[specialbao1]

Which is the best and easy Linux operating system.
I bought Linspire and that is easy and good.
Also give your opinion.

[Nuno Brito]

I use Ubuntu and it's a straightforward OS that replaced windows XP/Vista on my work machines.

Now I only run XP as an emulated OS whenever needed and it runs perfectly this way.

http://nunobrito1981.blogspot.com/2008/06/...-to-ubuntu.html

[joe43wv]

I've ran Fedora because it was what I was taught on when I took a Linux class last fall in college. It seems pretty reliable and stable.

[specialbao1]

linspire has also got ubuntu at its core.
and some extra features also some proprietary software also

[Zxian]

I'd never pay for Linux.

I'm using Fedora9 on my linux workstation, and CentOS for my servers. Both are very simple to use and manage. I personally find rpm and yum much easier to use than deb and apt.

Of course - if you want the best *nix server OS, then FreeBSD is the way to go.

[CoffeeFiend]

It comes down to preferences really.

We got Ubuntu on a couple boxes here (dual booting), but we've used plenty of others too.

Edit: I can't say it's exactly perfect either though... I had to recompile alsa-everything to have audio working, I had to edit the x.org config file to have a non-stupid resolution on the login screen (this is getting seriously old), other users weren't sudo'ers in the first place (was pretty restrictive for some stuff, like having to change user to be able to install the flash player), it's a pain having to select your language every time you log in (if someone else used it, and picked a different language meanwhile), the selection of a beta version of firefox for which most extensions weren't working with at the time of release, having to use autocutsel for copy/paste in VNC to work at all, an update breaking a perfectly good and working OpenLDAP install, etc. All kinds of stuff Works great for a lot of things, but they're not dual booting XP for no reason.

Server wise, I prefer Debian to RHEL/CentOS precisely because of deb & apt instead of rpm But even there, there's so many options... So many distros. And some people do indeed prefer FreeBSD.

This post has been edited by crahak: 10 July 2008 - 10:26 AM

[CoffeeFiend]

I'm slowly giving up on it these days. From GRUB problems, to having to recompile ALSA everything & editing the alsa config file to have audio working (over spdif), to Hardy Heron freezing solid on the kids box pretty much daily (I tend to blame the ati drivers for that one -- too bad it's not windows, no minidumps to check!), a LOT of flickering of the screen on some stuff like supertux which one of my daughters likes a lot (ATI again) -- thankfully it runs great on Windows, and sometimes sound doesn't work at all until you reboot (probably something with the SB live 5.1 having problems with the newly adopted Pulse Audio) but it's hardly surprising when you know how much of a mess Linux audio is, power saving not working nearly as smooth as Windows' on that box (pretty annoying), numerous issues with Hardy Heron in general that I didn't have with 7.10: Network Manager sucks, the update manager saying its up to date when sometimes it isn't, not coming with the tools to create network shares anymore (install nautilus-share, then reboot, and to change workgroup name, you again have to edit the samba config file by hand), not having the most interesting options of compiz fusion enabled by default, nor having the app to configure it installed by default, etc.

So 2 of my boxes are no longer dual booting... I just don't have the time to try another dozen distros, learn all the specific quirks those have, and all the necessary workarounds/fixes. Windows just works on these boxes, all the time, reliably. No crashes, freezes, strange problems or anything... Linux only seems to bring you different problems (and more of them from what I've seen).

This post has been edited by crahak: 30 July 2008 - 11:43 PM

[dirtbag33]

Anyone looking for an easy to use and configure Linux should take a look at PCLinuxOS. It's a Mandr(ake)iva derivative built with ease of use and stability in mind.

[deda]

Linux is a try to run Unix on a PC; Unix is a micro system to allow corporations have a mainframe without the mainframe costs, but with the same methodology, logical and resources (tech personnel, developers, etc). Unix wasn't built to be a desktop. A simply change of architeture and/or platform will not change this.

[Th3_uN1Qu3]

Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, or Puppy Linux if you want something small and portable. Puppy isn't very good for a Linux beginner, as apart from the basic wizard-based configuration you'll have some stuff to do yourself, but it's a very good platform to learn Linux on, and it's FAST.

This post has been edited by Th3_uN1Qu3: 16 July 2008 - 01:50 PM

[maggotspawn]

I just started messing around with Puppy 4.00 and love it.
Lean and stable, takes very little to setup a dualboot with it.

[doomangel]

where is opensuse?and how many debian based distros can you add?