Zorin OS - an Ubuntu derived distribution is even easier and even makes things more familiar for the transitioning user. I'd give that a shot. heard really good things about it. unfortunately that also uses Ubuntu repositories but that's fine for most new users.
Zorin OS - an Ubuntu derived distribution is even easier and even makes things more familiar for the transitioning user. I'd give that a shot. heard really good things about it. unfortunately that also uses Ubuntu repositories but that's fine for most new users.
There is no "best" version of Linux. It is simply a preference of how the distro's goals and if they match yours. The buntu's and those based on them are designed with the goal of being "easy" on the end user in that they will do most of the work for you at the sacrifice of customization and some choices. In this regard, they are often the "most compatible" but not always.
The question is how much work and in turn control you want to start out with in your hands? If you want most of it done for you then something like Mint or any of the buntus (K/L/X/ubuntu) will be the "best" for you. If you want to do more of the work yourself then there is Debian (buntu's base), Arch, Slackware, or Gentoo. Those are the prominent ones there are far more choices.
If you're choosing a buntu or Mint, then you need to investigate what DE you would like. And make the appropriate variation choice based on that.
There is no "best" version of Linux. It is simply a preference of how the distro's goals and if they match yours. The buntu's and those based on them are designed with the goal of being "easy" on the end user in that they will do most of the work for you at the sacrifice of customization and some choices. In this regard, they are often the "most compatible" but not always.
The question is how much work and in turn control you want to start out with in your hands? If you want most of it done for you then something like Mint or any of the buntus (K/L/X/ubuntu) will be the "best" for you. If you want to do more of the work yourself then there is Debian (buntu's base), Arch, Slackware, or Gentoo. Those are the prominent ones there are far more choices.
If you're choosing a buntu or Mint, then you need to investigate what DE you would like. And make the appropriate variation choice based on that.
Not at all - what he's saying is "All Linux Distributions are created equal." This statement is fact, no Linux distribution is any more or less compatible. If it works on Ubuntu it can work on other distributions (though lately thats starting to be less true since Canonical - the company behind Ubuntu has been making a lot of proprietary changes.) That said, Ubuntu and its derivatives (Linux Mint, Zorin OS etc...) are very easy to use, and are designed to be from the ground up - that said understand that if you use any Ubuntu based distribution you are using Ubuntu for all intents and purposes. That said you aren't going to find a Linux distribution that is 100% compatible with all Windows applications and games. It doesn't exist.
Not at all - what he's saying is "All Linux Distributions are created equal." This statement is fact, no Linux distribution is any more or less compatible. If it works on Ubuntu it can work on other distributions (though lately thats starting to be less true since Canonical - the company behind Ubuntu has been making a lot of proprietary changes.) That said, Ubuntu and its derivatives (Linux Mint, Zorin OS etc...) are very easy to use, and are designed to be from the ground up - that said understand that if you use any Ubuntu based distribution you are using Ubuntu for all intents and purposes. That said you aren't going to find a Linux distribution that is 100% compatible with all Windows applications and games. It doesn't exist.
I don't specifically know about HW monitor, but let me assuage your fears: everything you can get hardware wise in Windows, you can get in linux. Many of the linux programs will be CLI as opposed to GUI, but I actually find that more OCing friendly in the long run (makes it much easier to log data over time without relying on the specific program to do it for me).
I don't specifically know about HW monitor, but let me assuage your fears: everything you can get hardware wise in Windows, you can get in linux. Many of the linux programs will be CLI as opposed to GUI, but I actually find that more OCing friendly in the long run (makes it much easier to log data over time without relying on the specific program to do it for me).
You'll need a program called lm-sensors. It is CLI (no GUI). As far as I've experienced...Linux is very unforgiving on OCing in that it will let you know very fast that what you think is "stable" is in fact not and don't expect the same OC from Windows to be even close to stable in Linux.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tartaros
So you are talking about i could make my own? or what?
Pretty hard for me
I just want the one that are the best supported one that support the most common games and so on
Yes you could make your own. I highly doubt you'd want to do that though as that is called LFS (linux from scratch) and unless you have a deep desire to learn all of that it isn't worth for most people. But you can make modifications to any distro if you want though with the "easy" ones it can be more difficult depending on what you want to change.
And as long as someone ported the package/dependencies, what works on one distro should work on another (though those buntu comments are valid).
You'll need a program called lm-sensors. It is CLI (no GUI). As far as I've experienced...Linux is very unforgiving on OCing in that it will let you know very fast that what you think is "stable" is in fact not and don't expect the same OC from Windows to be even close to stable in Linux.
Yes you could make your own. I highly doubt you'd want to do that though as that is called LFS (linux from scratch) and unless you have a deep desire to learn all of that it isn't worth for most people. But you can make modifications to any distro if you want though with the "easy" ones it can be more difficult depending on what you want to change.
And as long as someone ported the package/dependencies, what works on one distro should work on another (though those buntu comments are valid).
I like the idea of that chart, but I question its accuracy. In particular, Mint and Ubuntu should rank the same in the "package" category as Mint is based on Ubuntu.
Linux Mint hands down. Based on Ubuntu so you get ease of use, but also includes all 3rd party "proprietary" non-free ( open ) codecs, drivers, etc without needing to fiddle, which for the completely new user can be saving grace.
I like the idea of that chart, but I question its accuracy. In particular, Mint and Ubuntu should rank the same in the "package" category as Mint is based on Ubuntu.
It doesn't make a difference. Pick one that works for you and use it. The only difference is going to be ease of installation between any of them. After the system is installed, pretty much any Linux distro out there is going to be relatively the same.
OCing comes down to you, not the OS. While the OS can help ( Windows being extremely lenient, and Linux being extremely picky ), it doesn't make a great deal of difference.
This seemed neat, it is a test you take and it suggest which distro you should try. No clue if it is accurate though. Although reading some comments of people already using linux they said it was very accurate.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Linux. Once you go penguin, you never go back. Unless...dragged...back....by.........Steam........Summer............Sale!
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!