Which Linux for a newbie?

Which Linux for a newbie?

Hey all....been reading all day till the ol'e eyes are bleedin in their sockets...still have no idea if as a newbie I should use Red Hats "Fedora" or Novell's "Suse"10.1" or ummmm unaauba or whatevewr it is called.....I am sick of windows and all its bullcrap and want to change, but dont want to become a programer.......can anyone help?,,,,anyone in the Phoenix area wanna give me a hand?

Between those go with Fedora. Their last release got much better reviews than SuSE or 'Buntu. They also have a more established community, more package options than SuSE, more 3rd party developers, and Core5 didn't require an apology from the development team for what was put on the market. I still can't believe SuSE actually released 10.1 knowing what was wrong and charged a nice sum of money for the boxed set. That was just wrong...I mean even MSoft has more scruples (a few more). Seriously, go with Fedora. I used to run SuSE for a long while but I really don't know where they are headed right now, and I don't like how Novell has handled their acquisition. For that matter no one seems to know where Novell is headed either at the moment as their board just cleaned house.

Originally posted by waxfetish:

anyone in the Phoenix area wanna give me a hand?

Almost forgot...it seems you have a lot of friends in the area: Phoenix Linux User Group

Thanks for the info...it is much appericated.....although the phoenix users group seem to not have any place on their web page to post a question, or get advise directly relating to specific questions..

Originally posted by waxfetish:

the phoenix users group seem to not have any place on their web page to post a question, or get advise directly relating to specific questions..

Phoenix LUG IRC Channel Info

Fedora Questions? Goto Fedora Forum.

hello waxfetish, not from pheonix area but might want to give some consideration on checking out suse as your first distro.

the reasoning being is, you still can use rpm files but not soley dependant on rpm files such as red hat/fedora

red hat and fedora are great linux's but you can easily run into the so called rpm nightmare, being, say you want to install a new program. you build it from an rpm

sounds simple enough to just type in

rpm -i yourfile.rpm

however here is where the headach comes in. you quickly find in order to use that rpm, you need 5 more dependancies which are rpms to support that one, and so on

suse can build off rpm's however with suse you can also build directly from source

./configure ; make

su
[pass]
make install

and your done.

also, suse has come along way. its a beautiful distro that comes packed with nearly everything you can imagine. its a great newbie linux that offers exeptional networking capibilities and programming platform for later as you grow

I dont bash other linux distro's and each to their own flavore. each linux distro is great in their own right, I just happen to prefer red hat and suse, and suse for a person just getting started for these reasons stated above

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

suse can build off rpm's however with suse you can also build directly from source

Is there some reason you can't build from source with Ubuntu or Fedora?
And you would still need the required deps whether in RPM format or source.

Not to mention the package managers wouldn't adopt a source build.

With the size of each of those distro's repos there is not much left uncovered.
Especially for someone just starting out....

No newbie should be building from source anyway.

yast isnt a used as a package manager itself?

however, building from source is always the fast and cleanest way to create with fewest headachs from not only my experiance but as far as every instructor Ive encountered for linux+ and lpi+ cert training would say too

this by no means is an attack on fedorah, I was trained on red hat, however, rpm's for a newbie can get to be a bit of a headache

ubuntu seems ok, I havent used it much but I wouldnt trust it for further use then just that of a newbie, such as if you later wished to run apache on it or mtu mail server, which really would be the next step from a newbie after learning their nix system

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

yast isnt a used as a package manager itself?

What is this is reference to?
And again, why can't you install source on Fedora??

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

however, building from source is always the fast and cleanest way to create with fewest headachs...

Okay, you've got a source file:

1. How do you determine the install directory?
2. How do you know what to enable (--with) in the build?
3. How do you determine what dependencies are required?
4. How do you keep track of what you installed?
5. Where was everything installed to?
6. How do you know what patch files should be used?
7. How do you keep track of security issues with your package?
8. How do you adopt into your package manager for use?
9. How do you uninstall if desired?
10. What about building python libs, ruby bindings or perl modules?
11. How do you attach needed .desktop files?
12. What about a build environment?

There are viable answers to each of these, but it is _alot_ of work and definitely not "fast and clean".
And it absolutely does not have the "fewest headaches".

An example: listed below a very common ./configure session for the package postgresql.
How on earth would a new user know which conventions to include?

 ./configure \
        --prefix=/usr \
        --libdir=/usr/lib/posgresql \
        --includedir=/usr/include/postgresql \
        --with-docdir=/usr/doc/postgresql \
        --disable-nls \
        --with-perl \
        --with-python \
        --with-tcl \
        --with-openssl

I dont know how you go about building source to have to do it this way unless your red hat

./configure : make

optional flags if your goning to maybe install php with apache etc, yet asnwers the original statement on as to why I recommended suse as best for a newbie over fedora

its due to the rpm headaches which is one main reason a team of creators came up with gentoo

yes, you can install via source with red hat but with some difficulty which is pretty much as you described for a red hat/fedora system building source.

ironically, I never had to do much more then a few occasional switches with suse for building source.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

yes, you could go through all this, or simply just

./configure : make

That will work for some packages but for many it will fail miserably.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

yes, you can install via source with red hat but with some difficulty

How is installing source on Fedora more difficult than with SuSE?

And you still have not taken into account all the other issues I mentioned.
Do you have answers for those??

It is in the end _much_ more tedious and difficult to install from source.

I beleive I answered all by stating at most all I have ever had to do was add a few more switches 'try reading your man pages', to build apache to run with php and postgresql

you again just strengthened my argument on as to why suse is the better choice for a newbie

hard to beat just ./configure ; make and your done except for those rare occasions =)

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

hard to beat just ./configure ; make and your done except for those rare occasions =)

Then you have not done much source building. Look at the package scripts at Crux, Arch, Slack, or Gentoo and you will see how it is your example that is rare. I have a Slack repo and can tell you from personal experience that it just is not that simple when it comes to maintaining a group of source packages. You count your blessings when it is but unfortunately that is not all so frequent.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

you again just strengthened my argument on as to why suse is the better choice for a newbie

In what way? I wasn't even referring specially to Fedora.
What I am talking about would apply to _any_ binary pkg based distro.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

I beleive I answered all by stating at most all I have ever had to do was add a few more switches 'try reading your man pages', to build apache to run with php and postgresql

No, other that demonstrating that you were fortunate, you have not touched on the following with regard to source packages in general:

- How do you determine what dependencies are required?
- How do you keep track of what you installed?
- Where was everything installed to?
- How do you know what patch files should be used?
- How do you keep track of security issues with your package?
- How do you adopt into your package manager for use?
- How do you uninstall if desired?
- What about building python libs, ruby bindings or perl modules?
- How do you attach needed .desktop files?
- What about a build environment?

actually what you seemed to have successfully avoided was the original posters question on the best linux distro for a newbie which was the original scope of this thread on the board. but far be it from me to clear up an ad hoc red herring to try and switch the scope of the original posters question

have you even used suse or are you just biased? the original poster asked which is easier, it is easier to just focus and concentrat on being able to get something done, or worry about being a network+ apache admin off the bat right away?

again, you answered my original statment due to what I just pointed out

have a good night and see you around on the mesages boards my linux friend =)

oh, and as for fortunate my friend

aparently I was fortunate to beable to run suse more then succesfully as my entire network including my firewall/router with no problem

http://my.opera.com/Simon_Magus/homes/albums/95426/south.jpg

but, maybe I just happen to have fortune dripping off me I suppose

anyways, g'night mate

Originally posted by Xian:

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

hard to beat just ./configure ; make and your done except for those rare occasions =)

Then you have not done much source building. Look at the package scripts at Crux, Arch, Slack, or Gentoo and you will see how it is your example that is rare. I have a Slack repo and can tell you from personal experience that it just is not that simple when it comes to maintaining a group of source packages. You count your blessings when it is but unfortunately that is not all so frequent.

I have to agree. Strongly. And I do build the vast majority of my stuff from source. That's definitly nothing you want to do to a newbie. Things like pkgsrc ( think BSD ports on drugs ) certainly make life easier but that's clearly for people who know what they're doing - which excludes newbies by definition.

Originally posted by Xian:

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

I beleive I answered all by stating at most all I have ever had to do was add a few more switches 'try reading your man pages', to build apache to run with php and postgresql

No, other that demonstrating that you were fortunate, you have not touched on the following with regard to source packages in general:

- How do you determine what dependencies are required?

Hmm... configure. Swear. Track down, download, unpack, configure... swear. Track down. Swear a bit more. Download. Configure. SWEAR. Update half of your userland. Configure...

Originally posted by Xian:

- Where was everything installed to?

Or rather - where did you forget --prefix=/usr/my_stuff and why did you end up with <package> in three different versions installed all over the place?

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

actually what you seemed to have successfully avoided was the original posters question on the best linux distro for a newbie which was the original scope of this thread on the board.

How did I avoid it when I already gave my opinion?
YOU enlarged the scope by bringing up the subject of source file installations.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

have you even used suse or are you just biased?

I personally have nothing agaist SuSE. It's just a distro.
I also mentioned I had used it for a long while.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

again, you answered my original statment due to what I just pointed out

If you can't answer some very simple questions about how to _properly_ (I'm not talking about you found a couple of pkgs and got lucky by only needing to use ./configure & make) manage source packages on a Linux system then you certainly don't need to be giving advice on which method another person should use on their computer.

Someone who does follow your advice on a consistent basis will soon find that their package manager is useless, they have no idea where their packages installed to, where the associated libs are located, how to update the package with security patches, what dependencies are needed, how to install the .desktop files, why they should NEVER install direct to the system files but use a build environment instead, how to remove the package and KNOW that it was done thoroughly, and so forth.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Or rather - where did you forget --prefix=/usr/my_stuff and why did you end up with <package> in three different versions installed all over the place?

Heh, well when you don't care about that (or most anything else relevant) I guess it doesn't matter.
I really need to start a "Break My Box" website and post all these great musings....

AFAIK there would be no entries from yourself.....

Originally posted by Xian:

Originally posted by Macallan:

Or rather - where did you forget --prefix=/usr/my_stuff and why did you end up with <package> in three different versions installed all over the place?

Heh, well when you don't care about that (or most anything else relevant) I guess it doesn't matter.

Come on, you know it's a goddamn nightmare and configure scripts are bound to pick the wrong version if there are several to choose from. Sure, there's always a way to fix it but it's annoying and troublesome. And I shudder at the thought of upgrading such a hand-built system without a package management framework...

But to stay on topic - from 2nd hand experience I'd recommend MEPIS. Caused me the least trouble.

I was going to say ... I know a guy on the forums from Phoenix who has a link to Mepis in his signature ... I haven't really seen him post anything related to Linux in a while, but maybe he could help. You might send bluesman2333 a PM and see if he's interested in helping.

Just go for kubuntu . NOt ubuntu but kubuntu (= ubuntu -gnome + kde) , they will send you a freecd, which is a install cum live cd , so you can try before installing, plus, the installer would automatically use free space from your harddisk. and the support and the community is really helpful.
btw whatever you go for, make sure you stay away from gnome, specially if you use anything other than explorer (the file manager). Trust me nautilus will kill you, with sheer irritation.

Gee....I was just looking for some solid advise.......didnt want all the arguing about stuff I dont have a clue about? Can't you guy use your soap box form about what is better elswhere? I wanted help....not watch a cat fight....if that is what I wanted I would go to the bar and watch mud wrestling

okay so once again....is there anyone in the phoenix area who can help a newbie to switch to a linux format......I use dial-up (yea I know Stone age)...but I have no ISP Install in my computer.....I just use the # to my isp...and use the dial connection in my network properties, then use opera.....I dont want all that crap from isp's in my computer.....so do any of the linux packages provide a dialer?...also I want to do a clean install, any advise on the best way to wipe the hard drive clean....the only way I am familiar with is using my ms install disks........

Just try Mandriva 2006, can be easily downloaded as a DVD image. It's pretty easy to setup also for a newbie.

Dial-up with 56k modems might be a major problem though, because most of these are WIN-modems.

I haven't used dial-up in a long time, but I think there's a dialer with a gui in both KDE and Gnome. In KDE it's called kppp, I don't remember off end what Gnome's dialer is called.

I use Ubuntu and find that it suits my needs. However, I see a possible issue with a user on dial-up. All the applications besides the basic stuff are installed over the internet, which will take bloody ages in dial-up. So you'll want something that has lots of packages on the disc and SUSE does have this. However, I share Xian's reservations about SUSE and add THAT Novell seems to have the reverse Midias touch: everything they touch turns to shit. I've heard some good things about Mandriva, but I haven't used that since Mandrake 7.0.

About installing, if you don't want to dualboot with Windows, the installer will format your drive for you as part of the install process and will set up with a workable configuration It will probably create a swap partition and a partition for the OS and the users (this will be your day to day log-in and the root) This is not really the /best/ way in my opinion, but it works. If you want to dual-boot with Windows, you need to create a seperate partition for Linux first.

Originally posted by ICQ_Eagle:

Dial-up with 56k modems might be a major problem though, because most of these are WIN-modems.

Isn't there a way around that now?

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by ICQ_Eagle:

Dial-up with 56k modems might be a major problem though, because most of these are WIN-modems.

Isn't there a way around that now?

Only for a handful chipsets, mostly those made by Rockwell if I remember correctly.

Originally posted by ICQ_Eagle:

Dial-up with 56k modems might be a major problem though, because most of these are WIN-modems.

Any serial (not USB) modem will work, as well as internals like the USR 5630.

Originally posted by waxfetish:

...didnt want all the arguing about stuff I dont have a clue about?

That had nothing to do with you but sorry about all the "noise". I'm a reluctant debater when it comes to most things but there are times when erroneous information has to be confronted. This was just a simple case of where some horrific advice was being offered and it needed to be countered.

Originally posted by waxfetish:

if that is what I wanted I would go to the bar and watch mud wrestling

Do they still do this? Ugh. I thought more of Phoenix.

Originally posted by waxfetish:

okay so once again....is there anyone in the phoenix area who can help a newbie to switch to a linux format

Was the IRC channel link dead?

Originally posted by waxfetish:

I want to do a clean install, any advise on the best way to wipe the hard drive clean..

DBAN Disk Cleaner or just reformat with something like Gparted LiveCD.
Your Linux install CD will also be capable of reformatting your drive.

Originally posted by waxfetish:

I use dial-up (yea I know Stone age)...

You really need to go with a distro that can offer a full DVD of all the available software so that you will only need to download security patches and critical updates. Some places like OSDisk offer DVD versions of many popular flavors for only a few bucks that you can easily install on your box. If I were in your situation that is the route I would choose unless you have a friend on broadband that doesn't mind burning the DVD for you. If so then great, but again be sure to stick to the DVD release. The idea here being that you do not want to get in a situation where the InstallCD only gives you a basic system and then expects you to download and install whatever else you might desire. On dial-up you could spend a month doing this and still be just limping along. I do know that these are available for SuSE and Fedora, but for others you'd have to check around.

Originally posted by Simon_Magus:

hello waxfetish, not from pheonix area but might want to give some consideration on checking out suse as your first distro.

the reasoning being is, you still can use rpm files but not soley dependant on rpm files such as red hat/fedora

red hat and fedora are great linux's but you can easily run into the so called rpm nightmare, being, say you want to install a new program. you build it from an rpm

sounds simple enough to just type in

rpm -i yourfile.rpm

however here is where the headach comes in. you quickly find in order to use that rpm, you need 5 more dependancies which are rpms to support that one, and so on

suse can build off rpm's however with suse you can also build directly from source

./configure ; make

su
[pass]
make install

and your done.

also, suse has come along way. its a beautiful distro that comes packed with nearly everything you can imagine. its a great newbie linux that offers exeptional networking capibilities and programming platform for later as you grow

I dont bash other linux distro's and each to their own flavore. each linux distro is great in their own right, I just happen to prefer red hat and suse, and suse for a person just getting started for these reasons stated above

,./configure

ooops don't have this lib, don't have that other lib either..I don't even know what this missing dependecy is .new user frustrated and goes back to Windows. There's plenty of time for him to learn to compile applications. I used to compile all my own stuff and spent hours looking for dependencies that SUSE couldn't be arsed to put on the discs, Knowing how to compile is good thing, but no need to strand him dependency hell right now

I would recommend kubuntu or ubuntu for a beginner (or fedora, but I haven't played around with that for some while, so I have no idea what's going on there), which one is up to the user (personally I prefer kde, so I'd go for kubuntu).

Originally posted by bluesman2333:

Originally posted by ICQ_Eagle:

Dial-up with 56k modems might be a major problem though, because most of these are WIN-modems.

Any serial (not USB) modem will work, as well as internals like the USR 5630.

True, but the vast majority has either internal win-modems (because they are cheap) or USB. That's why it's a problem usually.

ops, ya must of not installed fully then. only time I didnt have a dependancy is installing via rpm, yet still told me which rpm was needed.

I have just started using Suse 10.1 as my main opperating system. I've toyed with most Linux distros and found Suse the best one. Just make sure you have an ethernet box instead of a modem (be it dial up or adsl) I use the SpeedTouch 510. Get the box configured then suse will find the connection letting you do the updates before doing an initial login. Thus sorting any problems out. You'll have to install the graphics card drivers though which can be a little tricky. Hope this is a help

Kubuntu would be great. I use it for a while now and it suits my needs, and what is most important, it's based on Debian. The nice thing about Ubuntu/Kubuntu is that you can order absolutely free CDs through ShipIt, not to mention the great community at http://www.ubuntuforums.org/ willing to help. Download Kubuntu from here http://www.kubuntu.org/download.php. The Desktop CD let's you try it live, without changing anything to the hard-disk and install it graphically from the same CD if you decide to stay with it. Order the free CDs from here https://shipit.kubuntu.org/.

First off, if you want to go online right away, get an external modem.
This is not absolutly required, but unless you want to learn to configure modems in
linux right away, this will simplify your life.
External styles that plug into a game port or joystick port work great for 56k connections.

For a newbie, Suse is pretty good.
you can start getting your hands dirty right away, instead of just attempting to load the linux OS. some distros are difficult to load, if you don't know the lingo.
Ubuntu and Suse both load automatically as long as you have your bios set to
boot from your CD drive first.

Suse with the KDE option is simple to install and additional programs and app's can be installed using Yast Package Mananger.
After the OS is loaded:
For a newbie I recommend installing all the package groups in yast.
This will insure most things work when you try them.

Download the linux dictionary(PDF), this will help with understanding terms and commands.

*Don't expect to have everything work out of the box (Suse), most will work perfectly.
To make Mp3's and various Video formats work,
You will need to go to packman or suse gurus sites and download .lib-library files and
additional RPM files. (RPM > Redhat package mananger files, this refers to the first distro to use this style of installer). ie. you want SUSE RPM's for suse.

You need to know, what chip is in your computer, 64 or X86 style, choose the Rpms for the correct chip.
This post is from a newbie for a newbie:D

People want to play the popular media formats on their system in a "just works" way and I totally understand. Unfortunately, as it has been mentioned you just can't do that with SuSE, Fedora, Ubuntu, and so on. The reason for this has to do with patents and the legislation which supports them. I'm not making a case for or against this topic, but those are the realities. In short, it can end up being more difficult to get these issues sorted out than the actual installation of the OS. Plus, you've then got a set of 3rd party applications on your nice distribution that are not officially supported, might cause packaging conflicts or system instability, and will probably not be offered the same level of security updates as would be expected with the rest of the distribution software.

The best combination of ease of install and "just works" that I've seen to date is Vector Linux.

On Vector, things like Flash, Mplayer, and Java plugins work right out of the box. All the needed codecs are already present and none of the media applications are crippled. No need to install 3rd party packages or hunt down libraries to enable something just so you can listen to a mp3 file.

Of course you'll have to be able to sleep at night knowing you are a scofflaw.

Than again, even in Windows not everything "just works." When I still had Windows I had to track down codecs for formats as well. I've seen somebody recently have to do the same for Windows

There's a few other distros which are supposed to "just work", though I haven't used any of them. But I hear PCLinux OS (an offshoot based on Mandrake) is like that. Not certain if they actually include the de-css stuff to play commecial DVDs, that would violate the US DMCA, but if you're outside the US then no reason they can't.

Yes, you are right about PCLinux OS.
And a LiveCD installer as well, just like Vector.

Two very good choices....

Best linux starter distro: www.vectorlinux.com

And take also a look at the forum for questions and answers. Everything works out of the box, and installing is a breeze if you use common newbie sense

Forum: http://www.vectorlinux.com/forum2/index.php

Ok, do you want to format your hdd or write zeroes to it?

If you just want to format it *like you do with WinXP discs* like someone else here said most distros will format and partition your hdd for you as part of the installation process. If you want to literally wipe it clean by writing zeroes to it, there's Kill Disk *or a similar program*.

Also, most of the distros come with a dialer program, so no worries there. However, if you do have a win modem, be forewarned that only some win modems are supported in Linux.

As for picking a distro, there have been some very good suggestions here. I personally would recommend Mepis, hehe. But the best distro for you to choose is the one that works for you. So my best advice would be to first try out the live cds of the distros that have been recommended here - I mean really explore them and use them to see if it's something you think you can handle *and also to make sure all your hardware works*. Also check out their forums and see if you like them, because you will probably spend some amount of time there when you first start out.

Since you are on dial up, I would suggest also that you stick to one cd distros. As a note - Mandriva 2006 is available as a *excellent and better than the 3 disc set IMHO* single live cd that can also be installed, by the name of Mandriva One. I don't know about the other large distros - perhaps someone else here can clarify on those. Definitely look for distros that can be installed via their live cds so you won't have to download a live cd AND an install disc if you decide you want to install it.

Some of my highest recommendations:

Mepis *again, LOL*
Mandriva One
Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu
PCLinuxOS
Xandros

One more thing that might help since you are, after all, on limited bandwidth... OSVids. I know it will take a while for the videos to download but it'll take a lot less time than downloading entire live cds, lol. The videos usually show you the installation and a preview of various operating systems.

Hope some of this helps.

Use Debian Unstable

Ok, that was mean. I applogize Debian Stable wouldn't be bad, except the installer is a bugger... It would be rock solid, more so than even Ubuntu and the packages wouldn't conflict KDE is only version 3.3 though and some other packages aren't /quite/ the current versions But that might not be bad for a newbie the needs a stable system to learn with with minumal frustration, except with the bloody installer

just use mepis 6 -this is probably the best distro -

though kanotix is good

The one for which you can easily find loads of info on Google, meaning : more users, more problems, more variety of hardware issues and thus more solutions when you get stuck.

Forget all previously known.
Try Puppy linux.
In the following link you get it with Opera 9 included.

http://www.my-plan.org/storage/puppyLinux/

It is developped by an australian senior pofessor named Barry Kauler who write it from scratch.
This ensures smallness and velocity.
It is very small (about 70 M only).


Puppy, is a live distribution, meaning that it runs fron a CD.
Once the computer is on, it loads all the system into computer memory using a very small amount of it.
Running from memory, it works very very fast.

I am using it to navigate fastest because is no need of antivirus or external firewall.

There are a good forum. (Google it).
And the adittion of programas is a very simple thing.
I added Open Office and Skype, for example.

NOTE:
The peolple with internet connection with "modem" but WITHOUT router need download a program called adsl-start.pup
http://dotpups.de/dotpups/Internet/adsl-start.pup
( and after this, Right click, File manager, Rox, double click over adsl-start.pup. After install, run adsl-setup on the console).


Trust me. It is marvellous.

Cont. from my previous post.

If you use a dialled or an dsl connection, Puppy has a wizard to get connected easily.

For the medium users:

Puppy boots from Cd, DVD, or pendrives also.

It greatly configurable, and if you likes, it is automated to make a remaster, getting disks with your choices for backup or distribution purposes.

Does not need Linux partitions. Thoug a Linux swap about 1 giga it's not bad.
Your personal settings and the program with all your additions are stored in (you may choose the following):
1.- the windows (98 or XP) hard drive, doesn't matter if it is a fat or ntfs formatted one,
2.- or in a partition, or
3.- in a mode that Puppy people calls "Multisession mode" what it means that they are stored in the same cd (or better DVD) you boots from.

Puppy manages the Windows HDD, storing, reading, moving, copying and deleting windows stored files.
This allow to repair Windows.
Also it is possible to run an antivirus (ex. F-Prot linux is free) to deal with the most persistent windows virus.

If you need it, booting from a CD or DVD, it is possible not to leave traces of your computer activity.

Sorry for my english.

You forget to tell him, that most Linux distributions has a "Live" version. It means, that you download it as a iso, burn it to CD or DVD, put it to your cd drive, reboot your pc, and you will have a Linux running on your pc from cd or dvd and NOTHING will happened to your Windows instalation (just follow the instractions). As you can see, you can choose by yourself. Good luck

I suggest you try Kubuntu if you are beginning with linux. It has all the essential recepies you wud expect in a normal linux distro and wud not dissappoint you in terms of user friendliness and manageability. when you are comfortable enough with kubuntu then go for madrake 10 or mandrive 2006 free edition.