Best Linux Distro Other than Ubuntu.

You can change your desktop environment almost any way you want later, but one aspect of choosing a distro can hinge on 2 things...

Essentially, there are debian-based distros, and then there are the slackware-based ones. Debian uses what I think is a simpler method of adding software packages, but the other way works too.

Then there is the main desktop environment, which will be Gnome or KDE. You can read up on those. Gnome is cleaner and more "elegant", sort of like Mac, and KDE looks more like Windows (my opinion). But there are also a number of other desktops you can use - and you can pretty well use whichever you want on any linux system once you have it up and running. That's one of the great things about Linux.

I would say, if the first distro you download installs and works on your computer, stick with it. Then learn how to change things if you want. Why get on the distro merry-go-round some people hop onto if you don't have to.

 

Starling, a couple things...

A) Distros are essentially just Slack and Debian based? I don't think so, but I could be wrong, so let's investigate this a little. Let's take a look at the top ten most popular distros at DistroWatch, using this chart:
1) Ubuntu - Debian-based
2) PCLinuxOS - Red Hat-based (Mandrake directly)
3) openSUSE - Slackware-based (SuSE directly)
4) Fedora - Red Hat-Based
5) Sabayon - Gentoo-based
6) Debian - Debian-based
7) MEPIS - Debian-based
8) Mint - Debian-based (Ubuntu directly)
9) Mandriva - Red Hat-based (Mandrake directly)
10) Damn Small - Debian-based (Knoppix directly)

Okay, I'll give you Debian-based, but, I see more based on Red Hat than Slack, and what about distros like Gentoo and Arch? (which were both mentioned in this thread, and have fairly strong user bases).

However, given my experience with different distros (which granted isn't TOO much, but sufficient I think), I would say that the source base really isn't really THE major contributing factor to the "feel" of a distro.

B) I disagree that you should just stick with the first distro you use. Now, I don't advocate installing a different distro each week or anything like that, but, as was mentioned several times already during this thread (I think), Linux is all about choice, if something doesn't work, or you don't like how it works, then by all means, try something else.

Now, I think you SHOULD have a goal in mind when trying new distros, and not just randomly try everything you can. This is MY story of the distros I've tried:

I started with Ubuntu, but I ran into a couple of situations where I had to compile packages from source. I found it to be a PAIN. So, I figured, "why not try a source based distro? If a programs not in the repositories, I'll already have the framework in place to compile from source." So I went to Gentoo.

After using Gentoo for a while, I found two main things I didn't like, one, with GNOME, the DE I was using, it took them FOREVER to get it up to date. And, compiling just took too long. So I tried Foresight.

I used Foresight for about 30 min. then decided I didn't like it, because I didn't like the package management system, so I went back to Gentoo for a while. I realized that I liked a) the rolling release system, and b) the methodology of building the system up from scratch that Gentoo offered. So after a little research, I tried Arch. I've been using it ever since.

If I had followed your advice, I think I would have grown more and more dissatisfied, and more and more frustrated, because it's beyond the scope of Ubuntu to cater to what I wanted in a system. Likewise, Arch Linux doesn't cater to the needs of many other users (for example, having almost everything working on initial installation).



Now, I'm a tennis player, so this analogy makes sense to me, I hope it does to you to. When you're first learning tennis, a lot of people try to find the best racquet. But in reality, they would benefit much more from just taking a couple lessons, and getting better at the basics, improving their technique, learning strategy, etc. But there comes a time when, due to the strategies they like to use, and the way they hit their shots, it's best to change racquets. And so, they know what they like, they know their strengths and weaknesses, so they get rid of the racquet they've outgrown and find one that fits them better.

I think Linux is much the same. When you're starting out, it IS more important to learn the basics of how Linux works in general. But, there may come a time when the distro you started with, just doesn't work out anymore, and doesn't fit your needs. So switch. The Linux world is about choice, so why not use that choice.

So, Starling, if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, I apologize, but in any case, I think I still made some good points that people may benefit from reading.

 

Nobody mentioned sidux yet! You just have to try it... great up-to date debian sid, only hot and spicy and with lots of friendly help to smooth out the bumps (it is Sid, after all).

As for a real stripped down install, try a debian net install. Now THAT can be pretty bare bones.

 

I've tried Sidux on the system in my signature.. and it doesn't work with the built in NIC for whatever reason (even their IRC channel is out of idea's), so I can't update / or even try wifi support..

I've had about a dozen other distro's on this system and never had a problem with my NIC... so I've lost a bit of faith...

I have not given up though, because I love the Debian structure, and it's taken a lot of the fuss out.

 

Wow. Really? What a shame. I thought the bog standard intel stuff was golden. I know lots of other folks got it to work. Maybe your motherboard has a goofy bios? I know I have seen slh complain about issues with non-stard compliant bios.

 

When I said Debian or Slackware-based, I should have added there are Debian-like and Slackware-like distros too even if they aren't exactly based on them, but I was trying to keep things simple for newcomers (at the risk of oversimplifying for the experts).

As for continuously uninstalling one distro and trying another, well, that's fine if your hobby is trying different distros, but if you just want to work, that's an awful waste of time.

 

I use a virtual machine to install test distros on, then you can install them play with them and keep your main distro intact.

 

Distro surfing is fun, easy and doesn't cost much. Since most distros nowadays only take about an hour or two to install, why not try them all? Riight now, I am using Sabayon, and so far loving it - although the newest version isn't playing very nice with my ATI card. I cannot wait to try it on a laptop once I have one again.

 

PuppyLinux is easy to use, may not be as full featured to start. It is a 94mb, off CD hard drive or USB key, only 94mb initial download (java extra) It is not 64bit nor dual core aware

 

For keeping things simple, eh, fair enough, I'll give you that, though from my understanding the Red Hat-based distros are fairly popular and are different enough to warrant mention as well (though honestly, I don't have any first hand experience with them).

I disagree. If everything works well, and you're satisfied, then yes, playing around with other distros can be a waste of time. If it doesn't work the way you want/expect it to, and you have to do things that the particular distro isn't well suited to? I consider THAT a waste of time. Like the example I used earlier, Ubuntu just isn't designed well for compiling programs, in the situations that I needed to, it became a royal pain to do. Rather than trudge through and try to figure out which dev packages to install whenever I needed to compile something, I found switching distros to work much better for me.

Besides, if I just wanted a computer that worked, I would've stuck with Windows. I am (was?) very competent with Windows, and I understood, and could maintain it better than most of my colleagues (I work at an IT HelpDesk). It worked for me, I might not have been completely satisfied (definitely wasn't), but it worked. Does that mean it was a "waste of time" for me to try switching to Linux? I think you already know my answer.

 

Yea, I enjoyed PuppyLinux. I hate the default cartoon look tho.

 

The LAN card is actually what I was referencing. It's a Realtek chipset that's in about 100 different model notebooks... I have no idea about the wireless (which is Intel based) since I can't get it to connect at all to download the repo drivers.

 

A realtek that doesn't work?! Wow. They even support linux. I have a realtek 8139, myself. I'm really surprised. That would be a show stopper. PM me if you want to talk about it more.