installing/using Linux

I've heard about Linux for years but have never personally seen it in use or used it myself. However I've always heard people say how they thought it is better than Windows and have wanted to try it. I already used the distribution chooser to get a recommendation on which would be the best one for me and am considering getting a copy, partitioning my hard drive and installing the Linux on the partition.

However, I'm curious, is there any danger is using Linux instead of Windows? Is it more vulnerable to collecting any viruses or spyware when surfing the web? Does it come with or is it compatible with anti-virus software that commonly runs  in Windows OS? Is it compatible with programs that would have run in Windows? My laptop has Windows Vista 32-bit. Could I expect any clashes or issues with the hardware since the laptop was intended for Windows OS? Thank you

Linux is not better than Windows.

Windows is a huge SUV with automatic trany.
Linux is a 4 wheel drive pickup with a stick shift.
Linux is free. Windows is not free.

IMHO, you really should start with Puppy Linux. It is a quick download and is easy for a Windows user to get the hang of it. It is a bard bones OS that gives you the very basic things and is a good way to get the 'feel' of Linux. Works with Ethernet, but not so great on Wi-Fi.
Puppy Linux Download.

There is no need to install anti virus in Linux computer because windows viruses will not work in Linux.Linux is the safest OS in the world.There are plenty of free soft wares for Linux.you can install Linux along with windows by partitioning and it is also possible to install Linux(UBUNTU) in the windows OS.Once you use Linux after using windows for several years It will be difficult for you.with time and patience you can use it very well.Ubuntu is the best Linux Variant out there.You can download it here. http://www.ubuntu.com/

thank you. I might try it but I have to resolve some other issues first atm...

There is no need to install anti virus in Linux computer because windows viruses will not work in Linux.

Very true. But viruses written for Linux will work on it.

Linux is the safest OS in the world.

No it's not. What about Haiku? Or FreeBSD? or OpenBSD? And remember, safest != secure; any semblance of "safety" that Linux has from viruses isn't because it's inherently more secure, but because it's not targeted. Nobody is going to waste their time writing malware for an OS that is around a single percent of all desktop users because they can invest the same amount of work into a virus that can work on 90% of them.

Ubuntu is the best Linux Variant out there.

And this is just plain laughable. First of all, the term "Linux Variant"- even as noted on this forum's profile information page- makes no sense. Linux doesn't have "variants" it has distros.

My point being that they are all the same tree, just with different junebugs stuck in their sap.

On another note, distro choosers are sort of pointless. You'll need to try distributions for yourself to see if they fit. My personal recommendation would be Linux Mint, which I've found to be far better than Ubuntu in nearly every way. It's "Mint Menu" also somewhat mimics the behaviour of the start menu.

Its true that Viruses written for Linux will work on it.but I am using Ubuntu for 5 years.my computer is online 12 hrs a day.I didn't got a single virus infection in my computer.I agree that Mac OS X and Open source BSD are the safest Operating Systems in the world.
But when it comes to using it as a server, Linux is still one of the safest operating systems out there. You can make a Linux server very hard to crack into. You just have to be willing to learn about it and make sure that you know what you are doing....

The OP has used Windows and he wants to learn about Linux. It is alright to be passionate, but let's not scare him with too much information.
Linux Mint is good, But load a short version that fits on a CD. A n novice does not need all the stuff.

For a broad yet short review of most everything out there, the link below is a good read.
Free and non-free Operating Systems

I still believe newcomers should start with a minimal Linux that can run "Live" with very low overhead. Puppy Linux. Or one of the early Knoppix distros.

But I am using Ubuntu for 5 years.my computer is online 12 hrs a day.I didn't got a single virus infection in my computer.

Anecdotal. I've been running windows 7 since it was released, and this machine is usually on nearly 24 hours a day and it's yet to get infected, but I don't fool myself into thinking I am inherently secure.

But when it comes to using it as a server, Linux is still one of the safest operating systems out there. You can make a Linux server very hard to crack into. You just have to be willing to learn about it and make sure that you know what you are doing....

Not sure what makes you think they plan to use it in a server environment. Way to move the goalposts, though.

I didn't say Linux is fully secure.Every OS has a loophole.but when compared to windows,Linux is better and secure.If you don't know that why do u call yourself as a programmer??LOL. I think you are addicted to windows.I have a doubt.are you here for arguing or helping??..May be you have more knowledge than others.use your knowledge to help others.don't use it for unnecessary arguing.

Best Wishes

are you here for arguing or helping??..May be you have more knowledge than others.use your knowledge to help others.don't use it for unnecessary arguing.

Good advice. You should follow it yourself.

YES BOSS

I didn't say Linux is fully secure.

You said "Linux is the safest OS in the world" Which is dead wrong. It's not "safer" than any other OS, and you are misguiding others if you tell them so.

Every OS has a loophole.

Sigh. No, everyOS needs to be properly secured by the user or whomever installed it. You can't just go with the default options and assume your safe, this goes for any OS, and on the case of Linux especially for servers, since there is plenty of written malware for them, not to mention sendmail, that constant source of exploits. My point is, it doesn't matter what the OS is that you are using, none of them are "safer" than any other. That just doesn't make sense. It's like saying that a Trailer truck is "safer" than a Mazda Miata. The entire point isn't to be "safer" when in a car crash, the point is to prevent them entirely.

but when compared to windows,Linux is better and secure.

Yep, Linux is so secure, even kernel.org got hacked via a root privilege escalation. As for servers, sure, Linux servers really aren't that hard to use/run. Until they are. Then it takes two weeks of web searching, forum-hopping, reading blog posts that explain how to fix your exact issue on a version from eight years ago and so it isn't even slightly applicable anymore so why the *censored* is it the top search result on every major search engine, getting called stupid by various elitist Linux communities when you ask for help, pissing off an entire Linux community when you try to prevent the name-calling by starting with "I don't know much Linux so please walk me through this" and getting called stupid instead of getting answers to something that "everyone should already know", getting told to just use Google (which of course gives me old blog posts and forum topics from eight years ago and isn't the least bit helpful) by elitists who "don't have the time to answer every newb's questions" but apparently have plenty of time to sit on forums and call them names all day, getting sick of said elitist communities and reformatting and reinstalling Linux to see if that helps (which it doesn't), finally having someone who is willing to help give you some big long list of commands to type in and then calling you stupid and leaving when you ask what it means, and eventually you just say "Screw this, I'm buying a Windows license."

If you don't know that why do u call yourself as a programmer??LOL.

What does operating system security or OS choice have to do with programming? Absolutely nothing. This is a argument to irrelevance.

I think you are addicted to windows.

my laptop runs Mint 10.(Which brings up another point I will get to) I don't think it's a case of me being "addicted to windows" (what a silly concept) But rather me actually being realistic and not a Linux zealot. Not everybody who sees it thinks it's some sort of cure for cancer. In fact if anything, on the desktop, it's still a solution in search of a problem. At the moment it's primary selling point is "It's not Windows!" Which only goes so far. It's come far but it still hardly compares UI wise to even windows 95, and on the server somehow despite it being there from nearly the beginning windows server is making huge inroads in it's markets.

are you here for arguing or helping??

Both. I see far too many people paint this happy jolly picture of Linux where the person doesn't have to do anything and everything works. And then when that person has issues suddenly the people painting those jolly pictures dissappear, leaving the people who are realistic and actually know what they are doing to clean up the mess. Did I say they shouldn't try Linux? NO! I didn't say that. I was arguing against your FUD that Linux is "safer" which implies that it is inherently more secure, which it isn't. They are merely different Operating Systems. There is no reason Not to diversify and learn them all, but to fool oneself into thinking they are somehow "safer" is just plain foolish, and to spread the FUD that it is is doing Linux a disservice.

As to my running of Mint 10, after the release of Mint 11, I realized something.

There is no supported way to actually upgrade a existing system to a new version without wiping it. The only way I found would be to direct aptitude to the repos for Mint 11, but that was unsupported and probably not a good idea (And it's important to note that it is considered a bad idea by the same people that still thing vi is a good configuration UI). This is probably the biggest shortfall I've encountered so far, aside from having to edit config files for nearly any change I make (really takes me back to windows 3.1, that). But I do digress. to Answer the OP's questions:

is there any danger is using Linux instead of Windows?

No.

Is it more vulnerable to collecting any viruses or spyware when surfing the web?

No.

Does it come with or is it compatible with anti-virus software that commonly runs  in Windows OS?

No, and No, however there are some AV programs you can find that run on Linux, like ClamAV. Typically the Linux approach is to not run an AV at all and assume everything is safe, which has worked out in a Rube-Goldberg fashion since nobody has been bothered to write any high-saturation Linux viruses that attack desktop machines. Most of them target servers, and those that do target desktops aren't "distributed" in a way that the typical desktop user will encounter them.

Is it compatible with programs that would have run in Windows?

No, but there are almost always alternatives. If there is a Windows Program you absolutely need to use, you shouldn't be running Linux at all! WINE is not quite mature in it's support of a lot of the Windows APIs. Usually if the program is complicated enough not to have a Linux equivalent, the windows version isn't going to run on WINE. Very seldom will there be a Windows program you absolutely must have that doesn't have a windows equivalent, unless you are into some professional level stuff. (and even then, LMMS is pretty on par with FLStudio, and even (IMO) somewhat easier to navigate). Anyway, to summarize- No, it's not compatible with programs that run on Windows. But you won't need them, since there are Linux equivalents.

My laptop has Windows Vista 32-bit. Could I expect any clashes or issues with the hardware since the laptop was intended for Windows OS?

I wouldn't say so. But it depends on the distro you choose, as well. I would suggest trying several, and seeing which works best for you. Ideally via the method geek-9pm noted, via a LiveCD of the distribution. This way you can see how well it works for you, bearing in mind that it will of course run much faster of your HD than from the disc.

BC_Programmer, This is one of those times I agree with you. 
Put simply
Linux is not Windows. And vice versa.

Personally, I have been using Linux long before many others. I I got deeply involved in it. As I recall, I used Red Hat version 5 or 6. Don't remember.  At the moment, I can  use Windows XP on a Dell laptop because it came with Windows XP. It also have Vista and Linux Mint on it.

At the moment, I know longer have the Linux on the hard drive. There are some issues doing a triple boot selection for XP, Vista and Linux. But I can always boot the "Live" version whenever I want.  I have one version on a USB flash drive.

There are a number of reasons for a preference of one OS over another. And they go beyond the technical details, The concerns becomes more conflicts of perception and objective.

OP, don't this all the ranting discourage you. Learning something new to you can be a happy experience.  Give Linux  a try. From your own perspective.

There are a number of reasons for a preference of one OS over another. And they go beyond the technical details, The concerns becomes more conflicts of perception and objective.

Personally I find people who are zealots for any OS (whatever it is) an utter bore. I know that computers, cars, planes, weapons, etc can have a kind of "toys for boys" fascination for a certain type of (generally male) personality. I like railway engines myself. But the people who get obsessed with, and zealous over, software such as operating systems or text editors or programming and scripting languages really get my goat. The most severe cases probably have some kind of medical condition or other, get-a-life-itis or maybe something else that they take Adderall for.

Personally I find people who are zealots for any OS (whatever it is) an utter bore. I know that computers, cars, planes, weapons, etc can have a kind of "toys for boys" fascination for a certain type of (generally male) personality. I like railway engines myself. But the people who get obsessed with, and zealous over, software such as operating systems or text editors or programming and scripting languages really get my goat. The most severe cases probably have some kind of medical condition or other, get-a-life-itis or maybe something else that they take Adderall for.

So very true.