Most Windows-like Linux Distro?

P

Praetorius

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2002
Messages
310
I know... I know...

But I really don't care about learning Linux. Manually entering commands at a prompt, scripting and all that shit. I just want to run Linux apps via point-and-click and drag-and-drop and that's all.

Are there any performance difference between distros?

If so, I want to install the best performing distribution.


Thanks!
 
There are very slight differences in performance amoung most distro's but they are so minute it is not really worth thinking about. As with most software, it will run best on modern hardware, up the gigahertz and gigabytes from there for added performance.

Linspire (and freespire now?) is an extremely Windows like linux distro. Take a look at a few screenshots . Another one is Xandros, take a look at a few screenshots.

With that said though, linux is not Windows, and although those two (and a few other) niche distro's look a lot like Windows, they are of course far from it. If you want something a lot like Windows, you may just want Windows it's self, particularly for gaming. If you want a safe operating system capable of helping you do homework, office work, internet and multimedia tasks, then linux might be good for you.

Basically any modern linux distro (rather it has been fitted to look like Windows or not) is capable of doing anything you need without ever typing in a command line or learning a programming language. Ubuntu, Mandrivia, Fedora, OpenSUSE, and Mepis are good examples of such modern distros.
 
Just as a point of curiosity, but what "Linux apps" are you interested in running that you can't run (a similar program at least) in Windows? To be honest with you...even with Ubuntu and a lot of the newer user-friendly distro's you are still going to have to learn some basic command line and will be at a great disadvantage in terms of using the OS to its potential without it.
 
Forget about avoiding the command line. Those who make distros might advertise that the install is done graphically, but once the thing is installed and you need to start doing things with the box you'll need to use a command line. Those people who know linux well prefer the command line and when they do things like make applications they don't have beginner end users in mind. They approach everything from their own perspective. Plenty of applications you might want to run won't have a gui period and getting support for them is quite difficult.

I did an Ubuntu install recently. I wanted to isntall Hamachi. Only problem is that Hamachi needs a command line to run. No GUI. Spend days figuring out an issue that I coudln't get help with on any forum. Finally get it working. Reboot and now it doesn't work. Pretty much needs to be isntalled the whole time. Find GHamachi that is a front end for it. There is practically no installer for it, no instructions and the support you can find for it is miniscule.

That's just one example. There are programs out there that can help you administer, but each one has its subset of users so again getting support for any issues is difficult. It took me a few days to figure out why webmin woudln't work. Different people using different versions of the app with different distros all have different experiences.

Linux can be point and click provided that you only want to use the basic built in programs with a distro. Basically, if all you want to do is surf web + play an MP3 you're fine. Otherwise, you realistically have quite an amount (potentially weeks for a new person) of work/frustration to get things going.

The Linux community won't be at the click and go stage for decades. My experience with current distros is pretty much exactly the same experience I had 10 years ago playing with other distros. The installer on the will be GUI driven, but nobody in the community has the sense to make everything else the same way. It's really unfortunate because it could make for an excellent OS(s).
 
I think you are being a little harsh there general. I good number of desktop users looking to use linux will be just fine never seeing a terminal. An example you gave (surf web + play an MP3) can be considerably extended to: surf the internet, check email, play music or videos, work with vanytype of document (text, rich text, spread sheets, pdfs, etc), view and edit images, chat via IMing or IRC, etc. Basically, the same list that would be applied to a Windows evironment short of one catagory, gaming. Where in any of that would a user be forced to use a command line? No where, including the install and update processes with all distros I listed.
 
Read up on my posts in the forum if you want to get an idea of how easy things are for new people. I'm trying to set some proper expectations here. The two products you linked are for purchase. One of them has a free cousin that is still in beta form and the other has a free version that has limited capabilities. If this person wants something out of the box that works and will be paying for (as much as it kills me to say this) Windows is by FAR the best alternative.
 
general said:
Read up on my posts in the forum if you want to get an idea of how easy things are for new people. I'm trying to set some proper expectations here. The two products you linked are for purchase. One of them has a free cousin that is still in beta form and the other has a free version that has limited capabilities. If this person wants something out of the box that works and will be paying for (as much as it kills me to say this) Windows is by FAR the best alternative.
Click to expand...

I am familiar with your previous posts and took part in a few of them. However, your experiences certainly cant be held as the 'proper expectations' for a new user to linux.

In my original post I pointed those two distros out because they are made to look and feel like Windows, what the OP was after. I went on to explain that that means very little, and that for usage many other (free) distros will be just as point and click, though lack the exact look of Windows.

My point was that your statements about point and click are stunted at best. A user can go a long way with linux without a terminal.
 
Try Mandrake (or Mandriva or whatever it is now). It's bloated and not the fastest but sure is one of the easiest and usually has no problems with newer hardware as well.
 
Techgage just did a review of Sabayon here:
http://techgage.com/article/sabayon_linux_rc2

This product has not been released publically yet, but it looks like it will offer a great deal of features right "Out of the Box."

I think anyone will tell you that the best thing to do is download as many Live CD/DVDs as you feel necessary and play around until you find the one you are most comfortable with.
 
ubuntu...synaptic + automatix for the win. What exactly do you plan to do with the computer? Also you don't necessarily need to learn linux to use the command prompt. Ubuntu's great because of the great support and the forums, as well as being very user friendly. You don't need to learn to use the command prompt, just copy and paste and follow directions =)
 
Antheus said:
ubuntu...synaptic + automatix for the win. What exactly do you plan to do with the computer? Also you don't necessarily need to learn linux to use the command prompt. Ubuntu's great because of the great support and the forums, as well as being very user friendly. You don't need to learn to use the command prompt, just copy and paste and follow directions =)
Click to expand...

ummm yeah you do and its better if you do, I just installed the gfxgrub to give you a more graphical bootloader, I created a new theme for it and it seemed to just not boot my ubuntu anymore, long story short I ended up having to pop in the live disc, and using just bash, the live disc doesn't like my 7800GT, and if it werent for learning the commands, I would of never been able to mount my / partition, edit the menu.lst for gfxgrub and fix my problem.

terminal and bash are the best part of linux, and an incredibly powerful asset.
 
As I Lay Dying said:
ummm yeah you do and its better if you do, I just installed the gfxgrub to give you a more graphical bootloader, I created a new theme for it and it seemed to just not boot my ubuntu anymore, long story short I ended up having to pop in the live disc, and using just bash, the live disc doesn't like my 7800GT, and if it werent for learning the commands, I would of never been able to mount my / partition, edit the menu.lst for gfxgrub and fix my problem.

terminal and bash are the best part of linux, and an incredibly powerful asset.
Click to expand...

yea it's better if you do, but no you do not need to. Maybe to set things up, which you can do by just following directions, but once things are set up what do you need it for? And I say this because I've set my computer up from how-to's and I don't touch the command prompt in day to day use. You may need the command prompt for setting up ubuntu, but definitely not for using ubuntu.
 
Antheus said:
yea it's better if you do, but no you do not need to. Maybe to set things up, which you can do by just following directions, but once things are set up what do you need it for? And I say this because I've set my computer up from how-to's and I don't touch the command prompt in day to day use. You may need the command prompt for setting up ubuntu, but definitely not for using ubuntu.
Click to expand...

ummm........ this is also very true, unless you like to dpkg, or use apt-get or aptitude over synaptic, then yes you really dont. amongst various other things, but yeah with the right nautilus scripts you could avoid it entirely.
 
So my new user experience isn't valid for others? Uh huh, sure. Is there something magical in my machine? I was trying to be helpful and give the person proper expectations. Things in the Linux world aren't nearly as rosy for new users/regular desktop users and people would like to make them seem.
 
general said:
So my new user experience isn't valid for others? Uh huh, sure. Is there something magical in my machine? I was trying to be helpful and give the person proper expectations. Things in the Linux world aren't nearly as rosy for new users/regular desktop users and people would like to make them seem.
Click to expand...

I did not say they were not valid, I said they are not 'proper expectations'. Meaning, they are not what the average user will encounter. Your other threads have very valid issues and points in them, no question there, but you certainly had a worse experience then most. So, going around saying that everyone should expect to have such an experience ("proper expectation") or not be able to stay away from a command line is wrong.

I will repeat the only important point needing to be made, and the reason I quoted your post, a user can go a long way with linux without a terminal.
 
general said:
So my new user experience isn't valid for others? Uh huh, sure. Is there something magical in my machine? I was trying to be helpful and give the person proper expectations. Things in the Linux world aren't nearly as rosy for new users/regular desktop users and people would like to make them seem.
Click to expand...
My experience with switching to Linux on the desktop was that everything worked out of the box no problem and even customizing some things and changing looks and themes and adding programs can all be done without touching the command line.
However, there are some things that MAY require you to say hello to the command line, though very rarely. These things may include installing a program that is not in a repository or adding a repository to your list, using WINE, and a few others. but these things are usually fairly painless and are just a line or two of basic commands.
I am far from a linux master and I'm still learning shit but I'm in the Terminal about a little bit more than I was in windows, I can say that for sure I think.

Over all however I'm really enjoying the linux experience with only one or two minor complaints. :D

PS: Don't expect to have Compiz/XGL working without the commnd line and a fair bit of grief
 
Perrupa said:
My experience with switching to Linux on the desktop was that everything worked out of the box no problem and even customizing some things and changing looks and themes and adding programs can all be done without touching the command line.
However, there are some things that MAY require you to say hello to the command line, though very rarely. These things may include installing a program that is not in a repository or adding a repository to your list, using WINE, and a few others. but these things are usually fairly painless and are just a line or two of basic commands.
I am far from a linux master and I'm still learning shit but I'm in the Terminal about a little bit more than I was in windows, I can say that for sure I think.

Over all however I'm really enjoying the linux experience with only one or two minor complaints. :D

PS: Don't expect to have Compiz/XGL working without the commnd line and a fair bit of grief
Click to expand...

ummm really compiz/xgl on an nvidia card and gnome is really easy, not much grief there. I have set it up several times with no problems.....
 
For a Windows user, I recommend sticking with KDE as your desktop environment. It is much more windows like than Gnome. I find Gnome restrictive, but I don;t bother with switching to KDE because I do most of my linux work from the command line. (Putty FTW!)
 
i would say Ubuntu. They make it really easy to install new programs, and that seems to be what you want.
 
Xubuntu using Xfce is pretty-Windows like, leaner and meaner and much faster than regular Ubuntu (Gnome) or Kubuntu (KDE). It's worth a shot. Besides, they all have LiveCD versions that you can check out without committing to any permanent changes. CD media is cheap. :p
 
The distros themselves might be user friendly, but the problem is that once you want to do anything out of the ordinary you'll be dealing with things that want to be installed by the command line and administered by it.

"I find Gnome restrictive, but I don;t bother with switching to KDE because I do most of my linux work from the command line. (Putty FTW!)"

This encapsulates why Linux has not grown as it should over the last 10 years. Once you want something not included in the distro, you'll be dealing with a program written by a linux zealot who loves typing, hates a mouse, doesn't write user-friendly instructions and doesn't care if there is a gui for anything. The distro itself might be Windows-like, but the programs you're putting on it eventually won't be.

PS. For those who say you don't need to use the command line. Check out this post:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1090367

It isn't like it is uncommon for people to use widescreen resolutions these days.
 
Setting up Compiz/XGL is usually easy with compatible hardware =).

As far as eventually finding something there is no easy to use/GUI alternative for, I would say there are few programs a basic desktop user is going to be running that there isn't a GUI alternative for. I'd say I'm a relatively advanced Desktop user and I have yet to find a program I have to use the terminal for. The closest thing was a program for .par2's, but QuickPar under WINE works FLAWLESSLY.

Regarding the LCD HDTV post, I would agree with you there that there are cases when you have to use the command line (an LCD TV may not be the best example being somewhat atypical, but the 950 GMA has similar problems in widescreen), but there's still a GUI (ugly as it may be) for setting up xorg. It is a valid point however, because I'm currently running ubuntu on a laptop and the hardest thing I had to do was set up my widescreen resolution (i did indeed have to use the command line), but even so once you find a HOWTO and follow it the problem's gone. I agree with you that setting up the computer you'll almost certainly have to run into the command line, but once everything is up and running you really don't need to touch it.

I do however believe that if you're gonna use linux, you shouldn't be afraid of the terminal. While not using it sure doesn't cripple your abilities, using it definitely enhances them.
 
Ubuntu recognized my widescreen laptop fine and put it to it's native res of 1920x1200 but when I mentioned before about XGL/Compiz I didn't say it was hard, I just meant good luck getting it working without using the command line
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top