I've just seen this: http://www.freeyourselffrommicrosoftandthensa.org/02-superbugs-and-cyber-wars/2-4-uefi-the-microsoft-nsa-kill-switch

If it wasn't for how internet reliant linux is, I would definitely switch over!

Wow, Eris, that is so very cool info. I love Linux and I would like to stay with it forever. Right now at this point, I still need help to switch over to the new upgrades or versions but if I was more confident and able to be more independent, I would NEVER go back to windows again.

Not really news... The only thing "new" is that MS won't allow you to run Windows 8.1 on a non-UEFI system (this was already the case for their tablets...). And Win 8.1, on tablets, like iOS and ChromeOS, relies a lot on external servers to compensate for the insufficient local CPU/Storage. Not sure this means that *workstations* have to give their data to MS servers... Otherwise I know plenty of corporate and government workstations in Europe that are going to be migrated to Linux... Governments throughout Europe are currently pushing for locally-owned/operated cloud services (if you aren't using a local cloud service, you can't contract for the government) and elsewhere they are pushing to jettison Windows altogether (the Chinese government is reviving RedFlag Linux).

And this article must be very old, because Linux can boot on UEFI systems now. See the wikpedia article on UEFI

Well, since I don't read a lot of those articles, it sure is news to me. I still think Windows has seen its day and will be bumped aside the same way BELL was. They used to own the phone lines, now look. GO LINUX.

Let me, as a longstanding Linux-user make some comments to new comers

Linux Blends
All Linux distributions base on Linus Thorwald «kernel», which is the common start for all subsequent flavours.
There are a lot of different Linuxes around, most of them are free to download, install and use. A few distributions charge, however not for the distribution itself but for a service contract going with it and in some cases additional programs developped exclusively from those companies. The important ones are based all on Debian (most important descendand is Ubuntu and its derivates, incl. Mint), Red Hat (Fedora) and Slackware (openSuse). From these originate hundreds of branches and subbraches. See here a overview from Wikipedia.

In my opinion are exactly the three Distributions I mentioned the right ones to start:
· In the Debian world is certainly Ubuntu the most used, but also the one with a desktop one has to get used to. For people who change more from XP and do not like the W7 and W8 complications, Kubuntu is the better choice. Mint in both flavours look with their fresh mint very cool, but have quite a number of points which have put me off, mainly that is a more or less Onemanshow . Kubuntu has the simplest but at the same time the most self configuratable Desktop in the *buntu line.
· The RedHat line brings openSuse which is clearly the development distro for the commercial Suse. it was my very first trial with Linux and the aversion is still here.Website
· The Slackware brings mainly Fedora, which is interesting but did not chatch me at all.
· A small line is Gentoo with an italian distro Sabayon (it looks like a Ferrari).
Then there is a newer Line, called Arch with Chakra and the runner of the season Manjara.

Whoever is interested should study this Website: Distrowatch

All important distributions have one or more «user help user» Forums and most maintain mail lists to communicate directly with developers. Have you ever tried to communicate with a Migrosaft employee in their development departments?

So, my conclusion is: Do not just jump to the nearest and most spoken of distribution. Take your time, downlad a number of different flavours, the run them live on your screen. Once you have reduced to half a dozend potentials, install one after the other and test them a bit. Once you have an impression, install the next one and so on. Once you made your pick, stick for at least 1 year with it.
I'd like to welcome a lot of people in the MAFZ (Microsoft and Apple Free Zone).

Lots of very good info there, Arran, thanks for sharing.
One question I have, what is it about Fedora you don't like? I have it with the MATE desktop, and I love it.

The Mate desktop.

There are distros, and then there are desktops managers. You can very often run a given distro with something else than its default desktop manager (for instance, Ubuntu without Unity). Of course some distros make it easier (Kubuntu...)

The main differences among distros are:

• how they handle the system set up (contents of /etc...),
• how fundamentalist they are with/against proprietary software (including device drivers). Ubuntu has a pragmatic approach that allows it to run on most hardware out of the box (unlike the standard Debian, IIRC).
• how they deal with updates/upgrades. There are big differences between "server" distros such as RedHat or OpenSuse and end-user distros such as Fedora or Ubuntu.

Hahaha.
Funny article. The best is the "Top secret image of Windows 8 Secure Boot Kill Switch
smuggled out of Microsoft Corporate Headquarters in Reno Nevada" with the label
"Windows 8 Secure Boot Kill Switch".
Hey, you all are gimpers. Look at that label. They could have at least adjusted the angle of the text
when faking that label into the image of a whats'o'ever boosting atomic special red button box .
The rest is..., well, interesting...

To clarify a few things stated earlier in this thread...

While all major branches of Linux share some common influences and code (even developers), Red Hat is considered a separate branch and is not a branch of Slackware. Fedora is the community version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux and is not a fork of Slackware. Also, SUSE/OpenSUSE are branched from Slackware, not Red Hat.

The default Desktop Environment on Fedora is Gnome3, which is the same as Ubuntu (but without the unity shell). Of course you have lots of choices when it comes to Desktop Environments in Fedora, as well as a dozen specialized spins.

Personally, I'll take MATE DE (which is a fork of Gnome2) over the awful Gnome3 DE anytime, no matter which distro it's on.

I don't understand this post or answer. Does this mean Mate sucks or is it great?

I took the response to mean that Arran didn't like Fedora because of the MATE Desktop.

I pointed out that the default desktop in Fedora is not MATE. It's actually Gnome3, which is the same as Ubuntu (without the unity shell).

I did the distro hop years ago when I first found Virtualbox and I believe LiveCD's were just starting. I think I still prefer to try out a distro this way as these VDI's (Virtual Images) are already set up completely and is faster than running from a CD/DVD.

Check out these 2 sites.
http://virtualboxes.org/images/
http://virtualboximages.com/veedeeeyes/

After trying most everything out there I wholeheartedly gravitated towards debian based distros and finally settled on xubuntu (no Unity) after long stints with both ubuntu and mint. As beautiful as KDE was, I just never felt right using it. It's just "off" in some way I can't explain.

Red Hat/Fedora was the rage back then and though I don't have anything bad to say about it, I just felt more comfortable in debian. The other being that debian based support seems to be more prolific which makes it easier to get things done when you can find the help you need when you need it. I think if I ever gave another distro a chance it would have to be Arch. They have some of the best documentation around and seems to be a class act.

No matter what distro a person gravitates to, they will ALL be better than the monopoly alternatives. There will always be a stigma tied to Linux that it is hard to learn and is only made by and for tech nerds. This may have been true in the early days, but the stigma lives on. Hopefully the younger generation will be smart enough not to buy into the corporate cash machine and we can start to turn the tide. The computing world would be a much safer place if that day ever comes.

Yeah; Windows can be obtrusive, but at least they aren't so uber control freaks as Apple. Still, since Virtualbox has been mentioned), I also run Ubuntu 64-bit, Win98, and, of course, WinXP in a virtual machine (typing this now in my gold standard pristine WinXP that I use as a sandbox to protect my now Win8.1 OS (did the same for my Win7 OS until the 1998 (and former XP box) vintage dual core AMD finally died (well, more then likely just the power supply but decided, after putting in 2 videos cards, replaced memory due to a faulty memory module, and replace CPU fan among many other things, I wasn't going to put another red cent into repairing it; lol). Hopefully this computer will last me more then 7 years.

Using virtual images is a pretty good approach for testing out the various Linux distributions but there could be some limitations, imposed by the virtual environment, that keeps you from experiencing all the features of a given Linux distribution. There can be issues with Video, USB and other hardware devices, where the virtual environment is standing in the way of Linux directly accessing and properly utilizing the hardware. Still, it's a pretty good option.

Even Live CD/DVD images do not always give you the full experience because you might need hardware drivers, like nVidia display drivers, that usually aren't included on Live CD/DVDs. The only real way to fully test out a Linux distro is to install it and load up all the drivers and software you need. Then, use it for a little while. I normally use a small, dedicated hard drive for testing Linux distros and new releases.

In the past, I might not have recommended Fedora to the new Linux user. This is because Fedora is pure open source and proprietary codecs & drivers are not included by default. I would feel more comfortable recommending Fedora to a new user these days, though. The new anaconda installer is very easy to use and all the proprietary drivers can be easily accessed by adding the RPMFusion repositories. There is even a simple menu driven installer for proprietary codecs & drivers called: easylife that's a nice option for the new Linux/Fedora user.

Speaking to the topic of this thread, I agree with most of the issues covered by the article Erisian posted. UEFI and secure boot are evil. They are an example of Microsoft's bullying of the motherboard manufacturers, in a lame attempt to control the hardware we all use.

If anyone is interested, here is an informative thread, with Linus Torvalds giving his opinion on the entire UEFI debacle. Linus likes to drop the "F" bomb on occasion.

Once you get Linux setup and installed, you don't really need the internet anymore than you would in Windows. You should probably login and update once every month or two, but you need to do that with Microsoft too.

Problem is, how do I install software without internet access? With Windows, I just download an exe from my library's internet connection to my USB stick then take it home and install it on my computer. This is only possible with Linux if I learn how to compile from source and I really don't have a head for that kind of thing.

some love it and some hate it
but it is only one DE, there are several more out there ...
i was a gnome-fan until gnome3, now i use everything but gnome ... times changing

Thank you silk. I didn't like gnome 3 at all.

Thanks Tux, whats not to like about MATE, it makes sense to me and very user friendly.

No, you can also obtain the packages (.deb in Debian/Unbuntu, .rpm form RedHat/Fedora) and install them offline. For instance gimp for Ubuntu 14/04 is here. Some software not included in the officially supported distros and some more recent versions are available on "PPAs" and can be retrieved manually as well (likes these advanced Gimp releases for earlier Ubuntu distros).

You can also have the whole distro on a CD/DVD and install from that. You will only miss the security updates (but then if your Windows isn't connected to the web

But the good thing about installing through on-line repositories is that your dependencies are automatically resolved/downloaded/installed. The average Linux package isn't that big because there is a lot of shared code and you will often have most dependencies already installed, so installing through a smartphone internet connection isn't completely out of the question (the software manager will tell you how much it wants to download). You can also mix a local repository (that you seed manually with the bigger packages obtained offline) and the remote one.