Linux with easiest learning curve?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I'm getting so sick of Window's idiosyncrasies that I'd like to try a version of Linux. Is there any
version that is closer to Win2k or XP than others? I don't want to spend 500 hours learning a new OS.
And can I have it lurking on the same drive as Win2k or XP without the Windows OS having a bitch fit and
being uncooperative? I guess removable hard drive trays aren't so bad though - if necessary.
6 answers Last reply
More about linux easiest learning curve
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Frank W. wrote:

    > I'm getting so sick of Window's idiosyncrasies that I'd like to try a
    > version of Linux. Is there any
    > version that is closer to Win2k or XP than others?

    Linspire and Xandros are intended to be "Windows-like". How well they
    succeed I don't know.

    > and
    > I don't want to spend
    > 500 hours learning a new OS. And can I have it lurking on the same drive
    > as Win2k or XP without the Windows OS having a bitch fit and
    > being uncooperative? I guess removable hard drive trays aren't so bad
    > though - if necessary.

    You can configure a dual-boot installation with a separate partition or
    three for Linux (normally it wants a boot partition, a swap partition, and
    the main partition). Most Linux variants can also run from a FAT drive but
    this is not recommended.

    It also runs well under VirtualPC or vmWare, which might be a less painful
    path--vmWare also goes the other way, letting you run Windows under Linux.

    Just remember this mantra "Linux is not Windows". No matter how great the
    superficial resemblance, they are very different systems. Personally, I'd
    say to go with something like Gentoo that gets you exposed to the nuts and
    bolts early on and in the long run you'll be a lot happier.

    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Frank W." <reply_to_newsgroup@please.ccom> shared:
    >I'm getting so sick of Window's idiosyncrasies that I'd like to try a version of Linux. Is there any
    >version that is closer to Win2k or XP than others?

    What do you mean?

    Linux can "look" like a winblow$, but that's not really an issue, is
    it?

    >I don't want to spend 500 hours learning a new OS.

    If you really want to migrate from MS to open source, that that's
    exactly what you will need to do, IMHO.

    >And can I have it lurking on the same drive as Win2k or XP without the Windows OS having a bitch fit and
    >being uncooperative? I guess removable hard drive trays aren't so bad though - if necessary.

    I use rack. Try it.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Frank W <reply_to_newsgroup@please.ccom> wrote
    in message news:37855oF5696o0U1@individual.net...

    > I'm getting so sick of Window's idiosyncrasies that
    > I'd like to try a version of Linux. Is there any version
    > that is closer to Win2k or XP than others?

    Something to be said for trying knoppix in that situation.

    No installation at all, you can run it from CD and its
    got a very decent manual and it looks quite like XP.

    > I don't want to spend 500 hours learning a new OS.
    > And can I have it lurking on the same drive as Win2k
    > or XP without the Windows OS having a bitch fit and
    > being uncooperative?

    Its usually best to give it its own partition and most
    version want a separate swap partition in addition to that.

    > I guess removable hard drive trays aren't so bad though - if necessary.

    They're certainly not necessary.

    I'd have a look at knoppix on CD initially, then install it on
    its own hard drive partition if it looks usable and then consider
    what you want to do after that if you like it enough to use it.
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Previously Frank W. <reply_to_newsgroup@please.ccom> wrote:
    > I'm getting so sick of Window's idiosyncrasies that I'd like to try
    > a version of Linux. Is there any version that is closer to Win2k or
    > XP than others? I don't want to spend 500 hours learning a new OS.
    > And can I have it lurking on the same drive as Win2k or XP without
    > the Windows OS having a bitch fit and being uncooperative? I guess
    > removable hard drive trays aren't so bad though - if necessary.

    This might be the wrong approach. An OS is a far more complicated
    object than paper and pencil, yet you probably spent years mastering
    them. Linux expects you to know what you want to do and it will behave
    in predictble ways that change little over time. The intelligence and
    competence has to be supplied by you.

    Windows lets you do stuff immediately but will continue to backstab
    you and change its behaviour in surprising ways. Linux expects you to
    be a competent, educated user, since it is a complex and advanced
    tool. It is also (other than Windows) a professional tool that will
    act reliable and predictable most of the time.

    Arno
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> shared:

    >Windows lets you do stuff immediately but will continue to backstab
    >you and change its behaviour in surprising ways. Linux expects you to
    >be a competent, educated user, since it is a complex and advanced
    >tool. It is also (other than Windows) a professional tool that will
    >act reliable and predictable most of the time.

    very well said.
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Previously Ann Onimus <Ann@onimus.net> wrote:
    > Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> shared:

    >>Windows lets you do stuff immediately but will continue to backstab
    >>you and change its behaviour in surprising ways. Linux expects you to
    >>be a competent, educated user, since it is a complex and advanced
    >>tool. It is also (other than Windows) a professional tool that will
    >>act reliable and predictable most of the time.

    > very well said.

    Thank you!
Ask a new question

Read More

Linux Windows XP Storage