I have only used Windows for 20 years, but now my wife has a small business with 8 computers in use at 3 locations, and I cannot afford to place new winXP/MS Office installations where she wants. I have downloaded OOo2.0, and have heard I should try Linux...
So I downloaded the images debian-31r2-i386-binary-1.iso and debian-31r2-i386-binary-2.iso. However, when I burned them to CD (w/ old version of NERO), they came across one single iso file per CD, w/out any specific files on either disk.
Before I take these CDs to the hardware sites and attempt install, I have some questions (and would welcome advice for the questions I have not yet thought of):
Am I on the right track w/ OOo2.0 and debian Sarge?
Do I need to reburn the CDs? How?
I would also welcome a general comment re: 'what am I getting into?' Will this be the beginning of high-maintenance commitment, needing to manually configure every new peripheral that winXP would automatically install? etc.
Thanks for the opportunity to get advice at the get-go; I appreciate it!
Originally Posted by Camillo
OpenOffice is a perfectly acceptable alternative to MS Office and you should be just fine going that route. As to Linux, it really depends. What kind of business? What software requirements? Any special hardware?
Plain Debian is not a good choice for a beginner. You should consider Ubuntu, Linspire or Xandros if you want a Debian based system.
TANSTAAFL
I couldn't have said it better myself. Another vote for Ubuntu.
Advise for burning with Nero though. You need to burn using image file instead of normal data burning. What version of nero are you using?
I am quite impressed with the helpfulness of this forum.
Instead of burning a debian cd set, I have sent for a shipment of ubuntu cds.
Your other advice (to check the applications needed for the business) is on target, as it appears that my wife's salon software requires windows. I may make linux a personal project at this point, and use it on older computers currently running win98se. Something tells me it won't be long after the cds ship (in early June plu 4 to 6 weeks to ship) that I'll be back asking for help; your prompt and practical advice has made me feel that I can give Linux a try!
Ubuntu shipit can take a bit long so if you have relative speed and burner, it's easier to burn it and try it while waiting for pressed cd.
1) There is a large selection of Open Source software available to run on Windows. Check out this link http://osswin.sourceforge.net/
2) I have to accept the recommendation by the experts of Ubuntu. I use Kubuntu, a version of Ubuntu. My experience is , however, that you will get a lot of applications you don't need/will never use. It will take time to take away/de-clutter. I wonder about something like PCLinuxOS mini-me. This is a minimal distribution which can then be added to over the internet.
This is HOW you installed your system. If you choose the default installations (such as server, workstation), then a set of default programs are installed for you even if you need it or not. For example, I have like ppp-config installed even if I don't even have a modem in my system. That's what you get for being lazy but it's good for someone just starting out.
I always choose the advanced install option, that will install very minimal amount of base-install and then I work my way up. My motto is, if you don't know what it's, you probably don't need it anyway.
Hi ,
You can run OOo2.0 on MS windows operating system too.But as a matter of fact it is better to use linux because it is much more powerful.
This will be over soon, and then I can ...
Well, it's NOT a matter of whether you can run Oo.o. It's a matter of paying for OS. Last time I checked, a copy of XP costs 239 bucks. If you times that with 8, easily 2K. That's only base OS. With MS forcing you to upgrade, it will cost that much every 3 years or so.
If you REALLY need a program or two, go with VM type of stuff. Check out VMWare. That will let you run Windows on Linux based box. Then run your application in that virtual machine. Of course, it takes away many advantages of running an OS directly and eats up a lot of your resources, but then again, you have the option of running your absolutely necessary application under any OS. I've seen a lot of people do that and they are pretty happy with it.
Fixed bad URL link.. Schotty
Last edited by Schotty; 05-23-2006 at 06:33 AM.
I would say if you are looking for desktops my preferred OS is in this order:
1)Linspire
2)Fedora/CentOS
3)Ubuntu
1 & 2 have VERY easy methods to replicate installs. In Linspire, you can add the software to an Aisle in CNR. The costs are for you ONE licsense. Fedora and CentOS are Red Hat derivatives, and thus contain Kickstart. That is by far my favorite overall method for replicating system installs. After the first, the only thing that makes a larger deployment take much longer is bandwidth (network installs) and getting your candy a$$ up to goto the next system.
For servers, I would say stick with CentOS. The others are purely desktop flavors. Sans Linspire, the polish isnt there for an enterprise install. And Linspire just isnt aimed at all at servers for now.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks