Filed under: Features, Linux, Open Source
Flipping the Linux switch: The distribution maze
by Kristin Shoemaker Feb 26th 2008 at 8:00PM
Who doesn't love choices? You can "have it your way" at fast food restaurants. No two cars ever cost the same, because of add-ons and price negotiations. We like choice. It's a good thing.Right?
Choice, really, is a double-edged sword. We get too many choices, and we can get easily overwhelmed. "Oh crud, another option..." leads to "What do I care?" leads to "Forget it." We either select our options without thinking through (or understanding) the consequences, or we drop what we're trying to customize without ever getting all the way through.
Choosing a Linux distribution is tough. We're not kidding. There are a lot of them out there... some wonderful, some not so wonderful, and some that are designed to fit very specific needs you may (or may not) have.
So how are you supposed to sort through them all?
Here's a hint. You don't. Not all of them, anyway.
There are two real criteria a Linux distribution has to meet for most users. It has to support the hardware they install the distribution on, and it has to perform in a way they want and, to some degree, expect.
The first criteria is pretty easy. For instance, many years ago we tried installing Fedora Core 2 on a computer. It would not work. We tweaked the BIOS, we tried different kernel parameters. It would hang. It turned out that particular version of Fedora had some issues with the motherboard we had. Okay, fine. Easy enough, that ruled out running Fedora Core on that box (at least at that time), and we moved on to the next distro.
Some distros will support more hardware than others, and just because something doesn't work right out of the box on a given distro doesn't mean it can't ever work with it. In reality, though, if you find a distro (or two) that supports your hardware (or at least the core components) nicely from the get-go, don't beat yourself up trying out a distro that doesn't support as much of your hardware just because you like the look or feel of it. We've found it's generally easier to change looks and behavior than it is to make all the hardware play nicely, especially if you're new to it all.
Think about what you want to do with your computer. Do you want to do common desktop tasks (word processing, internet browsing and light multimedia work)? Are you looking for an installation that serves a particular purpose (maybe a PVR like MythTV or a server distribution)? Think about the functions or programs you need, and focus on the distros that provide all or most of them out of the box.
Remember how we mentioned earlier about not trying every distro? Seriously. Don't. Don't even try half of them. We'd dare say, starting out, don't even try more than four or five liveCDs before deciding what to install, and even that's probably pushing it.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to try a lot of different distributions. We would question the wisdom of trying more than five in a short period though. You're going to get overwhelmed, frustrated, and confused unless you take notes about what works and doesn't.
Make this easy on yourself. This is supposed to be fun. It is fun. It's not a lifelong commitment to a distribution. You can change periodically. We do, regularly. Skills are transferable... even your home directory and settings can be transferable.
We'd recommend approaching distribution choice this way: Try two of each major packaging system. Try two Debian based systems, perhaps Ubuntu or Mint or Debian itself. Try two RPM based distros, like openSuSE or Mandriva or Fedora Core.
One might jump out immediately as the one for you. At the very least, you'll get a feel for the different package management systems. Depending on which you prefer, you can, if you need to, explore other options that use your preferred management system.
Every once in a while a tool comes down the pike to help you choose your Linux distribution. Check out the ZegenieStudios.net Linux Distribution Chooser, or the (very brief) survey at Tuxs.org. Though not terribly scientific, this type of survey can get you started working with the most likely compatible distros.
The really important thing to keep in mind while choosing is that it is very much allowed (and normal!) to change your mind and try something else as you get more comfortable. We've found new users feel a bit less overwhelmed if they limit themselves to trying a few major distributions. It's certainly possible to blaze new Linux trails later, but keeping on the path of a solid, established distro at the beginning can make things a lot less stressful.
With Halloween fast approaching, it's a great time to get in some practice defending your territory against zombies. In Graveyard Shift, you take aim at zombies and other creepy-crawlies, blasting them into splatters of cartoony green guts. It's a casual first-person shooter, and it's very easy to get the hang of - use the mouse to aim, click to fire. Graveyard Shift has at least 15 levels, and it might even have some secret stages I haven't unlocked yet.
They key to getting good at Graveyard Shift is learning to use ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sean.Harrison said 9:37PM on 2-26-2008
I really think that the community that forms around a Linux distribution almost as important as any of the other details and should be researched before starting to use a system.
Is there a community forum on the distribution's website or another related site? Is the forum active? What is the community atmosphere? Does the community try to help new users, or exclude them?
Since most versions of Linux do not have host companies, the community must fill the support void. The documentation may be excellent, but it always seems that the one error that occurs is always the one that doesn't appear in the paperwork. Beyond strict support roles, it is nice to know other users that, in some form, share in a common experience.
I've used a good number of different distributions over the years, and I've had a great time with many of them. Of the user-friendly distros, PCLinuxOS, Linux Mint and Ubuntu have communities that stick out in my mind as new user friendly and very helpful. I'm sure there are many, many more out there, but those are the ones I remember.
The article was great and I hope my comment does not take anything away from that. Linux isn't as terrifying as some might think. It is a switch and it is a change, but it is very doable and very rewarding as long as the user is willing to put some time into understanding what they are using.
Reply
Kristin Shoemaker said 6:26AM on 2-27-2008
Thanks Sean! That is a very good point... a community that you feel comfortable approaching and asking questions is a huge asset when starting with Linux.
I have to say when I started out with Linux, I could quite comfortably use either RPMs or DEBs... I actually preferred RPMs in the beginning, a bit. Something switched, though, and I find them extremely clunky to deal with now (though they aren't nearly as annoying to me as they were a year or so ago).
Thanks for your comments!
rambutan said 9:38PM on 2-26-2008
Nice article.
I agree with your choice of 2 of the 2. I like your choices. I've installed all six and still use three of them. But since you display a DistoWatch chart that is extremely biased in favor of PCLos you should mention that PCLos is derived from Mandriva, so try Mandriva first. I tried PCLos and dumped it pretty quickly.
Reply
William Meier said 9:52PM on 2-26-2008
I recently went through a batch of at least 15 live CDs in my search for my first Linux distribution to install. After doing a bit of online reading and research, I found:
"Comparison of Linux LiveDistros at" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_LiveDistros
and www.distrowatch.com to be very helpful.
I was looking for something visually appealing, quick and that worked with a minimum of fuss with an older laptops' hardware.
Distributions that I tried included: Damn Small Linux, PCLinuxOS, OpenSUSE, Puppy, Ubuntu, Kubunto, Xubuntu, Fedora, Vectorlinux, Zenwalk, Sam, Myah and a few others.
It did not take too much time to download the distribution's ISO, burn the live CD, run, test and move on to the next one. After several days I had a good idea of what I liked and did not. Some that ran too slowly (or not at all) were discarded. I came to prefer GNOME over KDE and also kinda liked the look and quickness of xfce. Package managers didn't seem to be much of an issue to me since they all seemed to work.
In the end I installed both OpenSUSE and PClinuxOS. Along the way I learned how to partition a hard drive (using Parted Magic) about GRUB and LILO and numerous other Linux mysteries. I'm not about to move away from Windows as my primary operating system, but learning a bit about Linux has been an interesting experience. And now I know what I can do with some PC hardware when it gets past its prime.
Bill
Reply
Kristin Shoemaker said 6:35AM on 2-27-2008
Thanks Bill!
That's really cool to hear... Of course Linux isn't an all or nothing thing. I dual booted for about three years before I finally switched... and yes, I still use my husband's Windows machine for a few things. I am really happy though that you're enjoying the learning process, and extending the life of your hardware.
Keep it up! And have lots of fun!
Andrew Schott said 4:08PM on 2-27-2008
I found that through my personal uses and others that I have pitched linux to, that Fedora, Ubuntu, and Linspire have tested the test of time nearly every time where others (notably SLED/OpenSuSE) miserably fail after a short time.
Personally I recommend the aforementioned 3 and detail why one may be better than the others. Here is the jist I have gotten from how each distro operates with regards to the end user:
Fedora : Great if you are technically inclined already, but still great for noobs. More up to date revisions, and more likely to get commercial software working on.
Linspire : Best for noobs that are willing to pay a small bit for CNR. Good out of the box experience, and a complete hand holding from beginning to end.
Ubuntu : A more conservative Fedora. Also free in its entirety, but a bit slower to get the latest and greatest packages. Also has the biggest user base that works the forums regularly.
hope this helps anyone interested. For peeps that are shy going full bore and wiping the drive, XP and Vista are supported by VMWare Player -- use that! Fire off a VM of Fedora or Ubuntu to get a feel.
Reply
walid said 12:17PM on 2-27-2008
thanks
Reply
Peter said 4:55AM on 3-02-2008
One great way to try out a bunch of live cds without installing them is the VMware player and the live cd appliance. I use that all the time and it works great and it is an easy way to see which flavor best suites your needs without rebooting your computer.
Reply
Larry said 2:53PM on 5-13-2008
I have tried several of the Linux distros; Mandrake, then Mandriva, Linspire, and now Kubuntu (Ubuntu w/ KDE) and I always ended up with the same result:
The wireless card on my Dell E1705 laptop is not recognized by any distro I have tried so far.
Of course, without an internet connection, you cannot easily obtain updates or packages.
It's no big deal, really. All a user needs to do is look through hundreds of Linux FAQs and Forums, discover NDISwrapper, learn the console commands (as a superuser!) to banish the native Broadcom chip drivers from a module and then apply NDISWrapper to the Windows .inf file (which you hopefully copied to your Home directory or an external USB drive that is recognized by your distro) and presto! your wireless card comes to life 40% of the time.
Piece of cake.
Really, folks, until Linux is capable if recognizing common hardware devices installed on computers during the stone age, it will continue to be an amusing playtoy to serious computer users.
When Linux gets serious and ubiquitous about hardware support, (and until vendors supply reliable Linux drivers), then I will get serious about using Linux as my primary OS.
Enough said.
Larry said 3:05PM on 5-13-2008
I also meant to say that the Sun xVM Virtual Box is the best VM I have used in Windows XP so far, but a VM running Linux will not reveal hardware issues because the VM runs its own hardware layer.
I did not find out that Kubuntu 8.04 would not recognize my laptop's wireless card until I installed it on my machine.