which Linux distro is most like windows?

does anyone know of any that will run windows (.exe) files natively? (without WINE)
(i heard there were a couple...i mite be wrong)

Ubuntu is probably most like Windows, I'd suggest ordering the free cds (live and installation).

There may be a distro with something like wine built in, but I doubt it would do much else.

Thats always a tough question, it depends why you ask it.

Generally its because people dont want to learn the differences between the OSs and want everything point and click. First let me say this will leave you disapointed, switching from Windows to Linux is like switching from checkers to chess, it might be a bit of a learning curve but youll enjoy the final experience a whole lot more.

I would choose ubuntu, its set up is very easy and most things (eg wine) can be installed directly from the package manager with no compiling knowledge needed.

Other distros have tried to mimic windows (Lindows for one) but it never seems to work, there are things like file permissions that windows users have trouble with.

Ubuntu is by far the most supported as far as getting help, if you have an issue you type a seach in google with your problem and 'ubuntu' in the title chances are you'll get your answer.

Good luck!
-Jordan

P.S. Running windows .exe files even in an emulator in linux will still run badly (by linux standards) you may only be as stable as your windows pc running the same files. It is HIGHLY recommended to find a linux alternative to the program you are running, youd be amazed how many windows programs are cloned in *nix.

disappointed? i love linux!!! i was just wondering which one comes the closest. so i can recommend the right distro of linux to newbies that ask me. i like ubuntu....i like slackware as well...

Sorry let me clarify, linux is a world apart as far as functionality and well everything. I think were at a point now with all the Vista fun where linux will pick up as a consumer os. But most people, who have used windows since grade school (part of microsoft's 'philanthropy') have a hard time making the switch.

I could set up a distro to do everything my grandmother needs to do. But my father would reject the idea of file permissions and would always want to run defrag... (and on a side note probably thinking he's supporting the communist party)

Its awesome your being pro-active, I will help any of my friends with their issues for the sake of the 'cause'. The gaming industry is still dictating trends right now in my opinion. I get alot of resistance still not sure why, perhaps I get too technical on people.

Linspire used to be a lot like windows. It still is. But I think PCLinuxOS and Xandros look and feel much more like MS Windows than any other linux distro. They mimmick everything from the start menu, to my computer, all the way to the control panel. It's pretty natsy. I don't like it when linux distros end up mocking windows like that. I like windows, I like linux, I just don't think the two mix well together. I think linux should stay linux and windows should stay windows.

Linspire is a distro that looks alot like windows (that why it was made and that's why it first was called lindows, wich microsoft ofcourse didn't like and they sued the company for it).
Another good one (never tested, but it looks a lot like it) is Linux XP ( http://www.linux-xp.com/ ).

A last addition I want to add is ReactOS ( http://www.reactos.org/ ), it is open source, but I don't think it's linux. Anyway, it realy mimick the windows look.

Ubuntu is better than windows. It is pretty smooth to install, unless you have weird devices. Next to it is Suse, supports much more devices. very good for laptops.
next to them is Fedora core. Ultimately debian, gentoo and slackware, which are pretty good for the power users, but once you have a feel of it there is nothing compared to the power, speed and configurability of these distros.

my favourite being slackware.

The thing I don't like about Linux is when you get some software that you have to compile, and it asks you for additional packages, which in turn require other packages .... Ugh! I was trying to get some opensource 3d engine installed (Crystal 3D or something along those lines) and I spent literally 2 hours scouring the internet for working dependencies to install, and in the end I just got frustrated and wiped the drive with zeros in frustration

All else considered, I've had the most success with Ubuntu. Easy to install, and easy to navigate. Using the package manager is a breeze, but be wary installing software that needs to be compiled

I would have to agree with you Herbert, when I was first starting out that was my #1 problem. Ever since I switched to debian based distros (ubuntu being my current) I havnt had any problems, even the software I have to compile I can generally find the dependencies in the package manager.

Compiling code is a skill I hope doesnt get lost, being able to define the arguments for installs based on your computer is a fantastic idea, have a neat processor with more cache? or have an obscene amount of RAM and want the program to use a large file sizes? NO PROBLEM! Of course this is assuming the software has these options.

While dependencies might be a hassle its much better than the same information being on your computer 10 times installed by different programs (*cough* DLLs *cough*).

It still boils down to support for most people, I have an old Canon i320 printer that I have to use on my roomates computer because the only linux drivers out there are proprietary and charged for. Frustrating.