Completely Open-Source PC

[Padma]

Yes, that makes sense. And you can get by with mostly open-source drivers. For things like media codecs, if you want to watch non-open videos (e.g., wmv format) you need to bet 'non-free' codecs - available in the distro repositories. To watch commercial DVDs, youneed to get the libdvdecss module, again in the repositories. Flash - get the flash plugins. etc.

 

[El Koeno]

Personally, I recommend PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, and maybe Suse. PCLinuxOS, in particular, is designed to be newbie-friendly. So far, I haven't run into anything I've had to use the command-line for. (I do use the CL - I'm an old hacker, and am more comfortable using CL to get most things done.) Note, however, that for newer hardware, the current PCLinuxOS iso may not recognize everything, so problems may result. Mandriva One 2009 is more up-to-date, and requires less CL if problems arise. Suse / OpenSuse is also supposed to be very friendly, but I won't touch it myself, for philosophical reasons.

As you may have noticed from my short list, I recommend KDE (3.5.x, because 4.x is not yet ready for prime time) for novice users. And Kubuntu's implementation of KDE has always sucked, IMO. (And, as I understand it, they have switched to KDE 4.x already, on top of that.)

Well, you see, I'm not a total computer noob but I know that I WILL run into problems. A command line doesn't scare me at all (ehm.. it is like MS-DOS right?), as long as there's a forum or something you can go to for help.

I like a nice and slick interface though. I'm a sucker for nice and slick interfaces. I'd go to any command line for a nice and slick interface. It's just that command lines aren't very nice and slick. So as long as day-to-day operations don't require command lines (only stuff like getting MP3s to work, as mentioned earlier) I'll be fine.

 

[Murky]

It's doable I suppose. You could install a free linux distribution then install a bunch of freeware. You can do almost anything with open source that you can with commercial software. The only catch is that it typically requires more know how on the part of the user. I don't mind using open source software if it's good. The main reason that people adopt open source is that it's typically free.

Commercial software can still compete with open source so long as it's of better quality and is easier to use. As a software engineer, I prefer to use primarily high quality tools for doing my job. Most of the best stuff is built by paid development teams because they have more at stake. If you fail at creating an open source product, you survive and nobody really cares about it. If you fail at delivering on commercial software, you're out of a job.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

There are also Windows Open-Source software that I often use, but I suppose I can get by with Wine (or find a usable alternative).

This isn't going to be a gaming thing, it's more of a "productivity." The idea came to me when I was thinking of how I could save a few dollars on the laptop I'm planning to get.

Is it true that Linux works really well on older computers? 'Cos it'd be cool if we could all do this, get some old computers and put the Completely Open Source PC on it and sell them really cheap to low-income people or nonprofit organizations. (Just enough to cover the cost of buying old PCs.)

 

[Murky]

There are also Windows Open-Source software that I often use, but I suppose I can get by with Wine (or find a usable alternative).

This isn't going to be a gaming thing, it's more of a "productivity." The idea came to me when I was thinking of how I could save a few dollars on the laptop I'm planning to get.

Is it true that Linux works really well on older computers? 'Cos it'd be cool if we could all do this, get some old computers and put the Completely Open Source PC on it and sell them really cheap to low-income people or nonprofit organizations. (Just enough to cover the cost of buying old PCs.)

Poor people often buy or receive old computers as gifts. They often don't possess the knowledge to install or do much with Linux. If you did that, you would need to do most of the installation of the software for them.

Some people are buying netbooks with Linux on them. I do find it odd that people would pay $400-$500 for a netbook when it's considerably less powerful than your average budget wintel PC.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Yes, it would be install it for them. Some newbie-friendly distro. And for broken-down PCs, you could rip out the working parts and use them elsewhere.

 

[Padma]

Linux absolutely screams on new hardware. Yet it can function on nearly obsolete hardware, too. I know people who run it on PIIIs, and I even know of one who uses an old P2. A key consideration is RAM. If you've only got 64M, it'll be hard to get *anything* to run, although Puppy Linux, and *Darn* Small Linux may have a shot, there. If you can get 256M, virtually any Linux distro will work fine. At 128M, most can manage, although they will definitely be a bit slow. You would want to restrict installed apps (including the desktop) to 'lean and mean' versions.

Some people are buying netbooks with Linux on them. I do find it odd that people would pay $400-$500 for a netbook when it's considerably less powerful than your average budget wintel PC.

About a third of all netbooks sold come with Linux on them.

The idea is not to use them to replace a PC, but instead as something more powerful than a phone, yet smaller than a laptop.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I was thinking maybe 512M. That is what my original Windows 98 (and the one I just got a few months ago) have.

I was considering using my spare computer for testing this, but then I realized if it didn't come back right, I wouldn't be able to get Windows 98 back on.

I'm going to try it with the laptop I'm getting -- probably one of those mini-notebooks.

 

[Padma]

Up until this last year I was running Linux with 512M, and it worked better than my wife's XP system with 1G.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

So if I get a mini-notebook with 1g, I suppose it'll be really good performance.

 

[Padma]

It should. But a netbook *should* use a Linux distro tailored for it - in other words, don't get an MSI Wind netbook: they used a straight-up Suse install, and didn't even make sure that the hardware was properly integrated. No wonder the return rate was extreme....

Edit: I just happened to run across this: The Ideal Netbook Owner: my wife Carol.

 

[El Koeno]

If you want a cheap laptop where performance isn't an issue you might consider second-hand. There's shops that buy large quantities from companies that etc. that ditch their laptops, e.g. when they upgrade their hardware. As they have large quantities, they can afford to replace the laptop if it turns out defective. That of course means that you can afford running the risk the laptop you buy is defective. But you'd have to check if you can return it, otherwise I don't think buying a second-hand laptop is such a good idea.

 

[Murky]

If you want a cheap laptop where performance isn't an issue you might consider second-hand. There's shops that buy large quantities from companies that etc. that ditch their laptops, e.g. when they upgrade their hardware. As they have large quantities, they can afford to replace the laptop if it turns out defective. That of course means that you can afford running the risk the laptop you buy is defective. But you'd have to check if you can return it, otherwise I don't think buying a second-hand laptop is such a good idea.

Best place to find a cheap laptop is craigslist. Just make sure that it's totally legit before agreeing to buy it.

 

[Shadylookin]

Well, you see, I'm not a total computer noob but I know that I WILL run into problems. A command line doesn't scare me at all (ehm.. it is like MS-DOS right?), as long as there's a forum or something you can go to for help.

I like a nice and slick interface though. I'm a sucker for nice and slick interfaces. I'd go to any command line for a nice and slick interface. It's just that command lines aren't very nice and slick. So as long as day-to-day operations don't require command lines (only stuff like getting MP3s to work, as mentioned earlier) I'll be fine.

well linux terminal and Dos are only similar in the fact that they are command line. For all the flack that the command line gets I think it's an awesome tool for new users. instead of having to get instructions on how to use a particular GUI interface you can just copy and paste the commands right into the terminal and it takes about a tenth of the time.

There are also Windows Open-Source software that I often use, but I suppose I can get by with Wine (or find a usable alternative).

if it's truly an open source application then they probably have a port to linux or you could compile the source code yourself