Linux for a Windows power user?

[ATLMatt]

Cliff notes: I need recommendations on a Linux disto to use for sys admin type tasks and office work.


I'm currently exclusively a Windows user, but with recent dissatisfaction with Vista and Vista SP2 (AKA: Windows 7), as well as more network administration tasks where I am using ported Linux based apps, I am interested in switching platforms for my non OS dependent work. I would like to get a head start on learning more about Linux so I can switch to Linux or possibly Mac OS once XPPro is no longer viable.

I've goofed around with Ubuntu in the past, and it seemed pretty solid, but before I commit to learning a specific distro, I want to make sure I am choosing the best option. Basically, I want to install a Linux disto on an older laptop, (P3 750mhz, 512mb RAM, 40gig HD) and use it to run various networking utilities and vulnerability scanners, as well as basic e-mail/web/openoffice.org functionality.

Thanks for any help!

 

[Grenage]

You made a good start with Ubuntu, Debian is a solid linux platform. You doing have to worry too much about learning a specific distro, while there are many available, the underlying product is pretty much the same.

Get familiar with the *nix command line and you can take that from distro to distro. The same goes for most of the applications available.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[ATLMatt]

Thanks for the advice, I did some more digging, and I've decided to throw a couple different distros into Virtual Machines, poke around, and pick the one I like best for my laptop. Since I've already seen the basics of Ubuntu, I'm looking at downloading 2 or 3 of Debian, openSUSE, and Fedora.

 

[Grenage]

Opensuse is decent enough, although I'd recommend going with KDE 3.5 on it. Fedora is decent, as are most Debian distros.

Good luck, and I hope you get on with them!

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[thedaver]

but before I commit to learning a specific distro,

Keep on experimenting! As you may be aware, the principal flavors of distro that are NOT specialised distros (i.e. those that are tiny, or bootable firewalls) typically have heritage either from RedHat or Debian.

By heritage I mean that both RedHat and Debian have their "way" in a couple of major areas:

- Package management and system maintenance
- Libraries and file system standards
- degree of handholding for users

My experience with the RH variants: (RedHat, Centos, Fedora) says that they tend to be a little more hand-holdy, their library implementation is a little less standard, and the package management works nicely but they leave you behind fairly quickly as subsequent versions trigger platform upgrades.

Regarding Debian: in the old days (i.e. pre-Ubuntu) Debian and its variants were certainly more hobbyist and "know the guts" kinds of distributions - less hand-holdy. However their package management was superior IF you were willing to install applications with dependencies exactly how the debian packagers wanted it done. Otherwise you started compiling code pretty fast to change things. However, that approach lead to more conformance in libraries. Debian had a longer lifecycle in platform versions which was nice.

In the Ubuntu/Kubuntu/???Ubuntu era, the debian underpinnings have been made more hand-holdy and are (IMHO) better maintained to get you support for more current/leading edge hardware support. I've also seen a self-perceived greater stability in the Unbuntu kits when using the X desktop.

We've done the discussion to death in this forum on the matter of "Server" versus "desktop" installs, I'll leave you to search on that one.

Good hunting!








D.E.R. Management - IT Project Management Consulting

http://www.dermanagement.com/

 

[tjbradford]

Puppy linux my be work a lookie.........

It can run completely in ram "if required" so no install
its portable to a memory stick , great for portability.

you can add source code easily to compile your own apps.
there are packages "pets" available to easily get wine running (wine allows you to install and run windows apps)

if you don't like it , take the cd out and throw it in the bin , press reset and your back to windows )

http://www.puppylinux.org/

Enjoy

 

[cliffordsfleas]

Keep in mind that depending on the distro you choose Linux is a lot more flexible in how it's configured. Windows is an all in one Kernel, Command Line, Window Server Platform (for the graphical user inforace), and GUI. Linux separates all these in most cases except in certain more simplified pre-packaged distributions like Ubuntu which is packaged JUST with Gnome or Kubuntu which is packaged JUST with KDE.

If you install Slackware or Fedora or Debian chances are it'll let you select several different Gui's/Desktop managers. Some let you easily specify a different default desktop manager for each user, others you have to play around in your xfree86/xorg config files.

My point being since you're running on an older machine if you find Gnome or KDE to be sluggish... there are alternatives. Lookup on google "linux window managers" and look into software like Blackbox, Lightbox, Fluxbox, Enlightenment, Xfce, and more. Blackbox might be a bit too "minimalist" for a general user but you get the idea.. if you need more power but still need a GUI you can trade some ease of use for a faster smaller less full featured GUI.

That IMO is one of the great things about Linux and the freedom of use that comes with it - being able to custom tailor the system to the needs of your hardware and your personal performance needs vs preferred comfort/usability level.

dial800 professional call tracking and lead tracking