Linux - best distro for intermediate windows user?

[VirtualLarry]

I have a user that just got some spyware on their Windows XP PC. I'm not sure how it took hold, as I created Limited User accounts, and they were supposedly using them.
AIM was set to auto-start in the Admin account though, and they were using the Admin account to run UltimateBet software, because it wouldn't run correctly in the limited user accounts.

Anyways, I'm going over there tomorrow to do a reformat (unless I can pull off a miracle with HijackThis). We talked for a bit about installing Linux, because it has Mozilla Firefox and it is resiliant against viruses and spyware.

What is the best/easiest to use/easiest to install Linux distro, that will function much like a Windows XP PC?

They use Mozilla Firefox for a web browser, I guess most Linux distros come with that nowadays. They also visit YouTube, which requires Flash support. I don't know of any distros that pre-install non-free Flash plugin. Are there any? They also use AIM, is there a Linux version of AIM or a compatible client?

Ideally, they would be able to run Unreal Tournament and UltimateBet. Can you do that with Wine? Are there any distros that install Wine, and then allow seamless installation and running of Windows apps? (Even commercial distros?)

If I can get some good answers tonight, I might just do the Linux install tomorrow instead of a refresh of Windows XP.

 

[The Keeper]

Ubuntu
- https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats
- https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Wine
- http://appdb.winehq.org/object...s=application&iId=2552
- https://help.ubuntu.com/commun...ative/UnrealTournament
- https://help.ubuntu.com/commun...e/UnrealTournament2004

 

[QuixoticOne]

UT2004 can work well under WINE; I think there's even a semi-native LINUX version for many of the Unreal programs, though IIRC UT2004's installer was sort of a DIY affair.

UBUNTU Hardy Haron Desktop 8.04.1 is a good general solution. There are other LINUX versions that seek to emulate the look & feel of MS Windows a little more (e.g. the LINSPIRE stuff), but I think for a modern / major / well supported UNIX distribution I'd go with a customized UBUNTU.

If you launch synaptic package manager and search for nonfree or whatever there's a package of a lot of the most popular nonfree stuff that you can install all in one step. IIRC it includes flash and a bunch of other stuff. Anyway if you enable universe/multiverse in the package manager a ton of 3rd party nonfree stuff is easily available.

It might take about 2 hours on a broadband download link to install, fully update the system, install about 50 of the nonfree things you may want, and you're all set.

IDK about UltimateBet and WINE... You could try running it in WINE or a VM of DOS / XP / whatever is available.

Actually if you want to secure the PC you could try having them run their UB and Firefox and whatever in a VM to help isolate the main system from infections; this would be a good idea whether hosted by LINUX or XP/Vista. They'd need about 3GB-4GB RAM and some good dual core E6xxx CPU or better to pull it off with good responsiveness though.

I think there are window manager configurations that make LINUX behave more like XP but I don't recall what to suggest there.

 

[QuixoticOne]

Do use the 32 bit version if that is reasonable (if they have 4GB RAM or less and not too much RAM on their GPUs); the 32 bit flash plugins / browsers tend to be a little more stable IIRC. Although I think the 64 bit browser / plug in stuff may not be TOO bad anymore given the work-arounds that have been done for that situation.

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: QuixoticOne
Do use the 32 bit version if that is reasonable (if they have 4GB RAM or less and not too much RAM on their GPUs); the 32 bit flash plugins / browsers tend to be a little more stable IIRC. Although I think the 64 bit browser / plug in stuff may not be TOO bad anymore given the work-arounds that have been done for that situation.

Never had any problems with the 64bit plug ins. And the Open source 64bit version of Flash is getting pretty good now. I'd say give Ubuntu 64bit a go.

 

[Nothinman]

Do use the 32 bit version if that is reasonable (if they have 4GB RAM or less and not too much RAM on their GPUs);

The amount of memory is irrelevant, you can just install a PAE kernel and get access to all of your memory.

 

[sourceninja]

If you have to ask, the answer is usually ubuntu. Ut2004 is easy as pie to install native (yes, all ut versions except the last one have been native on linux from the get go) on linux. it even has a gui installer. Patching it is as simple as downloading the patches and extracting them into the install folder. I high suggest installing UT2004 into your home folder and not /usr/local this prevents any kind of permission issues.

 

[nerp]

I would definatley say ubuntu

 

[VirtualLarry]

Thanks for the replies. I used MalwareBytes to remove the infection, so i didnt need to reinstall. I think im still going to do a test install on a spare machine.

 

[ultra laser]

I think Ubuntu is a bad choice because it doesn't support, flash, java, a lot of A/V codecs, or graphics card drivers out of the box. These things can all be a pain to install if you're new to linux. For this reason, I suggest PCLinuxOS (http://www.pclinuxos.com/)), which does support these things.

 

[The Keeper]

On the contrary. Ubuntu is far better choice due to its massive popularity compared to such alternatives that do install restricted cocecs/software by default. This means it will be easier to get support in case of problems. Ubuntu's wiki is very good source of guides to install just about anything that isn't installed by default.

Also, if you are unable/unwilling to go through as little trouble as it is to install said restricted stuff, you're better off not switching. In fact, you're better off turning off your computer as you will have hard time using even Windows / OS X.

 

[ultra laser]

Originally posted by: The Keeper
On the contrary. Ubuntu is far better choice due to its massive popularity compared to such alternatives that do install restricted cocecs/software by default. This means it will be easier to get support in case of problems. Ubuntu's wiki is very good source of guides to install just about anything that isn't installed by default.

Also, if you are unable/unwilling to go through as little trouble as it is to install said restricted stuff, you're better off not switching. In fact, you're better off turning off your computer as you will have hard time using even Windows / OS X.

The OP asked for the easiest to use distro, and specifically mentioned needing things like flash from the get-go. Ubuntu does not meet this criterion.

 

[nordloewelabs]

Originally posted by: ultra laser
I think Ubuntu is a bad choice because it doesn't support, flash, java, a lot of A/V codecs, or graphics card drivers out of the box. These things can all be a pain to install if you're new to linux. For this reason, I suggest PCLinuxOS (http://www.pclinuxos.com/)), which does support these things.

i second that. i've tried several Linux distributions (Ubuntu included) and PCLinuxOS was by far the easiest to setup. all my video and audio files played out of the box. the same for Flash.

for a PC with decent hardware i suggest PCLinuxOS. for an old PC, i suggest TeenPup, which is based upon PuppyLinux. just as PCLinuxOS, TeenPup is ready out of the box.... great for Linux noobs.