Well actually I'm not that new to linux, but until now I only used it in a vm, normally for school.
We didn't learn that much in school. Only things about partitioning and setting up the system.
But now I'd like to install linux at home on my computer, but I don't know which distro I should use.
As I see a lot of you are using Arch Linux.
Would this be a good distro to actually start learning linux or should I go with something like OpenSuse or Ubuntu?
Do you want to "learn" linux or do you REALLY want to _LEARN_ Linux?
Ubuntu/Mint is really good for starting to use Linux, but if you want to actually learn Linux, I'd recommend Arch :) Every server I own / set up (with one exception) is an Arch server :)
Ubuntu generally sets a lot of things up for you, so if you want to learn that yourself perhaps try Debian, which is like a stripped down version of Ubuntu.
Arch is a little tougher, but you would learn more from it. Maybe if you plan to switch in future, go for Debian now and Arch later?
I really want to learn it. I want to get away from that Windows crap. The only reason I use Windows is for gaming.
If it's possible to do a dual boot on a ssd with Windows 7 already on it, I'll install Debian or Arch when I get home today. What is the big difference between these two, in learing and using them?
edit: I'd like to use gnome 3 later and I've seen that Debian doesn't support it yet. Would there be a way to get it working? (stable version)
If you are feeling REALLY lucky, [URL="http://www.gentoo.org/"]gentoo[/URL], if you want a little bit less of a challenge then try out [URL="http://www.archlinux.org/"]arch[/URL], or if you are looking for usability [URL="http://www.debian.org/"]debian[/URL].
There are many differences between all distros. In the instance of Debian and Arch, Debian goes for stability and is generally easy to use (apt is one THE best package managers out there). Arch (and gentoo) both give you a bare-bones install, typically only giving you the base system tools and a package manager, then let you build your system from the ground up, only installing what YOU want.
I think I'll try to install Arch on the weekend. If I don't understand it, I'll switch to Debian.
Arch isn't hard at all. You don't even compile your own kernel.
The only "challenge" is the OMG NCURSES installer, which is just like a GUI installer but you use the arrow keys instead of a mouse. Then you type "pacman xorg-x11" after the first boot.
Gentoo is much better. Linux From Scratch if you're feeling adventurous.
[QUOTE=Lord_Schrotty;33415639]edit: I'd like to use gnome 3 later and I've seen that Debian doesn't support it yet. Would there be a way to get it working? (stable version)[/QUOTE]
Upgrade it to the testing version, I think that has GNOME 3.
(Why anyone would want to use GNOME 3 though is beyond me, but each his own I guess)
[QUOTE=1solidsnake2;33430185]Upgrade it to the testing version, I think that has GNOME 3.
(Why anyone would want to use GNOME 3 though is beyond me, but each his own I guess)[/QUOTE]
I find that GNOME 3 is really usable once that you've done a few tweaks to it. Vanilla GNOME 3, not so much.
Messing about with gnome-tweak-tool, themes and extensions and then using Tint2 make it really nice to use.
When people here mention that Arch and Gentoo let you build your system from the ground up, don't forget that you can also do this with Debian. You can install just the base system (aka, a package manager and the most basic tools) off the net-inst disk, but I believe that you can do this in expert mode on the regular CD/DVD as well.
[editline]30th November 2011[/editline]
Also, I [b]really[/b] love apt and .deb's. They're just so easy to use.
[QUOTE=DarkendSky;33504594]When people here mention that Arch and Gentoo let you build your system from the ground up, don't forget that you can also do this with Debian. You can install just the base system (aka, a package manager and the most basic tools) off the net-inst disk, but I believe that you can do this in expert mode on the regular CD/DVD as well.
[editline]30th November 2011[/editline]
Also, I [b]really[/b] love apt and .deb's. They're just so easy to use.[/QUOTE]
You can get a minimal install of basically any Linux distro.
Gnome 3 is not that bad.
[QUOTE=ripple3000;33532548]Gnome 3 is not that bad.[/QUOTE]
Bad enough it forced me to switch to XFCE.
When I run into problems I use the terminal. Gnome 3 is no issue for me.
[QUOTE=ripple3000;33534429]When I run into problems I use the terminal. Gnome 3 is no issue for me.[/QUOTE]
Its not that it has problems, its just that (as many people put it) its hard to get anything productive done with it. I still use GNOME 2, and I will never be switching to GNOME 3 unless they first make the "panels" movable and customizable as in GNOME 2.
[QUOTE=Jetsurf;33540153]Its not that it has problems, its just that (as many people put it) its hard to get anything productive done with it. I still use GNOME 2, and I will never be switching to GNOME 3 unless they first make the "panels" movable and customizable as in GNOME 2.[/QUOTE]
Any super "fancy" GUI is that way. I always disable all the special effects that seem to only eat up processing power and precious time. As far as GNOME 3, the CS computers at my school kind of forced me to become accustomed to GNOME 3 (for some reason someone was too lazy to configure GNOME 2.)
[QUOTE=Vi3GameHkr;33560357]Any super "fancy" GUI is that way. I always disable all the special effects that seem to only eat up processing power and precious time. As far as GNOME 3, the CS computers at my school kind of forced me to become accustomed to GNOME 3 (for some reason someone was too lazy to configure GNOME 2.)[/QUOTE]
Why dont you go give your sysadmin a lecture about how gnome 2 is superior to gnome 3 if you hate it so much.
[QUOTE=ripple3000;33562098]Why dont you go give your sysadmin a lecture about how gnome 2 is superior to gnome 3 if you hate it so much.[/QUOTE]
i don't think they would listen to me. I'm just a freshmen.
[QUOTE=Vi3GameHkr;33584349]i don't think they would listen to me. I'm just a freshmen.[/QUOTE]
Its not that you are a freshman, its that Gnome 3 just plain sucks as is, and some people just don't realize it.
[QUOTE=Jetsurf;33593412]Its not that you are a freshman, its that Gnome 3 just plain sucks as is, and some people just don't realize it.[/QUOTE]
Its not THAT bad.
It just sucks
[QUOTE=kaukassus;33595185]Its not THAT bad.
[B]It just sucks[/B][/QUOTE]
Harder than the biggest black hole in existence.
The [I]Linux Mint[/I] team should be allowed to pimp-hand the Gnome 3 visual design devs and show them how it should be done.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;33422784]Arch isn't hard at all. You don't even compile your own kernel.
The only "challenge" is the OMG NCURSES installer, which is just like a GUI installer but you use the arrow keys instead of a mouse. Then you type "pacman xorg-x11" after the first boot.
Gentoo is much better. Linux From Scratch if you're feeling adventurous.[/QUOTE]
I may go for a gentoo install this weekend. It'll be entertaining to see me fail a few OS installs.
[QUOTE=ana-r3x3a;33595912]I may go for a gentoo install this weekend. It'll be entertaining to see me fail a few OS installs.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the first time I did it I probably ended up doing it 3 times to get it right.
Debian is the one distro I tend to stick to, wether server or desktop enviroment, I just find it perfect, I learns basicly all I know on it, then did some work with arch and also enjoyed that.
Personally, I'd wait to see how Linux Mint 12 is even though it's out. I'm not too sure if people are still ironing problems out or just flat out running into problems. Research it a bit, see how it is, make sure it's sane and something you'd be looking forward to.
Linux Mint 11 is the one I have been using on my laptop for a while and love it. It's the best I think you'll get without Arch-ing the hell out of your computer. The only reason I'm removing it is because I need my Windows programs. Linux Mint definitely did a good job with that, so I assume 12 would be just as good as the standard of awesomeness they've made. I just don't want to say get 12 and get you into a bind if there's something up in 12 as I haven't done to too much research, but even then the community is quite nice also.
Linux Mint is the gateway to Linux in general. (sans BS)
[QUOTE=wauterboi;33607908]Personally, I'd wait to see how Linux Mint 12 is even though it's out. I'm not too sure if people are still ironing problems out or just flat out running into problems. Research it a bit, see how it is, make sure it's sane and something you'd be looking forward to.
Linux Mint 11 is the one I have been using on my laptop for a while and love it. It's the best I think you'll get without Arch-ing the hell out of your computer. The only reason I'm removing it is because I need my Windows programs. Linux Mint definitely did a good job with that, so I assume 12 would be just as good as the standard of awesomeness they've made. I just don't want to say get 12 and get you into a bind if there's something up in 12 as I haven't done to too much research, but even then the community is quite nice also.
Linux Mint is the gateway to Linux in general. (sans BS)[/QUOTE]
Linux mint is horrible in my opinion. Not as much support as Debian from a softwares point of view.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33619444]Linux mint is horrible in my opinion. Not as much support as Debian from a softwares point of view.[/QUOTE]
Supported everything I needed, and if I need something special I always got it to work by following instructions. Mangler and LOVE is the only thing I felt I had to do a bit of work to get working.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33619444]Linux mint is horrible in my opinion. Not as much support as Debian from a softwares point of view.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1818"]http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1818[/URL]
You were saying?
Debian is the best distribution on earth.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33642226]Debian is the best distribution on earth.[/QUOTE]
Then by default Linux Mint is better.
Since it's basically Debian++.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.