EvilZone
Community => General discussion => : 98Mare March 18, 2015, 11:56:48 AM
-
Hello everyone. Can you tell me Which linux distro is best for beginners? arch, Debian or Opensuse?or any other?
-
For beginners I would recommend Linux Mint or Ubuntu.
Arch isn't recommended because you have to configure nearly all by yourself.
And Debian is used for server and afaik not so good for desktop pc's.
Opensuse I have never used.
-
thanks bro.yes in arch i have to add desktop environment myself. can you please tell is ubantoo is good and powerful too?
-
thanks bro.yes in arch i have to add desktop environment myself
Actually you can try ArchBang which is already has Desktop environment.
arch, Debian or Opensuse?
From this list you definitely should choose OpenSuse. It already has DE and brilliant installer where you can select which functional parts you want to see in the installed system.
-
Why not read the guide already here:
https://evilzone.org/operating-system/an-informal-guide-to-linux-distributions-for-the-unwashed-hacker/ (https://evilzone.org/operating-system/an-informal-guide-to-linux-distributions-for-the-unwashed-hacker/)
It sums up what you need and gives good advice.
-
Thank you guys... i'm gonna try opensuse. thanks you TheWormKill And KryDos and reqq456for your precious advice... i will try other distro in virtual machines and ok i have a strange question here some members in forum have -ve(negative cookies) why? now me too have 1.
-
OpenSUSE is really good for beginners. If you are more adventurous you can subsequently try the ubuntu based Linux Mint, Fedora and then pure Debian. This will familiarize you with the major different software packages out there. And when become an expert you can for "Arch" and build your own customized distro.
Its really fun. :D
-
Ubuntu. By far the most user friendly distro.
-
Hello everyone. Can you tell me Which linux distro is best for beginners? arch, Debian or Opensuse?or any other?
Depends on you reason for using it and your aptitude/determination level.
If you're brand new to the concept, I'd go with something easy like Mint/Ubuntu.
Ubuntu was my first Linux OS, years ago. When you have a firm grasp you'll probably want to move on to more personalized OS's that suit your specific needs.
I currently use Arch (Best OS there is IMO) but I probably would have been discouraged about linux it if I'd started out using it.
-
If you're brand new to the concept, I'd go with something easy like Mint/Ubuntu.
To be honest, I disagree with that.My first distro was (and still is) Slackware, being not what most people call
"user-friendly". But the jump into cold water is the best way there is, IMO. Everything else, like Ubuntu etc. is a
mere waste of time since it's bloated and hiding a lot of the details. That's the reason why I linked vezzy's guide
in my previous answer. Still, it's probably possible to start learning with something like Mint / Ubuntu / whatever
popped up from systemd's lair, but in the long run, it's a loss. Feel free to disagree ^^.
-
I have to agree...unless you have a specific reason to start slow (such as having a low familiarity with computers regardless of operating system) there is little benefit to starting with the easiest.
More complex starting points force you to learn more and a lot faster...especially if it wont work without you learning things.
I for instance have jumped directly into Kali Linux and Tails. I may fiddle with some live disk stuff of standard distros but until I see the need I am going to be fiddling with all sorts of non standard crap. If I don't know what I am doing I figure it out.
As a hacker or general technical minded individual you HAVE to be able to learn quick and with minimal direction from other people.
If you have to constantly ask people things you could google and learn in 10 seconds then you need to alter your thought processes rather drastically.
-
I can't argue with this, I could very well have just been holding myself back by using Ubuntu.
I didn't really reach what I'd call proficiency with linux until I switched to Arch.
To be honest, I disagree with that.My first distro was (and still is) Slackware, being not what most people call
"user-friendly". But the jump into cold water is the best way there is, IMO. Everything else, like Ubuntu etc. is a
mere waste of time since it's bloated and hiding a lot of the details. That's the reason why I linked vezzy's guide
in my previous answer. Still, it's probably possible to start learning with something like Mint / Ubuntu / whatever
popped up from systemd's lair, but in the long run, it's a loss. Feel free to disagree ^^.
-
Any of them. Pick one and learn.
-
Thank you guys... i'm gonna try opensuse. thanks for your reviews. evereyone has his own mind set and view. i love this forum!!! and sorry for the delay in replies cause i can't reply in operamini. i have to turn on my pc again to reply. sorry guys. as deepcopy said -any of them; i agree with it! its our mindset that which linux to choose or what to do.
-
try ubuntu
no problems with any hardware settings. I don't like ubuntu anymore but its easy to setup and use
-
Why doesn't anyone ever mention Gentoo?
-
Why doesn't anyone ever mention Gentoo?
Some consider it a broken system: http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt (http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt) (see the second paragraph in the FAQ).
I for one can't say anything about the system, but I guess you're right: it's worth mentioning, no matter what
is said. In any case it's a better choice than all those "fancy" distros.
-
Some consider it a broken system: http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt (http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt) (see the second paragraph in the FAQ).
Wow... that was one hell of a nerd slap.
-
Wow... that was one hell of a nerd slap.
What do you mean? I just said what I knew. Am I missing something?
-
What do you mean? I just said what I knew. Am I missing something?
Not what you said, I meant this was a nerdslap:
There are three big problems with Gentoo Linux: first of all, most if not all Gentoo systems are completely broken (missing or mismatched header files, broken compiler etc. are just the tip of the iceberg); secondly, the Gentoo maintainer thinks it is a good idea to add broken patches to the code; and lastly, it should be called Gentoo GNU/Linux.
For these reasons, it is impossible to support rxvt-unicode on Gentoo. Problems appearing on Gentoo systems will usually simply be ignored unless they can be reproduced on non-Gentoo systems.
-
Yep, that's true. But my guess wold be that the author has some reason to say that, although it is a bit harsh criticism.
-
Why doesn't anyone ever mention Gentoo?
Because he asked for a distro suitable for starters?
I guess so...
Some consider it a broken system: http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt (http://linux.die.net/man/7/urxvt) (see the second paragraph in the FAQ).
Yep, that's true. But my guess wold be that the author has some reason to say that, although it is a bit harsh criticism.
Actually he either joking or thrash posting... This is absolutely lies, Gentoo compilers are working efficiently it is actually a "compiled from the source" distro. This couldn't even be funny as a joke really. And of course urxvt are available and working efficiently, you can test it yourself...
Either way Gentoo is a great system. Those rumours that Gentoo is corrupted and many things break etc could apply in any distro which adopts to the philosophy of "compile from the source" and are absolutely thrash talking. The fact that the distro give you the ability to customize everything is not a proof that it is corrupted or unstable distro. Distros like Gentoo, Slackware, FreeBSD etc are totally depended on the hands of the guy who maintain them. So they can either be corrupt-unstable (on a bad use) or even stabler than the ones that claim to be stable enough by default (on a proper use). Its all about skills and experience.
So please don't reproduce this...
-
I use ______ because it's way better than _______ .
-
-------Arch Linux---------------------------Everything
I use ____________ because it's way better than ____________ .
-
-------Arch Linux---------------------------Everything
I use ______ because it's way better than _______ .
*linux everything
There I fixed it for you.
All Linux is beautiful
-
All Linux is beautiful
Proof that you're very... VERY wrong...
http://hannahmontana.sourceforge.net/index.html
Even Linus Disagrees with you
(http://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2014/10/04/b9ae21e0-4b69-11e4-b6a0-d4ae52e95e57/resize/770x578/5cd6c2e79e955dd3a9e2eed4b670201c/18-06-2012-13-33-24.jpg)
-
Proof that you're very... VERY wrong...
http://hannahmontana.sourceforge.net/index.html (http://hannahmontana.sourceforge.net/index.html)
Even Linus Disagrees with you
(http://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2014/10/04/b9ae21e0-4b69-11e4-b6a0-d4ae52e95e57/resize/770x578/5cd6c2e79e955dd3a9e2eed4b670201c/18-06-2012-13-33-24.jpg)
Well, it includes systemd, KDE, Hannah Montana themes and everything Ubuntu brings to your system. That's basically every kind of bloat I could think of during my nightmares.
-
OMFG thank you for the link!!! Downloading!!! I fucking LOVE Hannah Montana!!! She lives two lives its sooooo crazy!!!
-
Everything ubuntu brings?
Clearly you have no idea what you're saying and probably just never had the capacity to use your own Arch system. Or you'd know better.
Well, it includes systemd, KDE, Hannah Montana themes and everything Ubuntu brings to your system. That's basically every kind of bloat I could think of during my nightmares.
-
Depends what you're going for really, if you're wanting to have a huge learning curve then I'd suggest Arch.
If you're wanting something to use to replace Windows as a workplace I'd use Fedora. Then again it's all personal preference aswell, what I did when I first started using Linux was try as many distro's as possible and familiarise yourself with different types such as Gnome, KDE, Mate etc.. Then decide which you like best.
-
-------Arch Linux---------------------------Everything
A cookie for you sir! (Makes a change for once?)
-
To be honest, I disagree with that.My first distro was (and still is) Slackware, being not what most people call
"user-friendly". But the jump into cold water is the best way there is, IMO. Everything else, like Ubuntu etc. is a
mere waste of time since it's bloated and hiding a lot of the details. That's the reason why I linked vezzy's guide
in my previous answer. Still, it's probably possible to start learning with something like Mint / Ubuntu / whatever
popped up from systemd's lair, but in the long run, it's a loss. Feel free to disagree ^^.
I absolutely agree with you.
==========================
Well i heard many great things about Arch. But I'm Linux noob and haven't tried it yet. But few days ago I started using Slackware. So what can I say about it from noob point of view is that something similar to "train hard" like "learn hard". So I think using Arch or Slackware from the very beginning might get your brains working seriously. Cannot say anything about Arch or Gentoo (just heard that it's same level of hardcore as Slackware). But in first few days of using it I learned so much about Linux. While using Kali all i learned is to blindly copy paste commands from tutorials into terminal without thinking and sometimes screwing something up. Slackware forces you to understand wtf is going on. After I installed Slackware everything started from the very begining. Like getting internet connectivity there is not such a thing where you just plug a cable or point ant click on wireless icon, select AP enter your password and done. Nothing like that... I learned how to manually connect my box to internet trough cable or wireless. After that there was no sound so i learner to use alsamixer and aplay. Find out that alsa by default was trying to play music trough hdmi port. And this is just beginning. Less gui I use the more it feels I learn. And everything is so interesting in this way. So from my noobish point of view i suggest "learn hard" get serious and get slackware.
EDIT
And the most important thing i learned is to RTFM. I mean using man on everything. You can even read about C libraries there or search for stuff like where the fck is dhcp conf file ? 'man -k dhcp' ... Omg everything is so sexy here..