Best client linux version to use

[HostHell]

Hey guys,
I was wondering what client os you found to be the best and easiest to use for web design, and development and supporting your customers.

[Robert]

Server based? FreeBSD (Unix).

[HostHell]

client os, you know, I guess thats the term? like what you would use for everyday tasks.

[Robert]

Originally posted by HostHell:

client os, you know, I guess thats the term? like what you would use for everyday tasks.

I'm a Windows person. I won't get into the details, but anyone who says that Linux is more secure than Windows is a fool. There are necessary measures one would need to take to "safeguard" a linux machine, those measures goes for Windows as well.

[HostHell]

:stupid:

[patrick]

Mac for desktop, Windows 2000 for a games/relaxing machine, Red Hat and Cobalt for testing :)

I'll happily say that the Mac software does all the serious stuff and the Windows is hardly touched for anything but playing. The Mac is BSD based so I guess that gets my vote :D

[EthicalDesign]

I'm using redhat for my little linux box to develop web apps on but linux still isn't a viable alternative to windows for web design, at least if you want to use adobe or macromedia stuff. I know there's the gimp and web design apps for linux but none of them are as good as adobe or macromedia software yet.

The mac is probably a good bet if you want the advantage of running a unix based system at the same time as having access to industry standard design software.

I've found redhat's desktop (easy switching between gnome, kde and other window managers) to be very good but it's coming to the end of its life soon and being replaced with the enterprise version and fedora. I haven't tried fedora out yet but I've heard it's very good.

[websterworld]

Originally posted by HostHell:

client os, you know, I guess thats the term? like what you would use for everyday tasks.

try SuSE 9 its very user friendly. :cool:

[Ross]

SuSE....it's just......so gooooooooooooood.

[Sargek]

I'm a Windows person. I won't get into the details, but anyone who says that Linux is more secure than Windows is a fool. There are necessary measures one would need to take to "safeguard" a linux machine, those measures goes for Windows as well.

Linux properly setup is vastly more secure than XP properly setup any day. XP was never designed as a true multi-user platform and thusly is a swiss cheese security nightmare. Win2k and the server platforms are a completely different story. GNU/Linux was designed from the ground up as a true multi-user platform and properly setup is far more secure than Windows. Nothing is infallible though, so both platforms have vulnerabilities.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/linux_v_windows_security/ gives an excellent perspective on this hotly debated topic. My two cents...

[alex042]

Anyone tried the linux-based Linspire?

[ats-tech]

Hmmm... Idno... *looking down at my signature*

I've really come to like Fedora Core, and with FC3 coming out recently now would be a good time to give it a try. For web design, I would recommend getting Nvu (http://www.nvu.com), and for development I guess it really depends on what type of development you're going to be doing.

I highly recommend Fedora Core.

[linux-tech]

anyone who says that Linux is more secure than Windows is a fool.

Not to take this teribly off topic here, but that is 100% false.
Linux is MUCH more secure than Windows ever was, can or will be. Admittedly, you have to protect both, but that's a proactive thing. How do I mean? A few examples here.

A> Email:
When dealing with viruses, linux is 99.999% secure (sure there are the few, very few that get in). WHY? Because with Linux you have to specifically click on xxx program to do something, you KNOW what is going on in the background. Windows? Not so.

B> Browsing:
Internet Explorer (and thusly explorer) is the worst browser imaginable for hacks. 99% of the hacks, spyware and the like are designed with IE in mind.

C> Response time:
Every time something comes up that is "critical", Microsoft dulls around and waits forever to address things. The Linux community handles this MUCH better, because everything is "open source" for the most part, meaning that you can patch and fix the product and problem yourself. Voilla, instant response, or damn near it.

The ONLY thing WIndows has Linux beat on is usability, right now. The only reason THAT is is because most developers develop specifically for a Windows based OS.


Now, to address the original poster's question:
If you're starting out with Linux, don't go with Fedora as your home OS, just trust me there. You'll regret it. I've been using Various Linux OS'es for well over 5 years now (I think it's closer to 8, but not sure atm), and have tested a TON of the distributions for both home and away use. The best, IMHO for home , new users is going to be hands down Mandrake or Suse.

Why?
Mandrake has one of the EASIEST setup utilities available to mankind. It's intuitive and most of the work is done for you. The same goes with Suse. In addition, you don't have to play too much with the GUI to get it to work as you wish it to. With redhat (sorry, Fedora), you are stuck with BlueCurve, or their modified KDE which sucks major big ones.

In addition, Redhat yanked mp3 support from their distrobutions starting with psyche (8), which was when they pulled the BlueCurve crap. While this CAN be fixed with an RPM, why should anyone have to deal with having to do that? It's just more work for the end user.

Mandrake and Suse BOTH have excellent packages available and wonderful hardware support. Redhat is very lacking in the "package" department compared to these two from what I've seen.

If I were to do it all over again, knowing what I know now, mandrake woudl be the dl of choice. Suse is good, but you're going to be hard pressed to find suse (the latest) online, and they want like $90 for the pro/home versions iirc.

Good luck.

[JSpired]

Anyone tried the linux-based Linspire?

I have and it's OK. If you have previous desktop Linux experience, you probably won't like it. It was too "locked down" for me. I've been using Linux on the desktop for at least eight years. That said, I put it on my Grandparent's notebook and they absolutely adore it. If it works for you, great! They have a live cd, so you can check it out before installing and I'd recommend that.

Back to your original question, the poster above me gives excellent advice. Mandrake and Suse are great for new Linux users and seasoned users. I don't think you can go wrong with Suse! I tend to prefer that over Mandrake. Personally, I use Ubuntu Linux now, but it does take some extra configuring..

[alex042]

What is the typical program compatibility of these desktop linux platforms for running something from a microsoft windows platform? Do applications need to be specifically made for linux or will those made for windows work also? Or maybe there's a virtualpc type of program for linux to run windows applications?

[ilves]

I have been using Ubuntu Linux (http://www.ubuntulinux.org) for a month or so now and I like it so far. It's easy to manage with the Synaptic package manager (GUI version of apt-get) and plenty of packages are available. Ubuntu is based on Debian but it's more user friendly.

Tried Suse earlier (the free version). It doesn't include many packages so there was plenty to do before I had everything I needed and rpm dependencies are no fun..

[XeHoster]

Ubuntu is good. Anyone tried it before???

[thenynoc]

I've used it before and I really liked it. It was my favorite.

[acidbase]

This post started off 2 years ago and both ubuntu and Suse have changed quite alot. I have been using both since their earlier version and stayed with SUSE 10 when it was out.

The reason for choosing that is because I use that as a workstation and there are more programme that run in suse than in debian format (at least the packaged ones). Tired to start make, install and configure in a client os. Fedora maybe a good option also except that I prefer YAST than yum for its GUI interface. More options in YAST to play around with.

[darksun]

I like fedora, it was pretty fun to use.

[acidbase]

Has anyone used the latest ubuntu desktop and server set?

The desktop set looks pretty decent.

[XDeCX]

centOS or Fedora Core 4 id say

[acidbase]

I would think that even though CentOS is good for server and workstation for its stability. It is not very ideal for desktop because of the amount of package available for desktop use or rather they tend to keep the version to the most stable to ensure its stability.

As a desktop, i suppose people will still want to be slightly experimental to gain the cutting edge tech somehow. Just my feel.

FC4 or FC5 will be good if you have previously tried to use Linux. Good system with a learning curve i think.

[fnh]

Suse 10 with nice GUI.

[XHIServices]

centos all the way for me

[watchdoghosting]

For desktop users - Ubuntu. It just works.

For servers - FreeBSD, CentOS, and OpenSuSE

[acidbase]

I think ubuntu works and I think gnome also contributed to the success. Kde tends to be abit buggy somehow while I use Kubuntu & OpenSuse 10.1 for desktop.

For server, I would have to admit Centos is the choice. Very stable and lots of help from RH engineers/technicians. Not sure OpenSuse is fine for server use. Debian is fine but I somehow find that Centos update patches quicker than in Debian.

Just my view.

[anthony1414]

I like redhat best.

[acidbase]

How is Redhat in the WS version lately? I had moved on to SUSE and Ubuntu for a long time. Has yum in GUI form been very user-friendly? How about the use of SELinux?

Just to check. For server, this has been a wonderful software.

[alvarez16]

I usually go with CentOS.

Thanks

[anthony1414]

I like redhat best and I use it for gaming servers.

[bestofdata]

Personaly i like UBuntU, its a great distro combind with some Compiz+XGL :)

[comforthost]

Try Ubantu.. Secured, powerful and user friendly.

[sfxdip]

I prefer UBUNTU..

[rayAH]

UBUNTU is the best..

[scribby]

I use CentOS for my server and figured I would download it and give it a go on my home PC and found it quite easy to use, would recommend it 100%

[nwahosting]

I do my web design on a linux box, there are many if not more tools for linux. bluefish, screem, kwebdev, cssed, gvim, nano, gimp. i could go on and on

[ScalaHosting]

Ubuntu, CentOS are good ones.

[vpsville]

For a workstation Ubuntu is king right now. Easier to use than Windows or a Mac.

[hostingac]

For user desktop use Ubuntu, you will get the best on it.
For servers im sure that Debian is an great choice

[hostdime-roman]

For Desktop for my personal opinion Ubuntu, For Server CentOS...

[mr_brain]

kubuntu is nice

[Garry]

Hi,

Normally I use Windows XP.

I do have an old PC (P3 500mhz CPU and 384mb Ram) with CentOS 4 installed with KDE on it. What I liked with it, everything worked out the box, once I had installed and it seems fast.

I normally use it for Website testing and website changes on it

I haven't used any other Linux OS, so there maybe better ones

[CrystalGard]

If you're a Windows person, I'm going to personally recommend Ubuntu, or even Fedora for use. Not that I'd personally use them unless I needed a quick desktop environment, but I know that it'd be the best environment for ease of use for most people.

[damansk]

Red Hat Linux.

[adaliabarclay]

Ubuntu is best for people those also like to use windows ... i Also use windows for my regular work but if i have to use linux for some work then i like to use ubuntu ... i never use any other linux client

[brandonp]

my current linux choice is Arch linux. if you enjoy doing some of the setup manually and have some knowledge of linux it is a nice distro the only thing lacking maybe some packages, doesn't quite have the user base as say ubuntu does. so far there is very little that I can't install via pacman.
my current bsd choice is FreeBSD, I really love the ports system and just the overall design of the system. it can make a great desktop depending on your needs and is always getting better. PC-BSD appears to be working to make FreeBSD a great desktop but I can't say I have used it.
of course selecting a distro can be like trying on shoes... sometimes they fit sometimes they don't.

[Belier]

Linux distro always depends in what are you going to use. Ubunto is nice, but use lot of resources. OpenSUSE is good for low-specs pcs. CentOS for servers of course =D

[philsout]

If you're referring for web server OS, consider using centos or fedora.

[vibesh]

thanks for sharing this nice info with us.
hoping more from u.