Linux What Linux version to start with??

In that regard Linux is somewhat more like Windows 3.1 than Windows OS since. When the 'Registry' was introduced with the release of Windows '95, configuration details, which had previously been spread all over the hard drive, were 'centralised' in one location.
Linux takes this approach, dozens of small plain-text files in various locations each independant and intially cryptic.

 

I was a Linux newb a few weeks ago using Mandrake 10, which so far is great, but I have Mandrakemove which is a live cd, doesnt install anything. If you have a seperate system then do an install, if not then try a live cd like Mandrakemove or another one would be Damn Small Linux (Live cd about 50mb iso)

 

I Recomend Mandrake. KDE Enviroment makes it prety self explanitory. You might have to learn some about the terminals tho. Not too tough. works great for me. I have mandrake 10.1. Use it for my router, printserver, and FTP Server.

 

I would be hesitant to recommend sticking with a "beginner" distribution such as Mandrake for longer than strictly neccessary. In fact, the same applies to most RPM-based distribution - if they're good for you out-of-the-box, then great. You can even tweak the configuration a little. But when you come to install extra software, or want to make drastic changes to the way the system is set up, then you may find yourself stuck.

I look at distributions such as Mandrake or Suse the same way I look at computers such as Packard Bell or Advent - off-the-shelf PC World nonsense. For those with a little more of a DIY streak, there are hundreds of distributions out there with harder initial setup, but orders of magnitude easier administration. The key examples on this front would be Gentoo, or (my own choice of desktop OS) Debian.

Debian is extremely minimal to start with, and all extra software is installed from the online repository of 10,000 or so applications (or third party repositories for extra stuff) using an extremely simple method. Installing the XFCE4 desktop environemtn under Suse, for example, requires 24 separate calls of "rpm -ivh", whereas on Debian, "aptitude install xfce4 xfce4-*" did it all. The end result is a highly configurable, moddable OS.

By all means start with a PC World distribution, but you wanna wean yourself off as soon as possible.

 

I think that's the whole reason I want to get into Linux.

So are the other releases you mentioned (Gentoo and Debian) easy enough that a total newb could atleast get it up and running and not be too lost? Or should I really just go with Mandrake until I learn the ropes a little.
I found the hardest thing when I tried to get into Linux way back is to "unlearn" what I know in DOS, I would like to avoid the having to "unlearn" one version of linux to switch to another. I realize I know not what I say but would this be the case?

Oh, your link doesn't seem to work.

 

as good a reason as any.

i'd be hard-pressed to recommend starting immediately on debian/gentoo. they're both very powerful, and some guides exist to get you started - but part of the joy in using a real distribution is in the freedom it offers you, and you may find it hard to get a proper feel for what you've gained if you don't at least try some of the other options. at the very least, mandrake has an adequate NTFS resizer in its installer, and debian/gentoo don't.

it would to a degree, but nothing particularly drastic. the big difference between distributions lies in how extra software is installed & managed - RPM based systems are much closer to the mess of Windows EXE installation than something like Gentoo's source-code-based Portage, or Debian's DPKG. Much of the real meat-and-bones that you'd want to learn - how to use the command line, how where and why applications live, are common across all distributions. The rest can be learnt on IRC.

seems fine here, but my webhosts ARE incompetant

 

Seems to work fine now. Thanks for the advice !