-9

I need to make the move from Windows to Linux.

I just need an OS that installs fast, has the same (or almost the same) feel and design as Windows (Xp, Vista, Win 7, or even Win98 doesn't really matter), is easily customizable and which doesn't need 10,000 upgrades and reinstalls in one year, like most of the distros I learned about seem to undergo (most of them seem to be upgraded once or twice per year).

Anyway, as I was saying I need a stable OS that will function flawlessly even after 10 or 20 years, without needing a single upgrade, update or re-install. I am not interested in learning to use terminals or lines of code, I am not interested in gazillions of packages in their collection of software and applications, I don't need dozens of games or trying hundreds of new, cool and shiny apps, or anything like that. I will stick to the same browser that I've been using since it came out (mozilla firefox), I will stick to the same 2-3 games I've been playing since I was a kid, I'll also stick to the same Winamp, Winace, and other stuff that I've been using since I got my first PC. So, a huge collection of apps and even games won't impress me to install the latest and coolest distro if it fails to offer the minimum (stability and security)

I also need my OS to be highly intuitive (to look as much as Windows, if possible), to be easily customizable (drag and drop, or "click here click there done" type of customization, not typing alien coding into terminals and modifying dozens of config files and whatnot).

I am not very interested in saving on CPU resources as this year I will be getting a new PC anyway, with a minimum of 8GB RAM, SDD instead of HDD, too and so on and so forth. So PC resources won't be a problem anymore for my new Linux install (even my current desktop is able to handle a heavy Linux distro) but I need something that works and works flawlessly out of the box. I installed Mint x64 Xfce about a week ago and wasted all my time reading everything on their forum and while the folks at Mint forum are very helpful I feel like I will never get where I want with Linux Mint. And after doing some even more research and reading in Google and on other related and on-topic websites I feel like the more I try to learn how a particular distro or desktop environment works the more minuses it has and the more distros and DEs I hear there are. Which becomes s confusing and so down letting that you just feel like sticking to Windows but I can't (I WON'T) get back to it as I have already invested all of my energy and capacity of understanding it into it and it still looks like a program built by techie wannabes....

The drivers for my hardware is another biggie for me. After one week of research and forum asking I can't make the sound card and my (already obsolete) Speedtouch ADSL modem connect to the internet through Linux Mint, which is why I am looking for another Linux option.

I can understand that it's almost impossible for any distro to contain drivers for all possible device types and models, so I won't insist on this aspect. But at least I need to be able to easily make the devices work properly.

Is there any chance at all that I ever find such an OS among all the Linux variations that exist on the market today? I am not interested in server based Linux, or commercial or enterprise or other BS like that. I just need a OS to function on my desktop, that's all. I don't think I ask for much

So anyway, is there someone who has possibly, thoroughly tried ALL of the distros and Wms/DEs out there (or at least the major ones, those listed on DW) that can offer an unbiased opinion on which Linux distro is the solution I am looking for?

Rui F Ribeiro
  • 56,709
  • 26
  • 150
  • 232
user31261
  • 1
  • 2
    "I also need my OS to be highly intuitive (to look as much as Windows, if possible)" Windows and Linux are different. Even if you get something close to that (automagic DE which allows you to do everything with the mouse), be sure to get acquainted with some of the major differences. The evolution of this question, which is also quite new, may be useful: http://unix.stackexchange.com/q/62708/14831 – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 11:26
  • 5
    Also, you sound like you really want Windows, just without these problems. Have you ever considered trying to fix the way you use windows? What did you do? Did you run everything as Administrator or execute random EXEs from the web or enable flash and javascript for all web sites? Because I don't think it's that common for Windows to get infected that easily... – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 11:28
  • I tried everything a newbie would try and even more. I am not technology inclined type of guy I just use computer for basic needs (internet marketing, games, office, emails, downloads and stuff. I don't do programming, video editing and the alikes). With this said, I really have had enough with Windows. I've been using it for 20 years or so, but never had weekly issues with it like I had in the last year. What's more, I just re-installed it on a new formatted partition and installed only the basic apps (like I mentioned in my post) and yet, I still have connectivity and virus issues... – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 12:18
  • 3
    Which version of Windows? You do clearly have an issue with windows here, you should fix that. It is not normal to get "connectivity and virus issues" just after installing windows, unless you have been doing something terribly wrong. – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 12:37
  • That's exactly what I'm saying :) Something is terribly wrong here but I am not the one doing it. It just got done by something, not someone cause I am the only one using the computer. What really bugs me is that I don't know what's wrong as I repeat (for the third time??) that I did NOTHING different than what I usually do after I install Windows, which is install drivers, install media (winamp, vlc), install antivirus (usually AVG) which I download from their website every time anyway, install firefox which again I download from their website, install winace, etc. Been doing this for years.. – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 13:05
  • ... (continued) and never had issues on a fresh new Windows installation. Yet, this time I am having automatic internet disconnection, PC slowing down or freezing (sign of trojans but none of the AVs I tested found any), automatic (rare, that's true) system restarts (aka BSOD) and other idiot things like these. If you're telling me that even Linux has such issues then you can ignore my original post and feel free to recommend an OS which doesn't have them (or at least has less of them, and less dangerous/annoying) – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 13:09
  • 2
    Once again, what version of Windows? Also, where did you install the codecs and drivers from? Did you check all the binaries for vlc and the like to be sure they were virus-free? Did you install a firewall, in case you did not install a version of Windows which already has a firewall (and I think that if it is this case, that's why you've got problems as soon as you install it). Also, where did you get drivers, up to date drivers? – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 13:13
  • 3
    I completely agree with @njsg. You don't seem interested in learning how to use Linux, you're just trying to escape the problems you found on Windows by looking for something that behaves like it minus the problems. That's not what Linux is, and honestly, you're going to get disappointed and start cursing the linux gods. My advice to you is to take the time to learn to solve your problems on Windows. Random disconnect from the internet could be a problem at the side of the ISP, slowing down and/or freezing could be caused by a hungry process. Learn to diagnose. – rahmu Jan 27 '13 at 20:02
  • I don't seem interested in learning Linux cause I am not and cause I like simple and easy things. But I will learn it nevertheless. But that doesn't mean I have no rights to first find the easiest, safest, cheapest and most powerful solution. I am also "cursing" the linux gods for making such complicated things instead of keeping it swift and easy like its normal. They probably try to appear more knowledgeable in front of the non-geeky persons, I don't know but I know the syndrome as I had many geeky colleagues myself. As for learning how to diagnose and solve problems, I tried to do this more – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 20:42
  • than it's normal for a simple guy needing a simple working and flawless OS. But there comes a point when enough is enough. And that point for me is now :) With these being sad, I will say it again cause it's true: Linux is hard to learn, confusing, and complex, and could be made simpler. If people at Microsoft could create a simple OS so can the millions of Linux enthusiasts. Why they dont do it is beyond me but never mind. I will learn Linux too, as I kind of began to like it – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 20:44

1 Answers1

7

There are many things in your question which indicate that Linux probably won't suit you either.

So, here it goes. I need to make the move from Windows to Linux as I am too pissed off with the many system crashes, numerous and random internet disconnecting issues, trojans, rootkits and malware infections and whatnot, and all of these on a fresh new install of Windows on which I only installed the bare minimum (winamp, browser, antivirus, office, vlc, etc, etc).

No new downloads, no new apps installed, no anything and yet, system crash after system crash, virus infection after virus infection (and that's after scanning PC twice or three times with AVG, Malwarebytes, HitmanPRO, NOD32, Avast, Avira and whatnot).

If you are having these problems right out of the box, almost undoubtedly the problem is not Windows.

I just need an OS that installs fast, has the same (or almost the same) feel and design as Windows (Xp, Vista, Win 7, or even Win98 doesn't really matter), is easily customizable and which doesn't need 10,000 upgrades and reinstalls in one year, like most of the distros I learned about seem to undergo (most of them seem to be upgraded once or twice per year).

Most Linux distributions install fairly quickly, some processes are more involved than others. Most distributions try to cast a balance between having the latest versions of software and having a stable package ecology. Debian stable has infrequent updates, largely only for volatile or security reasons. Obviously that would mean that you do not get the latest versions of software, but that seems to be what you want.

Anyway, as I was saying I need a stable OS that will function flawlessly even after 10 or 20 years, without needing a single upgrade, update or re-install. I am not interested in learning to use terminals or lines of code, I am not interested in gazillions of packages in their collection of software and applications, I don't need dozens of games or trying hundreds of new, cool and shiny apps, or anything like that. I will stick to the same browser that I've been using since it came out (mozilla firefox), I will stick to the same 2-3 games I've been playing since I was a kid, I'll also stick to the same Winamp, Winace, and other stuff that I've been using since I got my first PC. So, a huge collection of apps and even games won't impress me to install the latest and coolest distro if it fails to offer the minimum (stability and security)

If you install a Linux distribution and don't upgrade it, it will probably continue working indefinitely assuming the hardware doesn't fail. However, you seem to have two contrasting ideals: in your last sentence you ask for "security", but you also ask to never update. As security is important to you you will obviously need to update to fix security issues as they emerge, but you also state that you never wish to update. If you're looking for a balance, again, probably Debian stable strikes it.

Aside from Firefox, it is possible that your games and Windows applications won't work in Linux (they almost certainly do not have native ports, and may or may not work in WINE).

I can understand that it's almost impossible for any distro to contain drivers for all possible device types and models, so I won't insist on this aspect. But at least I need to be able to easily make the devices work properly.

This is one area in which Debian may not satisfy you. Debian only packages free software in its main repositories, so your choices for hardware drivers will be limited to that out of the box. You can, however, enable non-free repositories and install any packages you may need after installation.

My recommendation would be to revise the way you're looking at this problem entirely. Windows doesn't suit your requirements because your requirements are in many ways conflicting, installing Linux doesn't make those contradictions any less so.

If you really want to try something, though, Debian stable ticks most of your boxes. It's a rolling release, so you shouldn't have to do anything too major in terms of upgrades. Worst case, you can only apply security upgrades and only do a major upgrade when your version becomes unsupported (or don't upgrade, and risk security issues).

Community
  • 1
Chris Down
  • 125,559
  • 25
  • 270
  • 266
  • 4
    Seriously. If all that happened with Windows, something must be wrong between the keyboard and the chair. It would be interesting to fix that first, because if the same strategy is applied to other systems, it may still lead to a similar outcome... – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 11:31
  • Hi and thanks for the fast reply. I can see why you think that my ideas are conflicting and I will try to make some compromises in the following way: I will agree to making updates, not a big deal but only as long as they have nothing to do with terminal or typing lines of codes into something. I just have repulsion for coding, don't know why but I just have it :) So, assuming that upgrades won't be a problem (and also the installation speed) which distro and/or DE satisfies my other requirements: stability (no crashes, viruses, or errors of any kind) and user friendliness? – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 11:33
  • Not a linux or otherwise UNIX-like distro, except maybe Mac OS X. If you think other OSes will have "no crashes, viruses, or errors", then you've got something terribly messed up there. Didn't worms start on UNIX? Do you think there are no linux rootkits? Do you think BSD systems are crashproof? Please... not even windows has any kind of special issue other than having been heavily targeted due to its market share. – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 11:47
  • Well, if what you're saying is true njsg than I really see no reason why I should start using Linux. The OS is even harder to understand than Windows. I really don't understand why you're saying such things. Obviously that I am aware that a few bugs here and there will happen to Linux but I didn't take these into account. I only needed to know which of the Linux distros and variations has the least (ye, let me say "the least") of them? As for viruses, do they really exist on Linux??? Cause if they do, it means that all these Linux forums and websites that 'promote" it are full of liars – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 11:53
  • 1
    @user31261 Linux viruses and security exploits are real. The fundamental reason that they are uncommon is because a.) usually Linux users are more careful with their operating environment, and b.) Unix has a much more overt permissions system. – Chris Down Jan 27 '13 at 12:16
  • @user31261 this is the internet, FUD is what you get the most. There's no such thing like a virus free system, or a completely secure system (unless it's in a secured, closed cabinet with no connection to the outer world. turned off). http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/30836/14831 – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 12:57
  • 1
    @user31261, you want to move to linux because of the widely held misconception that it is "virus free": most of this is due to the user behavior and to the saner defaults. The only issues with windows are the less than sane defaults and the component between keyboard and chair who may think it's nice to run every Flash applet out there as Administrator. If GNU/Linux was commonplace the day VBS.Loveletter was conceived, and many people used, say, Seamonkey Mail&News with some feature to run shell scripts by double clicking an attachment sent with the email, the result wouldn't be different... – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 13:00
  • well that's the worst news I've heard today :( If there is not even one stable OS... Anyway, 2 things I need to ask: a) what does FUD mean?? b) can you at least recommend a Linux distro and DE/Wm that has the least issues (remember that I am not into installing many apps and/or games so this shouldn't really be a problem) and which is easy to learn (aka no terminal or commands usage when I need to fix or install something) and which has bugs easily fixable (aka by running updates through Update manager)? Which of the hundreds of distros and DEs is the closest to fulfill these 2 requirements? – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 13:12
  • 1
    Many systems are stable. The biggest threat to computer security and stability has always lied between the keyboard and the chair. No matter how many different OSes one uses, the user is still the same. – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 13:16
  • 1
    A) Fear, uncertainty and doubt ; B) Microsoft Windows NT running EXPLORER.EXE – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 13:17
  • Ok, it's clear about the FUD thing. But I don't think you were being serious when you recommended Windows NT and even less serious when you recommended IE. I really don't like IE and as little as I use it, it crashes even more than firefox lol... Let me ask in another way then, maybe I will get where I want to if I put it like this: which of the dozens of distros you people have used required the least tweaks to bring them where you wanted? As I said I already have Mint and I learned to customize it the same day. So, which other distro is easy like Mint but more stable and secure than Mint? – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 13:32
  • 1
    Please try to run EXPLORER.EXE and see what opens. Even if it shares some code with IEXPLORE.EXE (hence the whole antitrust case), it's not the same. In fact, at least in Windows 4.10.1998, EXPLORER.EXE was the default Windows shell, if it wasn't already running, it would start the desktop background, the desktop icons, the taskbar... We can say it is the Windows window manager. – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 20:36
  • Now to answer your new question, one thing is what I want and what other people here want. Another thing is what you want. And it seems I'm not alone in thinking the closest system out there for what you want is Microsoft Windows NT. – njsg Jan 27 '13 at 20:37
  • Hey nsjg. Could you please be more specific by running explorer.exe? You mean by typing it in start>run or just opening the IE browser? Also if it's the run command I have to type what exactly I should see/see not and what to do with what I see? What is this tip for in the first place? – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 20:48
  • Is Windows NT still available anywhere and supported??? I heard that even XP will be discontinued or something like that. Why would NT still exist? – user31261 Jan 27 '13 at 20:49
  • 2
    Windows NT is the current, active Windows family. Windows 2000 is Windows NT 5.0; Windows XP is Windows NT 5.1, Windows Vista is Windows NT 6.0; Windows 7 is Windows NT 6.1, and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT – njsg Jan 29 '13 at 21:21