Which Linux OS is Best for These Specifications

I am most likely going to get th v2000z laptop with these specifications:

Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home Edition with SP2

AMD Turion(TM) 64 ML-37 (2.0GHz/1MB L2 Cache)

FREE Upgrade to 14.0 WXGA BrightView Widescreen!!

ATI RADEON(R) XPRESS 200M

256MB DDR SDRAM (1x256MB)

60 GB 5400 RPM Hard Drive

DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive

54g(TM) 802.11b/g WLAN w/ 125HSM/SpeedBooster(TM)

12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery

Microsoft(R) Works/Money

As well as a 1 gig ram upgrade along with the 256.

What linux will fit my needs best if I demand a simple Linux which I may configure myself (with simple configurations, I am not an incredible OS code wiz) and may fit my needs as a programmer, web surfer, and music listen to-er? Also, which Linux will recognize the most hardware? Where might I run into trouble?

 

I would go for Debian Linux. It seems the best for your needs. And most hardware works on Debian Linux, so that is a plus.

 

Debian may be just too big to start with. Try Ubuntu: it may be sufficient, it is very simple, and it has very good hardware support (don't know specifically about ML-37 though).

 

I do like Ubuntu, but it offers certain problems.

One, I do not like how it installs so much software initially, I want really a blank slate that I can customize for my own needs (or can I uninstall everything on Ubuntu, and start from new?).

It also comes from the unstable branch of debian, if I would be able to work with a gnome GUI desktop environment with stable Debian (I believe Sarge) it might suite my needs best.

What do you mean by Debian being too big though?

Let me know, thanks in advance .

 

Ubuntu 64 wouldn't recognize my keyboard... Ubuntu 32 installed, but crashed immediately after the first boot. I combed through Ubuntu's forum and nobody could help me out. However, I'm very new to Linux and have read of other V2000Z owners installing it without issue.

 

If you want to customize it yourself then Slackware is the standard reference point. I read they have improved on the hardware support.
So far I haven't tried it myself.

 

Debian is a 8-9gig install. I have it on two dvd-r disks

 

Why is Debian so big? I do not mind an OS being big, but is it extra features that it is offering or what? I like simple OS's that offer alot of customization, stability, and safety.

Slackware, I have heard about it, I will check it out.

 

One Vote for SUSE - it can be huge - but if I remember correctly installition is total customizable. I run the Open Source SUSE 10.x on an old PIII - I use it as a database server (however I do have 1.5GB RAM). It has been very stable so far.

Fedor is another viable option (I still use Red Hat AS 2.X never Fedora) - was debating between that and SUSE.

I did install UBUNTU and did get Oracle running on it - but it was a pain ..decided to go with a supported platform.

Nice to have choices and better yet Free Choices.

 

Why don't you download a few live cd's and see wich distro supports the most out of the box. Or google for it , I found some links pointing at: http://www.linux-on-laptops.com/compaq.html

 

www.linuxiso.org

 

http://distrowatch.com/

 

Knoppix 3.6 is a good and stable version for beginners . Try that its like 600MB, download the ISO and burn to a CD and boot with it. Pretty good.

 

Distributions tend to be so large because they include pretty much any software you can think of. Office suites, programming tools for pretty much any language out there, numerous internet and network servers, network management tools, graphics manipulation programs, and on and on. Most installs that I am familiar with (Fedora Core, SuSE,) give you the option to select every piece of software you want installed, but you can also select categories of software and all necessary dependencies are installed as well.

Everything in Linux is configurable, however, be prepared to tinker extensively to get all of your hardware working on a brand spanking new laptop. Supporting the newest hardware is probably the weakest aspect of Linux, as a lot of companies do not actively write drivers for it. Heck, widescreen resolutions aren't even natively supported within the graphics subsystem; you have to set up a hack that runs on the video BIOS every boot.

PERSONALLY, I got fed up with using Linux on my laptop. If you want something that just works, with MAYBE the download and install of a couple drivers, Windows is it. XP may not be as customizable as Linux, but it is more than stable enough for pretty much anything but server applications. As for safety/security, being behind a NAT router, running a decent anti-virus program (I shy away from huge suites like Norton that take up a bunch of resources, but whatever you like,) and being cautious with what you download, you should have no problem with Windows.

That's just my opinion, but if you're dead-set on using Linux, keep a windows partition or another running computer around so that you can look up documentation if something doesn't work right away.

Good luck!

 

debian is cool. the INSTALL discs are 8gb, because a lot of the .deb packages are in the dvds. to get the base system running is only <1gb. i've installed debian plenty of times. it is NOT 8gb.

 

SUSE Linux is the best IMO. 1 DVD of 4gb and thats it