I'm thinking about going to RedHat 6.0, probably installing Linux on a
2.1 gigabyte hard drive and Win98 on a much larger hard drive. I chose
RedHat because all I ever read is how much simpler it is to install and
set up than other distributions.
Here's my situation:
I'm about to build a new computer in about a month using spare parts
from my current one:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Packard Bell Multimedia E-154 | Microsoft Windows 98
> PB-680 Motherboard - Intel 430VX | Internet Explorer 5
> 80 Megabytes EDO-RAM | Agent 1.6 32/525
> Pentium 150 MegaHertz | ICQ 99a Beta v3.17 - Build #2565
> 2.1 Gigabyte Hard Drive |AOL Instant Messenger 3.0.1415 beta
> Creative Labs 3-D Blaster Banshee |-----------------------------------
> 16MB Video SDRAM / PCI | Monitor - PiXie - Model 770 -- 17"
> 128-bit 3Dfx Voodoo2 Engine | Display 1280 x 1024 - 32-bit color
> Sound III 336SP / 33.6kbps |===================================
> WinTV 404 Video Capture Device | FUTURE UPGRADES -- SB Live!
> Mustek 600 III EP Plus Scanner | Abit BX6 rev.2 / Pentium III 500
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Out of what is above, I plan to use the Banshee, WinTV 404 video capture
card, Mustek Scanner, PiXie monitor 2.1 GB hard drive, floppy drive,
CD-ROM drive and an Epson Stylus 800 color printer in the new setup.
I want to add to that a SoundBlaster Live, CD-R drive (finally), V.90
modem (USRobotics, probably since I have had good luck with those),
hopefully 128 megabytes of RAM (since Windows98 chokes on 32MB) and I
hope to get at least a Pentium III 450. I was originally going with a
Celeron 300A on an Abit BX6 rev2, but those are old news and if I get a
PIII 450, there's not much upgrade room because the most it will
accommodate is a PIII 550. I'd like to get a motherboard which will
accept nothing less than the CPU I pick to make sure I can at least use
two CPUs on one motherboard.
Anyway, since I'm getting a lot of new hardware, I'd like to know that
my choices are not just a total beacon for extra attention. I want to
make choices for hardware that will get me through all the setup with no
problems.
I know that Linux runs on any or just about any CPU. Windows, though,
given the talk I see around the 'net, seems to like Intel's processors
more than other brands like Cyrix or AMD.
Also, I'm hoping to write software on this system. It's a tall order
for someone who doesn't know the first thing about Linux, to jump in,
set up, get familiar and start programming. I considered Visual Basic
and VB is the rosey path, and I can't help but think that choosing to
write programs for Linux is likely to be a climb up a sheer cliff in
comparison to Visual Basic, in which I also have no experience.
I would love to write a program for Linux that performs like Agent
performs in Windows—with similar functionality.
In my past experience with unix commands on telnet connections or
unix-based BBS's, I always felt that the commands were more cryptic than
they needed to be. I understand the issue that shorter command lines
result in smaller programs, but jeez. Single letter commands and
commands with no vowels are confusing to someone who is anal retentive
about grammar and spelling in the english language. It would be nice to
form a grammatically perfect sentence, hit return, and have the sentence
converted to the proper Linux code, thereby saving space and making the
whole thing easier to understand. Hopefully any books I purchase on the
subject will describe the etymology of the commands so I can understand
why "sldk880/{0008}-777" results in a specific task being performed. I
know that's not a command, but it all looks the same to me at this
point. Since I have nothing but time and no work committments, I have
plenty of time to teach myself.
Any comments will be greatly appreciated, especially on hardware issues
I should be aware of—particularly things to steer clear of. I would
hate to install hardware for which there are no drivers.
Ty Matthews
