Linux

Quote from: Qwerty.55 on 23 April, 2011, 02:26:33

Slightly more advanced user: Windows DOS

PLEASE, please don't refer people to Windows DOS! Tongue

(I'm going to assume you mean DOS, since the Windows "DOS" is the Windows NT/2000/XP/7 command line, which implies you installing it anyway.**) Although it is a fun environment for some old games, there's absolutely no way you can go online these days without using something "modern" like Windows, Mac, or Linux. Tongue

Whereas the Linux CLI is pretty plentiful (assuming you have more than just a CLI shell), the DOS environment is a barren desert, unfortunately. That's why there's DOSBOX!

** OK, I'm lying. You *can* get a Windows CLI only interface, but only if you strip *everything* out, and the CLI only version is usually for building recovery tools and such on top of it - basically, not for general public use.

Quote from: willrandship

@albert actually, with ndiswrapper, Windows Wifi drivers = Linux wifi drivers, but in most hardware cases outside of wifi and Video cards (don't worry, they're easy enough, esp. on Ubuntu and Mint), Linux will have a driver, usually auto installed or included in the kernel.

Ehh... ndiswrapper is a bad bad idea (at least that's what I've been hearing), and should only be used if there is no or little (aka non-working) native driver support at all.

And for wifi drivers, I should also mention that you typically just need to download proprietary stuff. For me (Broadcom), I had to download firmware to get it working.

Quote from: DJ_O

There are paid ones??? O_O

I never used Linux, but I got told by many people that if I am not very tech-savy, I should start with Ubuntu or Mint. Before, people would only recommend me Ubuntu, but in the past two years it's more Mint.

Yup - such include (without going too much into details) SUSE Linux (http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/), Red Hat Linux (http://www.redhat.com/rhel/desktop/), and the now defunct Linspire/Xandros Desktop (http://www.xandros.com/products/desktop/). The first two have been very successful at delivering this to businesses and such; the last not so much.

As for the sudden change from Ubuntu to Mint... Ubuntu recently (or should I say always) shows their ignorance to the community, refusing to fix bugs, making sudden irrational changes without community input, and focusing on pretty rather than the system core. You'd know there's something wrong when the "benevolent dictator" (Mark Shuttleworth) forces people to use a Mac OS like window toolbar and at the same time not making it as stable as a Mac. Tongue

And guess what? They're going to overhaul the GUI again.
Old: (10.10)

New: (11.04, next release)

(The release numbers jump from 10.10 to 11.04. It's formatted as YEAR/MONTH, and a release occurs every 6 months.)

In short, things aren't going in the right direction, and they've simply alienated the community, kinda like TI. /rant

Linux Mint, on the other hand, is based on the Ubuntu releases, but focuses on user experience (stability and usability, not fancy shmancy GUIs). The developers there try their best to patch up any flaws of the released Ubuntu, and make it easy on the user to use it. At the same time, they preinstall things like Java, DVD and MP3 codecs for media players, etc. This is likely why many Linux users (like me) suggest Linux Mint instead of Ubuntu, due to the battles we tend to have with the Ubuntu devs, and the pluses offered to new users to avoid installation hassles.