Now waiting for Linux Mint 7 64Bit edition.

if you can't find one with no hardware problem at all, take one with least problem and start asking uncle google for howtos. broadcom's b43 hardwares used to be hell to setup. they are pretty much hassle free these days.

if your hardware is rather new, you might want to try debian unstable branch. at least until you've come to the point of having everything working. then you can freeze it until it goes to testing.

it would help if you know your hardware. lspci, lsusb would be your friend.

ive been thinking to turn to linux from windows. but i have a question here... can linux support dx10 games and most of the 3d software??

Asking this type of question is like asking what is the best car but from my own personal experience I would say Ubuntu Linux or Linux Mint. Easiest to install, detected all my hardware devices. Only my Canon Canoscan 440DF and KWorld TV Tuner doesn't work. These 2 devices doesn't work either in the other distros I tried - Fedora, Mandriva, openSUSE, PCLinux OS, Sabayon Linux and ELive.

err i dont really think linux suits gaming, at least for now. u might wanna go for a gaming console instead for gaming :}

Actually you can play quite a few games on linux... I've played COD 2, Sauerbraten, UT2003 quite nicely indeed. And all that too on Ubuntu 8.04 64 bit. Check out the WineHQ site for what works (easily).

I have recently bought myself a reasonably spec'd home PC (Intel Q8400 quadcore, 4GB RAM, Nvidia 9500GT, 1TB HDD) and loaded in Ubuntu 9.04 64 bit on it. In terms of usability, so far I have found Ubuntu to be pretty alright - I can play videos and audio, download files via P2P and Rapidshare, browse the net, rip CDs, burn discs, convert video files and what not, but I have to be honest and say that if one is looking for something that works just like MS Windows, then one should just use Windows.

With the advice of a friend who's been a Linux user for years, I decided to keep an open mind and try Linux. I'm not regretting the move (yet)..

On the minus side though, I am finding the latest Ubuntu 9.04 64bit edition a bit unstable compared to the OpenSuse 11.1 64bit edition that I have recently loaded into my work laptop (dual boot with Windows 7RC). While Ubuntu boots up faster and operates quite a bit speedier than OpenSuse (probably due to Ubuntu's support for the new EXT4 filesystem), I have been experiencing some weird issues with it - the movie player (SMPlayer) sometimes makes a 'pfffft' noise and refuses to output audio until I exit and launch it again, the Compiz 3D thing often creates weird artifacts on screen when I run the GCompris educational games etc.

Maybe I should go with OpenSuse on my home PC, but since it doesn't support EXT4 out of the box, I will need to backup my data in the /HOME partition first, I guess.

Well, if Mint's 32-bit limitation is a deal-breaker for you, you'd be more limited in terms of choices. Many of the popular free ones nowadays by default come w/o proprietary codecs. But let's clear up one misconception first: it's possible to add the proprietary codecs using entirely GUI operations. Tools such as Adept and Synaptic are equipped to do so. However, why do most of the how-to's on the net give examples using complicated-looking command lines? My guesses:

1) Creating screenshots is troublesome compared to copy and pasting instructions, and
2) Once you get familiar with it, it's actually faster to go the CLI way. Just cut and paste, easy-peasy. However intuitive a GUI is, a mouse is never as accurate as fast key typing and copy/paste.

Installing proprietary drivers such as NVidia, Broadcom etc is simple. I use Kubuntu 9.04 and it actually tells me that I still lack some proprietary drivers and I have a nice GUI to download and activate them. It takes all of 5 mins (if Screamyx doesn't screw you up first) to get this done. For the proprietary codecs, in 9.04, I have a nice alert that tells me I may need to install additional codecs the first time I run Amarok (music player) and Dragon (video player). And yes, it allows me to install with a button click too.

Let me give you another perspective on the "ease of installation" compared to Windows: every time I install Windows XP (no experience using Vista, sorry) on one of the machines in the office, the default install is virtually unable to get on the net for anything. Both ethernet and wifi can't be detected. Sure, if I have the installer ready, I just need to slot in the disc and run setup.exe. But I've been caught without the right drivers many times and it's a chore to search for them (especially if the machine is a LowYat assembled variety). Ditto for the graphics drivers and sometimes even the USB controllers. On top of that, I have a batch of laptops in the office where XP installation can't even detect the freakin' hard drive (due to XP CD lacking the correct SATA drivers). Yes, almost all of these issues can be resolved using the exact same workflow: download and execute setup.exe. Predictable. Tedious.

Using my Kubuntu live CD, not everything works out of the box. Fine. But basic things like ethernet and non-3D drivers are typically settled out of the box. So even if my wifi doesn't work, I don't need another machine just to download the drivers 'cos I can use the ethernet connection instead.

Getting over Linux's own set of peculiarities no doubt has a learning curve. But come on, if you're a power user on Windows, I'm sure you had some sort of learning curve as well. I'm pretty darned sure that most of the codecs you use on Windows don't come by default. And you had to hunt them down one by one (alright, I concede that CCCP is a life-saver, but that wasn't Microsoft either). In Kubuntu, I had to install basically one meta-package to download virtually all the codecs I need. Yes, I did have to hunt that line down on Google, but that was a one-liner coming from one search.

One additional advantage of Linux's package management: even third party apps not included in the defaut repos can be updated readily using the same mechanism that you use for basic OS updates. You mentioned that you'd probably use VMWare or VirtualBox to run Windows. I prefer VirtualBox nowadays. I did not download the .deb package to install manually. What I did was to add the 3rd party repo for VirtualBox and install using the package manager. I've successfully gotten 3 updates to VirtualBox over the past few months just doing this. How often do you go hunting for the latest ATI drivers by visiting their web site manually if you were using Windows?

I strongly suspect that your (and many others') definition of "easy to setup" for Windows stems from the fact that you're familiar with it. Many others here would strongly disagree with you, but that's because we are familiar with Linux. You'd only be able to see it from our point of view if you actually took the effort to experience what we've been experiencing. Unlike yourself, most of us definitely would have had previous experience using Windows. So I think it'd be fairer for us to make a comparison

Good luck, Wong

Mint 8 seems nice. Anyone have any thought on it?

I m downloading Linux Mint 8 64Bit edition...to check out the elegance feel...

linux gui is still pretty crap compare to other OS'es

I not meant to insult you, but your question shows that you are not ready to "turn to linux".
do some simple research, about what linux actually, and how it works.
You may start with multiboot first. Try to avoid ubuntu as it try to be as close to windows in term of simplicity thus you may not get much input from it, but dont blindly jump into slackware or genntoo, or you'll ended up learning nothing .'intermediate' distros such as openSUSE and Fedora, or debian if you want 'ubuntu-ish' enviroment will do; these distros will provide good platform for beginner to learn.

---

Added on March 5, 2010, 1:37 amNo, it was your GC that crappy enough to make compizfusion won't run on your machine.
Or you are ignorant enough for not even try to learn how to tweak your GUI.

unlike windows that designed with home and office user in mind, or mac that obviously for eye candy and so-called stability(because there are nothing to tweak to begin with); Linux is developed primarily to power the servers in first place (who the retard that want flashy server interface?). Linux as desktop OS's is not well established as its server counterpart, but with skillful yet creative tweaks it will lure Steve Job's fans out from its darkness captive.

This post has been edited by failed.hashcheck: Mar 5 2010, 11:53 AM

arch linux ... the fastest linux

i suggest u go for linux mint..
much more user friendly...
and its alot better for new user
its bundled package kinda great.. u cant play videos, youtube all thing out of box edy..

ok

I've tried some linux distro, most of them have HCL- hardware compatibility list. so u can check ur hardware there or simply run the live cd version to test your harware before you install them. i personally recommend Ubuntu for beginner like me, just enable community repositories for 3rd party driver and software. Or maybe you can buy professional support from Ubuntu, since you are willing to pay . For me, I'm happy with openSolaris for other task besides online gaming

Any issues with Opensolaris on HArdware compatibity. I plan to run on hp mini 210.

OpenSolaris does not use the Linux kernel. I guess you probably have to test it to know..

anyone currently using the latest Linux Mint? Please share info.

For all of you who are facing difficulties with Broadcom wireless and OpenSuSE - there is a solution.

You just have to add the "packman" repository to the software manager and install the package "broadcom-sta".

http://packman.links2linux.de/package/broadcom-wl

SuSE even provides a one click install, when you follow this link, you don't even need to add the repository...