for those who want to USE their desktop with the Linux OS. I really would not bother with any other distro until you try Ubuntu out, it would probably end in tears. Or maybe just a format of the HDD ;)

What you might encounter on the interweb are alot of Linux elitists who are closet masochists who enjoy spending hours recompiling a kernel to add functionality obscura or tweak out meaningless performance gains on ancient hardware. Please ignore them.

Screw you too "buddy". There's no such thing as a "powerful" distro either, the terminology doesn't make any sense in the context. And I do "USE" my desktop with the Linux OS, kthx.

is it reaaally far faster? are there any benchmarks to show this or is it a "feels faster" thing.

Considerably. Don't get me wrong, running Windows 2000 on THIS machine wouldn't be sluggish, but on that one I'm using a Window manager that has no dependencies and is 600k in total so it starts up within a second or two and MPlayer only takes about 2-3 seconds rather than VLC or Media Player Classic on 2000 (on that machine) that took about 6-8 seconds, programs on it just seem to have a reduced load time (maybe the programs are just smaller? Although optimisations do have more of an effect when they are really needed like in this case). It always seemed to churn the HD more (couldn't have been the RAM though as it has nearly 400MB). The advantage is that I can cut off bits wherever I want with Gentoo on that machine where as Windows is (except for non-essential services) set in its ways). On a normal machine that wouldn't be too much of an issue, but on a machine like this, stripping is good.

[drasnor]

I had a chance to use CentOS at the LAN and yum (the new RedHat package manager) has really changed my opinion of RPM-derivative distros. For the uninitiated, a condition existed with distros that adopted the RedHat package manager (RPM) called "RPM Hell" where installing a package could cause cataclysmic dependency conflicts. This problem came from a lack of any well-maintained dependency tree and method of managing softwares that required multiple versions of the same library.

At this point I'd have some trouble finding a truly bad distro. I seem to get the most tech support requests about Fedora but that could just be pebcaks. I'm going to break down my impressions of a few distros and you can decide for yourself.

CentOS and Fedora:
These are both very similar in that they use yum for their package manager which uses .rpm packages. Pros of using .rpm is that it is the most widely available form of binary package and that as a binary you don't have to mess with maintaining a working toolchain (gcc and friends). Cons include using .rpm files you find on the web are almost guaranteed to toast your install (RPM Hell) and that the binaries are optimized to run on the widest variety of hardware. Try not to install packages that aren't part of yum's carefully-manicured package dependency tree. Each distro using yum maintains its own package tree which generally has a larger quantity of non-free software than distros not using yum.

Fedora likes to take care of you and install a whole lot of software that you may not know what it is or what it does or even need by polling you during install. For instance, if you say you want "Games" it will install several common GNU games, "Office PC" nets you a few office suites like Evolution or OpenOffice.org and so on. When this software breaks or needs updating you will find yourself making more threads in my forum :). I imagine CentOS does much the same thing but is more geared towards servers. As far as I'm aware, the packages get installed with a default configuration and you will be required to seek out and modify the config files yourself if you want to deviate.

Debian, Ubuntu, and kUbuntu:
All of these use Debian's package managers apt and dselect which use .deb packages. .deb files are less common than .rpms on the web but are a lot less likely to trash your system. Install-time package selection in Debian is done through dselect which is an absolute turd of a software. If you go with Debian, only install the "minimal" set and install more packages after you restart using apt-get. I believe Ubuntu and kUbuntu have their own installer which doesn't use dselect. Contrasting strongly with dselect is apt and the more-often used and vastly more user and system-friendly apt-get. Apt-get maintains a fairly comprehensive package tree including some non-free (read: not GPL) software that can be installed and dependencies resolved with a simple command. Ubuntu and kUbuntu use most of the same packages as Debian's package tree with a few exceptions. The Debian package tree is smaller than yum's but you probably won't notice. One of the nice things about .deb is that it includes source packages in addition to binary ones so you can get some The downside of .deb is that configuration has to be done manually in dselect and isn't done automagically by apt-get.

All three of these offer to take care of you in much the same way as Fedora and CentOS but also allow individual package selection. I wouldn't do it under Debian because it will install old versions of the software off of the install CDs with obsolete dependency trees all of which will need to be updated when you get Internet access. I don't know but I believe Ubuntu and kUbuntu fetch packages off the Internet during install so it isn't such a problem.

Gentoo:
Gentoo uses the portage package manager which is inspired by BSD's ports package manager. Portage uses .ebuilds to tell the machine about packages but an actual .ebuild is just a text file containing the package's dependency tree, a set of compiler flags, and the filename(s) of any files off the Internet needed to install the package. Portage maintains a list of all of the most current ebuilds on your hard drive and figures out dependencies on the fly whenever this cache is updated. Installing software using portage is as easy as using apt-get but most of the configuration is done automagically though portage tells you when you need to update a file manually.

Most software for Gentoo is source-only. This means that Gentoo has very little non-free software in its package tree. This doesn't mean that you can't use that software on Gentoo, merely that you can't use portage to maintain it. The advantages of using source packages has been said already but I'll mention it again for redundancy: packages compiled from source on a properly-configured compiler are optimized for the hardware configuration of the target machine. On my machines this usually equates to using SSE instructions instead of 387 instructions for floating point calculations on all machines that support SSE, O2 optimizations, and turning off compatibility modes for processors I don't plan to use. I don't have a way to benchmark how how much faster SSE is than 387 but you can use your imagination. Unfortunately, compiling packages takes some time so initial installation will take awhile.

Portage uses USE flags to tell it what features should be enabled or disabled on software. Portage maintains a list of globally defined USE flags that generally shape your system but they can also be defined individually for each package. This is useful if, say, you wanted PGP support in Thunderbird: first you would set the enigmail USE flag for Thunderbird and tell portage to install thunderbird. Portage would see the enigmail flag and install enigmail together with thunderbird and configure everything for you. It's also useful if you want to enable some application-specific optimizations like 3dnow and SSE acceleration in mplayer. Or specify one library over another, like using FFmpeg instead of Xine or GStreamer in mplayer.

Until recently, Gentoo did not have an installer but left it up to you to get it installed from a LiveCD. There is a very well-documented procedure for this in the Gentoo Installation Handbook but you need another machine with a working Internet connection to read it while you install, a printed copy, or enough Linux savvy to fire it up on a virtual terminal on the target machine. LiveCD installs are more difficult than using an installer but in my opinion it isn't so bad when the manual is so good.

Gentoo now includes an installer that takes care of most of the hard parts for you but less of what's going on is explained. Gentoo has the most extensive collection of HOWTOs for getting software installed and configured and strange hardware to work. Their forums are also the nicest and most helpful of any place I've ever gone to get help.

I hope this helps.

-drasnor :fold:

[citrixmeta]

thanks for your posts guys, learned alot

[drasnor]

Don't need a walkthrough for that.
"emerge ati-drivers" then change the graphics driver option in /etc/X11/xorg.conf to frglx instead of vga. It isn't that simple because you have to run fglrxconfig to reconfigure your xorg.conf file and the answers to the questions it asks are not intuitive, particularly if you use AGP. Gentoo does have a HOWTO for this though, found here (http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_ATI_Drivers). ATI steadfastly refuses to optimize its Linux drivers so performance will be much poorer than you would expect. The open source radeon driver is pretty good but only supports up to the R250 cores. There is now an open source R300 driver but it hasn't been out long enough to get any performance data. Things are a lot prettier on the nVidia side with well-supported binary drivers. If you want to go old school 3d-accelerated drivers are available for the rage, voodoo, and matrox chipsets. I have yet to meet a graphics card that wouldn't work with software rendering.

What you might encounter on the interweb are alot of Linux elitists who are closet masochists who enjoy spending hours recompiling a kernel to add functionality obscura or tweak out meaningless performance gains on ancient hardware. Yeah, I've met them. However, if you use Gentoo you'll want to compile your own kernel which isn't as hard as people make it out to be. It can be wierd for other distros though, especially those that use ramdisks to boot. It usually only takes me ten minutes to configure a kernel but the first time should only take 30-45 min. All you need to know is what's in your computer and what you want to do. If you don't mind long startups the generic kernels are fine for most people.

-drasnor :fold:

[GHoosdum]

Loving the info. Thank you so much!

[Leonardo]

recompile kernel to add functionalityWhat does that mean? I've probably read that phrase hundreds of times, but have never seen a writer explain it. For a start, I know what the kernel is, but the rest?

[rapture]

I'm not sure where all the Ubuntu fuss came from. Oh wait, the free CDs...

[drasnor]

Leo: The kernel source comes as a big 36MB or so tarball. Most distros ship with a generic kernel that was compiled with support for a wide variety of hardware. Generic kernels tend to be highly modular with very little actually compiled-in. However, very rarely is support for every device or protocol compiled in.

Consider the case of the Linux router. It takes a very different kernel than a desktop PC. A typical desktop kernel would only have ipv4, ipv6, and iptables/netfilter (Linux firewall) support compiled in or compiled as modules. My router kernels usually feature multicast routing, QoS routing, IPsec VPN, and full NAT masquerading. Most of those features aren't present in the generic kernels. There are other examples too like SElinux but I don't use it so I can't comment.

-drasnor :fold:

[Leonardo]

Wow, that's the first time a Linux user has stooped down low enough to explain that to me in laymen's terms. Thank you. (I don't lump most of Short-Media Linux users in with some of the other Linux users...but that's another topic.)

OK, so then when recompiling a kernal, to stitch together the functions to the kernal that will best serve the specific user's needs, how is this done? Coding? Command strings? Both?

[drasnor]

The kernel source comes with three tools that allow you to configure it: config, menuconfig, and xconfig/gconfig. After you get your kernel source unpacked, you just change your working directory to the kernel source directory and type make config, make menuconfig, or make xconfig. At that point, the chosen tool will fire up.

Config is the nastiest and the second-most difficult way to configure a kernel. Config asks you questions and configures each option sequentially without any sort of help.
jormungand linux # make config
HOSTLD scripts/kconfig/conf
scripts/kconfig/conf arch/x86_64/Kconfig
#
# using defaults found in .config
#
*
* Linux Kernel Configuration
*
*
* Code maturity level options
*
Prompt for development and/or incomplete code/drivers (EXPERIMENTAL) [Y/n/?]

Menuconfig is my favorite way to do it since all you need is a working libncurses installed. Menuconfig is done from the command line but it fires up a DOSshell-esque menu-oriented configuration tool. There's some help available for the various options.

Xconfig/gconfig is another way to do it using a GUI interface. I find that menuconfig is faster since I don't have to go back and forth with the mouse. The same help available in menuconfig is also in xconfig/gconfig. You would use xconfig if you have the qt libraries installed (eg you use KDE) and gconfig if you have the gtk libraries (eg you use GNOME).

The nastiest and hardest way to configure your kernel is to fire up nano, vi, emacs, pico, or whatever you use for console text editing and open .config in the kernel source directory. There you can set the 1's and 0's next to each of the options.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

It isn't that simple because you have to run fglrxconfig to reconfigure your xorg.conf file and the answers to the questions it asks are not intuitive, particularly if you use AGP. Gentoo does have a HOWTO for this though, found here (http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_ATI_Drivers).

Not true. Running the ATi config program just does what I said and then breaks your xorg.conf file by re-writing all the default values (I mean everything, the list of modules loaded, location of directories etc) STAY AWAY FROM IT. The only things it change that needs to be done is the one I mentioned. It's basically a hacked version of xorgconfig.

[drasnor]

It seems the new drivers use aticonfig. My bad. Also, it's hard to break a config file that hasn't been created yet.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

It seems the new drivers use aticonfig. My bad. Also, it's hard to break a config file that hasn't been created yet.

-drasnor :fold:

There is a .example one there by default. The one ATi creates wont work as it points the directories to the wrong place and everything else. So, you could do what I say, change one value in the real example file and have it work, OR use ATI's config program and break your X installation. Pretty clear choice isn't it. And yes, I'm speaking from experience as my Laptop is ATi.

[drasnor]

It has never been a problem on any of my Radeon 9800 Pros so this is the first I've heard of it.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

It has never been a problem on any of my Radeon 9800 Pros so this is the first I've heard of it.

-drasnor :fold:

It may be an issue with Xorg versions then as they change directories for different files in different releases where as the ATi config program normally seems a step or two behind.

[lightnin]

if i could throw in my 2 cents.... i would highly recommend not using gentoo your first time out. i used gentoo for a while but found that their merge scripts often times break things. i had to recompile a lot of stuff from source, like apache2.2, php, mysql, postgres, some nifty gui things... so unless they've changed and have some sort of qc going on now i'd steer clear.

i've always been a big fan of debian. apt is an awesome tool. i hate rpm based distros.... at some point you'll get stuck in dependancy hell trying to update some package you want. it can be a pain. ubuntu is based on debian, and is easy to install, but debian also has a new installer that is very easy. http://www.us.debian.org/CD/netinst/ for the iso images or check out the wiki for more info:
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller

i used the new DI to build a custom install cd for specific dell servers with a particular raid device... it's ultra handy and the machines are rock solid. still in use as http and mysql servers, been up and running for 2.5 years now (with a little break every now and then for patches/updates and making sure there's not a lot of dust in there).

plus my desktop is an amd64 running debian, has been since the day i got it. i run two ati cards, but they arent anything spectacular. all i do with it is develop code, and check my email. and code. and code code code code... ;)

[citrixmeta]

yes, ive also had great experience with debian, if im not mistaken, isnt ubuntu based off debian?

[drasnor]

I haven't had qc problems with ebuilds in a couple years so I think it's improved. It's good to hear that DebianInstaller went final because dselect really sucked. Do you know if the m68k port has DI?

I always keyword the untested graphics card drivers because it's very rarely that the latest version breaks my system.

-drasnor :fold:

[lightnin]

yeah ubuntu is based on debian, but i'm not sure how close it is to debian in terms of file structure hierarchy. my guess is it's pretty close.

as far as the DI, it looks like m68k is one of the supported architectures. so is amd64, but it still isn't final for some reason... but it does work, heck i used it in december 04 to install with. it's listed under the daily builds.

hey the i386 and amd64 netinst cds are graphical installers!

yeah dselect was just about as awful as it got. i used it once and thought, why on earth am i doing this.... apt rendered it pretty much useless. i'd install the base system and then use apt-get to add whatever else i wanted and it took care of dependancies. i havent thought about dselect in a while.... it's amazing to see how far linux in general has come.

[jared]

I have used a handful of distros (slack, bsd, fedora, deb, ubuntu, etc) and I must say Ubuntu is by far the most hassle free distro I have ever used.

If you are new to linux and would like to start out learning I would recommend nothing other than ubuntu. Yes, ubuntu is based of debian which is great because you can use all the debian packages. Another thing that makes ubuntu so great is stuff just works out of the box. Amazingly well at that. As you dive more into linux though you will find out it is very customizable however, so with the first-off simplicity you don't really sacrafice anything. Lastly the reason I would recommend ubuntu is the community. The ubuntu forums are the most helpful linux community I have participated in. No matter what you problem or question is, you will find an answer on their forums. (Plus the unoffical ubuntuguide.org is great).

If you want to start with something a little less intimidating I strongly recommend Ubuntu. The newest release (Dapper Drake 6.06) has some really nifty eye candy as well and your friends will be like :o~~~ haha.

If you are on the fence about using it, download the live cd and try it out before you do anything drastic, i promise you you will be impressed.

Also, for the time being I would recommend still sticking with the i386 install because many apps and packages are harder to install (or worse, they dont) under the amd64 install... it requires more 'hacking'

anyways if you have any questions please ask!

cheers :D

[lightnin]

i'm glad to see so much positive feedback on ubuntu.

as far as the amd64 stuff goes, we can help him set up a chroot 32 bit environment to run those x86 apps right?? lol

[muddocktor]

I'm glad I saw this thread here, because I was about to start a new one myself. I finally had enough of microsoft's bull**** genuine advantage validation tool crap and their endless new updates to it today. I just had windows update install some kind of update to that piece of crap last month and when I went to the MS Update site today with my work laptop, it wanted to install yet another update to that turd. Now, I've never had a problem with it puking up a bogus key number or anything like that (and yes, all my copies of XP are legit, paid for versions), but I'm tired of those asshats forcing more crap on me that they don't need to be doing. And I've read some stuff lately about this turd of a tool checking back in with MS every time you boot and who knows what kind of info the bastards are mining off my machines. So in short, MS really pissed me off this morning and I finally decided to start checking into Linux.

Anyways, since I'm on sat broadband and subject to the FAP (fair access policy) which limits how much data I can download over a 3 hour period, d/l'ing iso's are pretty much out of the question. So someone told me that Ubuntu will send you free disks of their distro and I went and ordered a 3 disk set today, containing a 32 bit disk, 64 bit disk and a mac disk. And they send it for free; don't even charge shipping.:cheers:

So anyways, in 4-6 weeks I should have the disks in hand and I will be trying out Ubuntu on my X2 folding rig. But I don't know if I should go with the 32 bit or 64 bit version. Since it's main focus is folding, it won't gain any speed by using the 64 bit version. What about it you experts? :D

[Leonardo]

Mudd, when get to installing it, please start a thread for support and to post your experience. I have been considering moving my dedicated Folding rigs to Ubuntu when Vista comes out, just to upgrade my primary machine to Vista.

[muddocktor]

Mudd, when get to installing it, please start a thread for support and to post your experience. I have been considering moving my dedicated Folding rigs to Ubuntu when Vista comes out, just to upgrade my primary machine to Vista.

No problem, Leo. I was fully planning to do just that. With all this Genuine Validation stuff that M$ has been doing lately and pissing me off with, I figure it's about time to try a different route, OS-wise. I'm hoping that Ubuntu will prove to be a lot less of a PITA to mess with than when I looked at Linux last, which was around 5 years ago. Like you, I don't want to have to dedicate months of hard study to learn the OS; I just don't have the time or inclination to do so now since computers are a hobby, not my way of putting food on the table. ;) From all I've read so far, Ubuntu looks to be a pretty easy way to go Linux.

[Enverex]

Why move them to anything? Dedicated folding rigs don't need anything, just shove Knoppix or something (hell, most Linux LiveCDs from any distro should work) download F@H into the RAM Drive on that PC and run it there. Doesn't need a HD and if set up properly you can do it where you only need say a Pendrive to boot it from and then you can remove that too...

[muddocktor]

Why? Because while I don't want to spend months learning a new OS just for ****s and giggles, I sure wouldn't mind checking out whether Linux would be worth it to me, for my everyday uses, to like it well enough to where I might be motivated to learning much more about it. I'm not totally ruling out whether I might not get interested enough in it to where I'm motivated to getting a lot more familiar with the way it operates, but I'm also not commiting myself to months of relearning the way I compute either, right now. Plus, I don't like ramdrives anyways due to having momentary power outages where I live and since I already have the whole system, including hard drives, I might as well use it.

BTW, I might be getting some disks even earlier. A guy on the OCF forums is going to burn copies of both the latest Ubuntu and Kubuntu distros.

Which of those two gui's is more like what I'm used to in Windows, experts? I know that Ubuntu is Gnome and Kubuntu is KDE, but nothing beyond that.

[drasnor]

I think you'll find that both are different from each other and different from Windows but not so different that their operation isn't intuitive. If I were to make comparisons, I'd say KDE is probably closer to Windows than GNOME but it really depends on who configured it for you. GNOME in its original configuration reminds me of NeXTStep more than anything else. The closest common OS that you may have used would be MacOS Classic. I configured mine to be more like Windows in taskbar layout but left everything else fairly unchanged. I've never seen KDE in its default configuration so I can't comment though all the configurations I've seen were laid out like Windows.

Both desktop environments ship with a fairly tame window manager by default that draws windows similar to the ones you're familiar with. Actually navigating the GUI is not going to give you any trouble, the only trouble happens when you need to go to the console for something.

-drasnor :fold:

[muddocktor]

Thanks for the reply, dras. I d/l'ed the Ubuntu desktop guide pdf yesterday and looked through quickly and the gui with Gnome doesn't look too different from what I'm used to seeing in Windows. It looks to be a nice basic guide. Ubuntu also looks to have a fairly intuitive and easy gui based installer and update process too. But just reading this is one thing; I will have to see how it actually is when I have a machine with it installed and running.

BTW, I was planning to install this on my Dual Sata2 machine, which is using the Asrock Dual Sata2 mobo which uses the Uli M1695 chipset and has an X2-4400 in it. Do you know of any particular configuration problems with this setup? As is having problemsw with the Uli chipset or dual core detection? This system has an old GeForce2 GTS vid card, so I don't see it having any problems supporting it.

[drasnor]

Shouldn't be a problem with the ULi boards though if anything goes wrong it'll be with the AGP GART. Actually, there could be a problem with your video card since the newer nVidia drivers don't support cards that old. You'll have to keep your driver revision under v7500.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

Why? Because while I don't want to spend months learning a new OS just for ****s and giggles, I sure wouldn't mind checking out whether Linux would be worth it to me, for my everyday uses, to like it well enough to where I might be motivated to learning much more about it. I'm not totally ruling out whether I might not get interested enough in it to where I'm motivated to getting a lot more familiar with the way it operates, but I'm also not commiting myself to months of relearning the way I compute either, right now. Plus, I don't like ramdrives anyways due to having momentary power outages where I live and since I already have the whole system, including hard drives, I might as well use it.

BTW, I might be getting some disks even earlier. A guy on the OCF forums is going to burn copies of both the latest Ubuntu and Kubuntu distros.

Which of those two gui's is more like what I'm used to in Windows, experts? I know that Ubuntu is Gnome and Kubuntu is KDE, but nothing beyond that.

I simply meant that why waste HW on dedicated folding machines when they don't need it.

I think I'm going to shut up either way now anyway, I can see my responses aren't being useful and are just creating hostile responses.
I'd say KDE is more like Windows than any of the others. Gnome has been labotomised lately and now has very little to offer in comparison...

[GHoosdum]

Well, that definitely makes me lean toward choosing KDE.

[drasnor]

Gnome has been labotomised lately and now has very little to offer in comparison...In what way? I haven't noticed any differences between older versions of GNOME and the current version. Or do you mean "slimmed down"?

-drasnor :fold:

[muddocktor]

I simply meant that why waste HW on dedicated folding machines when they don't need it.

I think I'm going to shut up either way now anyway, I can see my responses aren't being useful and are just creating hostile responses.
I'd say KDE is more like Windows than any of the others. Gnome has been labotomised lately and now has very little to offer in comparison...

Enervex, I wasn't being hostile to you there, but rather trying to explain why I want to do a regular install and the bolded words were not yelling, but rather to put emphasis on that part. And I already have the hardware; it's not like I have to buy anything to put this machine together. And even though it's a dedicated folding rig, I still use my other machines as backups and also just to mess around with. This particular machine has it's own dedicated monitor, so it's one I regularly use as a backup machine anyways. :)

Drasnor, would a GeForce3 Ti 200 be better to use instead? I can swap that out with another rig if need be. Or if that one won't do, would a Radeon 7000 AGP card or a PCI Radeon 9200 do? That's one nice thing about having multiple rigs; I can swap stuff around without too much problem.

GH, the guy on the OCF forums says he will send my cd's of both Ubuntu and Kubuntu. If you go the Kubuntu route I'll go the Ubuntu route and we'll see who runs into the most problems. :D

[GHoosdum]

Sounds good - I'll do Kubuntu as a starting point.

[drasnor]

It's not a problem using the GeForce 2's, after all a few of my Linux machines use them. You just need to be aware you can't use the latest drivers with them.

Ubuntu and Kubuntu should be identical except for the desktop environment. They both should offer much the same functionality except for a few items (GNOME CD-Master vs Kcombust etc.) It's a personal preference thing. I used GNOME first so I tend to use GNOME more.

-drasnor :fold:

[Leonardo]

I think I'm going to shut up either way now anyway, I can see my responses aren't being useful and are just creating hostile responses.Oh, not at all, friend. We may have just buzzed through one of your posts too fast, that's all. I have particulary enjoyed how you and others in this thread have given well thought out responses in simple language. It's been very helpful.

[Enverex]

It's not a problem using the GeForce 2's, after all a few of my Linux machines use them. You just need to be aware you can't use the latest drivers with them.

Ubuntu and Kubuntu should be identical except for the desktop environment. They both should offer much the same functionality except for a few items (GNOME CD-Master vs Kcombust etc.) It's a personal preference thing. I used GNOME first so I tend to use GNOME more.

-drasnor :fold:

Not so. Gnome comes with about 8 programs or so by default, KDE comes with about 200 (that's overexagerating, but it's also probably not far off). KDE also has considerably more control (of KDE itself compared to what Gnome can change) through it's own control program. I wish I still had KDE and Gnome installed so I could take some screenshots of all the things that come with it.

If you join Freenode (basically THE opensource IRC server) everyone will say about how Gnome has had most of its features removed and any settings programs, apparently incase "they confuse users". When I first used Gnome a year or two back it was ok, but now it's... well, empty (I don't just mean in terms of useless programs like lots that come with KDE either).

For reference I'm refering to KDE 3.5.3 and Gnome 2.14.1.

[Enverex]

I pull out my vote for Gentoo, hell, at this point I pull out my vote for Linux as a whole.

[jhenry]

Try Kubuntu and see if you feel the same way...

[Enverex]

Try Kubuntu and see if you feel the same way...

I tried Ubuntu, can't say I was impressed and KDE is a bloated machine whore so I doubt that will help.

[muddocktor]

I tried Ubuntu, can't say I was impressed and KDE is a bloated machine whore so I doubt that will help.

But when you tried it you were already familiar with Linux, right? It will be a different perspective for both me and GH with me trying Ubuntu and GH with Kunbuntu. And from what I read on the Ubuntu site, if I want to ge with the KDE interface later it's a relatively easy thing to do. Both GH and I was fairly conversant with Windows and hardware but know almost nothing about Linux, so these distros might make it easier for noobs to get into Linux.

[Enverex]

But when you tried it you were already familiar with Linux, right? It will be a different perspective for both me and GH with me trying Ubuntu and GH with Kunbuntu. And from what I read on the Ubuntu site, if I want to ge with the KDE interface later it's a relatively easy thing to do. Both GH and I was fairly conversant with Windows and hardware but know almost nothing about Linux, so these distros might make it easier for noobs to get into Linux.

Yeah, it takes less time to get running than XP does (when I installed it on my moms 1.3Ghz Celeron machine) and it's supposed to be easy, but it just confused me as I was used to Gentoo, heh.

[jhenry]

KDE is very similar to Windows IMO, so it makes it easier to transition between the two. Since I use both OSes a lot, Kubuntu makes it nicer for me in having very similar interfaces. Plus, Gnome is just too basic and "easy" for me, it doesn't feel like it has much power.

[Crypto]

I spent a long time trying to get Ubuntu to work fully as my main PC. I had a lot of help from Drasnor to get FAH set up and learnt quite a bit in the process.

However, FAH never seemed to work as reliably and more importantly, as quickly, as under Windows XP, so I gave up for a while.

I'm now having another go with the latest version of Ubuntu so will watch your progress with interest.

:smokin:

[GHoosdum]

From what I've heard, the Folding client for Linux is not as fast as the Windows client.

[drasnor]

From what I've heard, the Folding client for Linux is not as fast as the Windows client.Where'd you hear that? My Linux clients tend to be as fast/faster.

-drasnor :fold:

[GHoosdum]

I heard that on this very forum. Then again, it was years ago, so the situation may have reversed by now.

[Enverex]

Yeah, apparently it used to be but nowerdays no-one seems to say about it being slower so maybe it's caught up.

Anyway, if you value your sanity then just don't go in IRC. All you end up is with idiots that will either give one of three answers. They'll either a) point out the obvious over and over and then you'll get sodamised by the channel if you start to get irritated by the fact people keep telling you the same moronic things over and over, b) say the error is PEBCAK (basically your fault) and won't say why or anything, this is mainly because most people in IRC are what is known as "****tards" or c) tell you to fix it yourself. That's right, problem with openoffice "Oh, fix it yourself and stop being so lazy, it's the Linux way" regardless of whether or not you have a days coding experience in your entire life.

So if anyone was wondering about my tained view lately, thank the wonderful users of Freenode.

[qsiguy]

I'm no expert on linux but I do dabble. I have a few friends who are Linux gurus in my opinion, meaning they can always tell me how to perform a tast or fix a problem with my little linux box. They recommended and I use a Slackware distro. I used Mandrake a little before that. I can't tell much difference myself becuase I don't really work it very hard. Have a little web server, ftp server, and use ssh to log in remotely and play with it. That's about it. Also, they almost exclusively use it in command line mode and so do I because I don't even have a monitor connected to my Linux box. I only connect remotely.

Another cool distro I like is called KNOPPIX Operator and the latest version is 3.3.20 . What's cool about it is that the whole OS is on a CD and you can just pop it in and boot from the cd and you are running a linux OS. It creates a RAM drive and nothing gets written to the hard drive. This way you can play and experiment to your hearts content and then pop out the cd and reboot and you're back to normal. It boots to X Windows and includes tons of apps.

Heres a link. Operator v3.3.20 (http://www.ussysadmin.com/operator/)

[Crypto]

Other disros that allow you to boot off cd that I have tried are Ubuntu and Xandros.

The trouble is they seem to run OK off the CD, lull you in to a false sense of security that everything works OK. You then partition up your hard drive, install the OS properly and then a lot of the elements don't work.

For me, Ubuntu won't connect to the internet, Live CD fine, installed OS, no.
Xandros, Live CD fine , installed OS, no sound.
Each distro has their own forum where there are loads of threads on these problems, but sadly no solutions.

After several frustrating weeks, I'm back to Windows XP. I just hope a more reliable distro comes out before Vista takes over.

[Enverex]

That sounds... quite... silly. Did you just install the OS then expect it to work or did you actually install the needed components and configure them?

[deicist]

Oh, I have some basic linux questions.

I downloaded and installed Fedora Core 5 to use as a web server...I chose fedora because I've tinkered with Red Hat before and it seems easy enough to use and configure etc.. I've got my Joomla sites up and running, figured out how to get virtual hosts working with Apache and all the rest of it but I just have some quick questions:

1) this was just a test server to see if I could get it working, now it is I'm going to be moving the server to a dual core Athlon box. This is slightly overkill but it's the only spare machine I have. Anyway, How good is Linux at managing Dual cores? Will I see any performance benefit over a single core machine or is it just a case of multitasking will be better?

2) Is there a guide anywhere to setting up Folding@home on a dual core Linux machine?

3) What's the best bittorrent client for Linux and can someone point me to a guide for setting it up correctly?

I think that's it but I'm sure there'll be more questions when I actually get round to building the machine.

[Enverex]

1) Multitasking would benefit but most things (especially like Apache) are multithreaded which means it will benefit heavily from multiple cores/processors as each thread will be handed off onto the core with the least current usage. I run dual core and it's highly useful for me as I compile a lot and the time litterally gets cut in half on a dual core machine.

2) Erm, does the program let you pick a core yourself? If not it should automatically put one on one and the other on the other anyway (the programs not multithreaded so run a copy for each core/processor).

3) Azureus. Not sure the easiest way to install it on Fedora, sorry.

[Enverex]

I was just playing with Ubuntu on my moms laptop again (yeah, got bored and wanted somewhere new to install something) and it's stupidly easy to set up and install so yeah, if you want an easy Linux Distro I recommend it.

It proved my point about Gnome though, Gnome on that laptop (it's Breezy 5.1 installed like half a year ago or more) and it's Gnome 2.12 and Gnome on there is great, so many features, but if you install Gnome 2.14 now most of the features have gone. It's almost a skeleton of what it used to be (hence labotomised).

[Crypto]

That sounds... quite... silly. Did you just install the OS then expect it to work or did you actually install the needed components and configure them?
Not quite sure waht you mean by silly.

My point being, which you appear to have overlooked, is that the Live CD worked, therefore had all the appropriate drivers that I needed, but on installing the OS to my hard drive, said drivers or whatever were no longer there.

I also said that there were many, many people with the same problems, which other forum members were unable to solve. I've lost count of the number of solutions that I have tried, only to trash various components of the OS and having to do a clean install yet again.

[Enverex]

Not quite sure waht you mean by silly.

My point being, which you appear to have overlooked, is that the Live CD worked, therefore had all the appropriate drivers that I needed, but on installing the OS to my hard drive, said drivers or whatever were no longer there.

Of course they wont be, an installation is nothing like a LiveCD. I could help you if you still had anything left installed. Things can be distro independant which means having issues like you did sounds rather odd and possibly just down to inexperience...

[drasnor]

Oh, I have some basic linux questions.

I downloaded and installed Fedora Core 5 to use as a web server...I chose fedora because I've tinkered with Red Hat before and it seems easy enough to use and configure etc.. I've got my Joomla sites up and running, figured out how to get virtual hosts working with Apache and all the rest of it but I just have some quick questions:

1) this was just a test server to see if I could get it working, now it is I'm going to be moving the server to a dual core Athlon box. This is slightly overkill but it's the only spare machine I have. Anyway, How good is Linux at managing Dual cores? Will I see any performance benefit over a single core machine or is it just a case of multitasking will be better?

2) Is there a guide anywhere to setting up Folding@home on a dual core Linux machine?

3) What's the best bittorrent client for Linux and can someone point me to a guide for setting it up correctly?

I think that's it but I'm sure there'll be more questions when I actually get round to building the machine.

1) The Linux threading scheduler is excellent. I mean, it would have to be since a lot of Linux machines are supercomputers with oodles of processors.

2) Not as such, but as Enverex mentioned it's pretty straightforward. The short answer is just make two directories and put a copy of the client in each one. From there, we'll have to write a simple script to get them to start at boot-time. This was discussed in another thread but I can't remember if it was in Alternative OS or FAH.

3) I prefer the vanilla BitTorrent client for Linux. It should be listed in Fedora's package list. So should Azureus for that matter.

-drasnor :fold:

[drasnor]

I also said that there were many, many people with the same problems, which other forum members were unable to solve.I can't find any threads started by you for Ubuntu-related problems. We can help, give us a shot.

-drasnor :fold:

[muddocktor]

Damn, already some real good info in this thread. Keep it coming, guys. :thumbsup:

BTW, on the machine I plan to experiment with, I'm thinking of dual booting Ubuntu along with it's present OS, which is Win2K Pro. I have another hard drive to install Ubuntu on, so I can have a hard drive dedicated for each OS.

[Crypto]

I can't find any threads started by you for Ubuntu-related problems. We can help, give us a shot.

-drasnor :fold:

I meant on the relavent Ubuntu or Xandros community forums.

For those still interested, there is a massive community forum for Ubuntu where many people get help and solutions. They swear that they will never go back to Microsoft!

I guess I'm unlucky with my hardware combination as I've tried many solutions and advice offered there but with no permanent fix.
Thanks for the offer of help again Drasnor, you did a fine job of talking me through setting up FAH. Alas that was on an earlier version of Ubuntu. I'm going to give it a rest for a while, maybe try again later as Vista looms.

[Enverex]

The main reason why Linux remains more difficult than Windows is mainly because zealots insist that EVERYTHING is done from the command line. I mean it would be nice to have a choice half the time but they are stuck in their ways and refuse to acknowledge anyone that even requests it, hell, all I hear from them lately is "oh, so go make one yourself" "...".

To set something up, rather than a simple configuration program, you'll give up after god knows how long trying to set something up, only to join IRC or somewhere and have someone say "omg noob, you just need to run blahblah-blah &> --switch -switch 9281 2&> /dev/wtf | grep chickens | ec-exec-1 [greenpie], it's so simple dumbass" I mean how the hell are you supposed to know that? Being told to RTFM or rather "man touch" is all you get in IRC a lot of the time too, and when it's such a complicated thing you end up having to do you have no chance in hell.

Yeah, like Linux, hate the users and mentality.

Hell, I mean look at VIM, the editor you'll surely be recommended by the zealot elite, it's the hight of insanity, just to quit the program you have to do some insane ****ing shift-alt-colon-home-break combination JUST to bring up the command box to then do something like control colon exclamation quit semicolon crazy **** then to actually get OUT of the program. It's just absoloutely insane.

[Crypto]

BTW, on the machine I plan to experiment with, I'm thinking of dual booting Ubuntu along with it's present OS, which is Win2K Pro. I have another hard drive to install Ubuntu on, so I can have a hard drive dedicated for each OS.

Wise move muddoctor, it's easy to set up dual booting with the Ubuntu installer. Even I could do that! I was also able to rearrange the boot loader so that XP loaded if no response was made to the boot options after 10 seconds. That suits Mrs.Crypto.

[drasnor]

Yeah, like Linux, hate the users and mentality.

Hell, I mean look at VIM, the editor you'll surely be recommended by the zealot elite, it's the hight of insanityWe try to set ourselves above that crap here. I'm sure all of us have horror stories from mainstream Linux support channels that we're trying to escape from.

VIM? That's a change, they used to preach straight vi. Meh, I just use nano or pico most of the time.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

I meant Vi, sorry.

[skryking]

I use which ever editor seems most appropriate at the time... for quick changes I use vi, but for long edits and scripting I use kate... hey but to each his own... as for installing the folding@home client do a google for finstall. Its a script that will ask a couple of questions and then downloads and installs the client for you... it handles dual core and multi processor systems exceptionally well.

Skryking

[GHoosdum]

I'm probably going to pull the trigger on kubuntu tonight - I'm just wondering: are there driver compatibility issues with the 64-bit version as there is in XP64, or am I going to have just as much hardware support if I go that route? Or should I stick with the vanilla x86 build?

[Enverex]

Hardware support seems the same on both which is something that supprised me. Only issues are with programs that use x86 assembly code and such (not many). I'm actually going to install Ubuntu on my laptop tonight.

[GHoosdum]

I'm going for a laptop install as well. My only concern is the broadcom chipset in the wifi card, but I'm hoping it will have the drivers to cope. I'll give the 64-bit install a shake and see how it goes. :thumbsup:

[Enverex]

lol, installed Ubuntu on my Laptop (detected and setup my Atheros A/B/G WiFi PCMCIA card automatically) which took all of like, 3 minutes, just gone through the list of software now and telling it to install everything I want. I have to admit Ubuntu is nicer to use than Gentoo simply because it's EASY and I don't have to wait for everything to compile (which is good on something that's mobile and isn't really a powerhouse. The main thing that I like about Ubuntu is that it's all GUI based rather than all console based (which pisses me off on Gentoo, heh, I want GUIs damnit, not necessarily for setting up the OS, I mean for programs and and the distros settings etc). Where as the Gentoo community is pretty much "do it on the command line!" all the time. Only issue (and critical downside) for me is the lack of complete control that Gentoo gives (you basically do everything especially, pick and choose from scratch, etc).

But at least I can happily recommend it to people now. Simple and easy to use, installed faster, better and easier than Windows. Indeed impressed.

[GHoosdum]

My experience with kubuntu is very similar. The LiveCD booted into a working session, and I installed it onto a spare notebook HDD. It was much cleaner, faster, and easier than a Windows install, and it installed a variety of useful apps alongside the OS - such as OpenOffice.org

kubuntu seems very notebook friendly; absolutely everything works right off the bat except for the scroll section of the touchpad, and my Wifi. As I suspected, I'm having issues with the Broadcom chipset in the wifi card that's built into the notebook. However, little perks such as the battery indicator and such work without any tweaking necessary.

Now I just need to figure out how to get the wireless to work, and I have no doubt that kubuntu/KDE could completely replace Windows for me as a daily use OS. In fact, I'm typing this post from Konqueror right now... I just happen to be plugged into the router, which is on the opposite side of the house from my office.

[Enverex]

What chipset is the WiFi thing and what make/model?

[GHoosdum]

Broadcom 43xx (I'm not sure which 4300-series variant my chipset is, but it's definitely not the 4318). It's built into the laptop, an eMachines M6811.

I've located this fix (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=185174) on the ubuntu forums, but it's written for ubuntu instead of kubuntu. I'm running into a few problems, and I'm not sure of the cause.

I'm pretty sure that I've got the universe enabled in the repository (kubuntu uses Adept and not Synaptic as its GUI package manager) but I might be wrong. When I try to apt-get install bcm43xx-fwcutter, it says that it's not found.

Basically, I'm not sure where I went wrong, but I'm guessing it's one (or more?) of these three things:
1. I didn't properly set up access to the universe?
2. kubuntu has a different universe than ubuntu, and kubuntu's doesn't include bcm43xx-fwcutter?
3. 64-bit builds have a different universe than 32-bit builds, and the 64-bit doesn't include bcm43xx-fwcutter?

If it's #2 or #3 I can always install a different version of the OS. I really like KDE after using it for only a day, though, so I'd much prefer to find a solution that doesn't include switching, but it seems like all the support and information is dedicated to ubuntu, rather than kubuntu.

[jhenry]

I have the exact same situation as you...

Everything but wireless works perfectly...

Atheros AR5001+

I'm kinda surprised it doesn't support WPA though

[GHoosdum]

WPA might be considered "non-free" enough that it's not included with the default installation? That's just a guess, mind you. ;)

//edit: I think I figured out what I was doing wrong with the universe repository - I enabled them in Adept, but I did not add "multiverse" (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Repositories/Kubuntu) to the string. I will do this tonight and see if I can get a running WiFi connection. :thumbsup:

[Enverex]

I have the exact same situation as you...

Everything but wireless works perfectly...

Atheros AR5001+

I'm kinda surprised it doesn't support WPA though

Have you tried the "mad-wifi" package? That's supposed to support all Atheros chipsets afaik.

GH: Is support for yours not in the kernel?

[GHoosdum]

Apparently not. Broadcom seems to hold their cards close to their chest. I finally found out what the issue is - Broadcom won't release any specs on their cards. The driver has been reverse-engineered and is included in the latest Linux kernel, but the firmware is proprietary. The fix that I posted, and that I am going to try, imports the firmware from the Broadcom Windows driver, and completes the Linux driver to allow it to work. If Broadcom were a little more Linux friendly, I'm sure the entire PC would have worked with an out-of-the-box Kubuntu install, but I've got to jump through a few extra hoops because of the hardware vendor.

[Enverex]

That's a reason lots of things don't work. I'd be supprised if Microsoft didn't have a hand in this. Why would people want to switch to an OS where their devices don't work?

Anyway, look into something called ndiswrapper. It lets you use Windows network drivers (so you can use the Windows ones off the driver CD or whatever).

[nrwilk]

Hi all. I'm pretty new here (found Short-Media while searching for reviews on the HP dv8000t laptop which I'm looking at buying). I'm a relative linux newbie, but I absolutely love it. I switched from OS X about nine months ago. I liked it so much that I built a nice AMD rig to run Linux. My Mac is covered in a thick layer of dust recently. Don't get me wrong, I still love OS X, but I like the customization capabilities of Linux. Also, I'm a computer science student, and Linux is a great platform for learning in programming fields.

Anyway, I haven't tried too many distributions in my short time. Just these: Red Hat, Yellow Dog, Knoppix, Open SuSE, Mepis, Fedora Core 5, (K)ubuntu, and Gentoo. I still want to try Many others - I like to see what's out there. I started out in Kubuntu, and have run it the entire time, running all the others on seperate partitions. Kubuntu is definitely my favorite with a close second going to Mepis. Both are KDE distributions, and both are based on Debian. Mepis is really brilliant, and I'd say that the only thing holding it back is a lack of support/developers. It is growing, and it is getting more popular, but nothing on the level that *buntu is growing. Mepis installs EXTREMELY easily, it even detects and preconfigures network printers (mine were connected to Macs). That's something no other distro did when I installed it. Mepis also just switched over to using Kubuntu's software repositories instead of Debian's.

The difference between the two is mostly their core philosophies, but they have other differences.

*buntu's philosphy is the following: "The Ubuntu community is built on the ideas enshrined in the Ubuntu Philosophy: that software should be available free of charge, that software tools should be usable by people in their local language and despite any disabilities, and that people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit."
This means that if you want to use files in a proprietary format (Mp3, WMA, mov, M4a, etc...) you will have to install the codecs yourself. Also, you'll have to install proprietary ATI drivers if you have an ATI card, and other things like that. This is amazingly easy, just a "sudo aptitude install [software required]" away, in fact. Even though the distro doesn't ship with these things included, they do maintain Non-Free repositories.

Mepis sees things a bit differently. When installing Mepis, it will set up your video acceleration automatically. It includes codecs for things such as Mp3, and I've heard that playing WMVs works without tweaking a single thing (This is insane!).

To get down to it, though, you have to look at the communities around these distributions. the *buntu community at ubuntuforums.org (http://www.ubuntuforums.org) is simply wonderous. It's the best Linux support community I've ever come across. Seriously. I mean these people are superhuman helpful. Just amazing.

The community on the Mepis site is just about the opposite. But, I've heard it's MUCH better at mepislovers.org (http://www.mepislovers.org/modules/newbb/). Haven't been there, though.

Anyway, I hope you guys have as good an experience with Linux as I have had. Good luck!

[drasnor]

Welcome to Short-Media! Thanks for the input, it's always nice to see another new face down here in Alternative OS land.

-drasnor :fold: