What is the Easiest Way to Down Load a Linux Image File?(25 posts)
That is very personal. It's like food or wine. We all like different things. I like Zorin because it is similar to Windows. I hate Ubuntu since they came up with this stupid Unity UI.
Btw: see also my last posting in your other thread.
I just want to find a version of linux that I can learn with. As far as a GUI, I can adapt myself. There is only one GUI, that I'm against, and that is the New Windows 8 touch screen.
You do not have to stay with the default desktop (unity) in Ubuntu or any other desktop on any linux distro. In Ubuntu you don't even have to use terminal to install another desktop such as Gnome or LXDE. Install from GUI with Ubuntu Software Center. Reboot. When you reach the Ubuntu log in window, click the little round logo top right of the password dialogue box and select which desktop you want to boot into.
One of the reasons a lot like linux is the degree of customization that is possible. You don't have to be an "expert" to do a lot of customizations. Today there is a GUI version of many linux functions. However terminal remains the best way for a very good reason. With all the desktop GUIs it is very difficult for someone running a different desktop to describe a GUI way of accomplishing something because of the vast differences of layouts in the various GUIs. So terminal remains a universal way that will accomplish the same task whether you are using a desktop such as Unity, Classic Gnome, Gnome3, LXDE, XFCE or a minimalist install.
Terminal is a very powerful tool and is worth learning. If you can become very familiar with terminal you can get almost any machine to run. Case in point: look at Rick with his expertise of the command prompt commands in windows.
As a Live DVD I have looked at:
I am currently downloading Fedora. I want to download Debian however I'm not sure what to download. I know the Intel Chip and I am aware of the AMD Chip. But what is these? armel, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, sparc.
I am unsure of these for a different reason:
I assume this if for the AMD chip - amd64 and kfreebsd-amd64
What is kfreebsd?
Are these for 32 bit systems? (I think they are... But in the case of Linux I want to make sure)
amd64 is for amd and intel 64 bit processors. i386 is 32 bit. The 64 bit architecture is named for amd because I believe they were the first to put out a 64 bit CPU. Regardless amd64 refers to 64 bit architecture for both intel & amd 64 bit CPUs
I still feel unsure of myself when it comes to this Debian distribution because it seems like you need to be connected to the internet to install it. At the moment I just want to create a Live DVD like I did with the other ones.
I created the Fedora Live/Install DVD. Using my old desktop I looked at everyone mentioned except for Debian. As of now I like what I see in Mint and Zorin. I can tolerate the other User Interfaces and features. I am no where near ready to custom things with the terminal but I will try and learn it as I go along.
Greg, everyone starts their journey at the beginning. You will learn as you go along. Linux is not hard, it is just very different than windows. Basically most things you know about windows need to be left behind in linux.
presence, I would not go as far as that. Yes, Linux is quite different but since I use Zorin, I can find my way around pretty easily. I had used about another half dozen distros before, but with those I was more alienated.
I always make an installation in virtual - VMware or Virtual Box. That is the easiest to test it - even to run it permanently. And if you move the VMware installtion folder to an external disk, you can even run it on any PC in the house - or outside the house.
Whs, virtual is fine, that is a very viable option. But what of people who have a low spec machine they want to breathe new life into with Linux? I prefer to set up a dual boot always. That does not take anything away from your method of set up in virtual. So this we can agree on, I think. It is up to the user to decide what installation method they want to try. If someone wants virtual I will refer them to you. Neither way is better or superior than the other, it comes down to what best meets the users needs. I respect the users right to choose, and having interacted briefly with you in here I believe you do as well. In computing there are usually multiple ways to accomplish something.
I have no argument with that. The limitation is the RAM. If you have only 2GB of RAM, then it's tight (although XP plus Linux will run OK). But already with 3GB of RAM you have a lot of options. But I guess you are talking about real old bangers with 1GB or 512MB of RAM. That is hopeless.
My systems have 6, 8 and 16GB of RAM. So I may have the wrong perspective.
I was first introduced to Linux in 1999... At the time I was very busy and didn't see the use in learning it. At the time all I could see was a complicated command line on an old archaic O.S. with no to almost a graphic user interface when Microsoft had clearly taken the world. I remember I had no manual or internet access to help me to learn the command lines. Without knowing the command lines, my friend and I just set at the computer and typed stuff.... I have no idea how we discovered the LS would list directories and files. I had a blank 386 computer with a 20 meg hard drive. I tried to install linux from a floppy disk! It messed up the MBR so bad that even Fdisk wouldn't reset the partitions correctly. Some how I performed a low level format on the hard drive. I can't remember if that computers Bios had that option in menu or not, or maybe I used a program from a testing program I had obtained. Anyways as I recall, I was told by my teacher that you shouldn't perform a low level format on an IDE hard drive, but I was left with no choice. After the low level format was accomplished I could use Fdisk to partition for DOS. Then I had to do a full hard drive format. Even back then I knew that Linux is based on the Unix system. I was not taught about Unix or Linux. My instructor only taught us Microsoft. Back then I knew DR. Dos and MS. Dos, almost like the back of my hand. But now I know almost nothing about Dos like command prompt that comes with Windows 7. I have looked it over and noticed that the commands have been updated and some changed.
This time when I started on my Linux Journey I started with a clean slate. I decided to read the history on the operating system.
I am also a member of the Linux and Ubuntu Forums.
Right now I am not concerned about installing Linux. I'm more concerned about finding the distribution that will do what I need an operating system to do.
I need to be able to rip CDs to the Mp3 format. I need to be able to edit audio files. I need to be able to convert video file formats. I need to be able to edit Video Files. I need to be able to burn DVDs from those video formats. I need to be able to print with my printer. I will talk more about these things at a later date.
On the subject of the printer. I tried Pinguy recently and it seems there isn't much in the way of sophistication in the linux printer software. There aren't any preferences like printing black and white only for example...this was a big downer for me.
" I need to be able to rip CDs to the Mp3 format. I need to be able to edit audio files. I need to be able to convert video file formats. I need to be able to edit Video Files. I need to be able to burn DVDs from those video formats. I need to be able to print with my printer. I will talk more about these things at a later date. "
When you find Linux programs for these tasks, let me know. I do a lot of that stuff too - but on Windows. For Audio, I saw Audacity in the library.
This topic has been closed to new replies.