Best distribution award goes to .... SuSE 154
ZDNet UK reports that people who voted for best Linux distribution at the LinuxWorld, chose SuSE. Congratulations SuSE! (and if I might add a comment, please improve the GUI installer, maybe even release a beta version before going gold).
Installers? (Score:2)
Re:Hahaha (Score:2)
Cool. (Score:1)
But--big deal. A survey where people pick their favorite distribution. Wow, I've never seen that before. That's about as cool as a Slashdot Poll!
At least FreeBSD wasn't voted as the "best Linux distribution"--I think that'd get some attention!
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
Re:Hahaha (Score:2)
The Tick - "Spoon!"
libjpeg (Score:2)
Great for SuSE *so* (Score:1)
"Patience is a virtue, afforded those with nothing better to do." - I don't remember
Winners Don't Matter (Score:1)
Personally I like Slackware, but to each his own. That it what I love about Linux: the variety in choices. If one type doesn't satisfy you, find another. Anyway congratulations SuSe!
Running SuSE (Score:2)
1. Yast2 pretty much sucks. A GUI install tool is nice, and I've seen it done well (as in Caldera), but the SuSE one holds your hand in the wrong places and glosses over the wrong places. Plus, the first time he ran it it blew up in his face just for running the "Recommended" setup. Once you got further into the nitty gritty (like, *gasp*, naming the partition on which you want linux installed) it went fairly well.
2. Neither Yast2 nor my preferred Yast include any provision for sound. There are many sound cards now supported by the kernel, so it wouldn't even need to include commercial software like OSS to work for many people.
3. This isn't quite as big a deal, but the CDs are very difficult to browse. There is no real standard directory structure, so looking through the CD to find useful software becomes a bit of a chore (add to that the fact that there are *6* CDs in the latest version!...)
Beyond that, I've loved just about everything about SuSE; once it is installed it is truly a joy to run, and the wealth of useful applications and utilities is very nice.
------
Re:A first - story deleted. (Score:1)
You are a disgrace to every thinking person in the known world.
(mean, maybe, but i feel it needed to be said.)
Don't be afraid to stick the knife in! (Score:1)
"and if I might add a comment, please improve the GUI installer, maybe even release a beta version before going gold."
Congratulating someone and then finishing off by saying something like this. I hope HeUnique doesn't start throwing any compliments my way.
Oh shut up...there was no knife (Score:1)
SuSE (Score:1)
Simplicity is the key
Yggdrasil Linux
Re:Cool. (Score:2)
You really should try it. I went SuSE over RH and Slackware, and I like it. It feels a little more, um, 'Solaris'ey than the others, but as soon as you get into the habit of using
Word of warning! Recompile the kernel from the main-tree RPM (Not the SuSE sources) or it will spit the occasional German error into the log, and you don't want to see a kernel panic! I hit one, half drunk, and almost wet myself. 'Sie hast Corrupteded die Kernal! Sie ist a eine Moron! Gehen sie back to Microsoft!' or something to that effect. I was drunk, okay??
Not LinuxOne? (Score:2)
I do have to wonder at people's insistence on these general rankings. Clearly SuSE isn't best for all people, since last I checked Slashdot isn't running on it.
SuSE eval (Score:4)
+ They came up with X servers for variety of cards -- back when X configuration for Linux/XFree86 was a pain {remember XF86Setup and xvidtune} they improved X configuration tools.
{ X servers, config tools: SaX, now iSaX }
+ 'YaST' does a good job of centralizing system admin. For most users -- though some of us may hate its SuSEconfig script that overwrites manual changes (unless told otherwise). It is much better than linuxconf in RH.
+ SuSE has a nice database of supported HW on their web page.
+ nice startup scripts with central configuration through
the startup scripts.
+ Can't beat their price.
{ I am not considering {CheapBytes/FTP} users }
Some quirks that SuSE needs to correct:
- GNOME RPMs were late for 6.1 version.
- GNOME RPMs are named differently preventing users from upgrading using non-SuSE rpms.
- SuSE keeps on changing files in a package from
one version to next. This is not documented so is painful for people who wish to upgrade. {i.e. el cheapo ftp from suse guys}
e.g. nkita and nkitb contain different tools in
6.1 and 6.2 some tools cross over from nkita to nkitb in new version!
- SuSE was late in upgrading to libc6. {6.1+}
- During 6.3 release -- Their mirrors contained incorrectly marked rpms e.g. ppp-2.3.10 contained
ppp-2.3.8 ! They need better use of RPM naming and consistency of its contents.
Overall I liked SuSE more than RH. Besides it gives a good competition to front runner RH. That is always good.
- ak
Linux Distros (Score:2)
RPM is a great way to add onto an existing Distro as well. I like that. SuSE is a good solid, stable distro but I would like to know how it beat out Debian, RedHat and Mandrake.
LK
Re:It's my birthday! (Score:2)
SuSE Rules (Score:1)
GUI installer. (Score:1)
It omits a few questions that I find essential. I fogot which. One thing I do remember is that it tells me that the root password that I've been using for way too long now has illegal characters. Jee, and I've been using those illegal characters all those years, and NOW it tells me!
Booted the other CD and installed the system.
Roger.
Re:libjpeg (Score:2)
Linux on Alpha (Score:1)
I just recently got my paws on a second-hand Digital Alpha, and in the process of (re)installing Linux on this beast, I found that the only distribution that would work correctly was SuSE.
This isn't exactly true. Let me expound: RedHat 6.1 wouldn't let me partition my hard drive the way I wanted it to be. At least, not by default (I'm sure the 'expert text' mode would have allowed it, but after booting an Alpha 50 times, you don't want to do it again). Debian wouldn't even boot. I tried every tangled conglomeration of kernel boot parameters I could find, and nothing worked. The debian-axp mailing list was of no use.
Out of frustration, I finally turned to SuSE, which I had never used before. It installed like a charm! And every time I had a problem, the suse-axp mailing list was there to help me. Now I have a running SuSE-AXP system that's blindingly fast. It's so fast that I have trouble tearing myself away from it to sleep at night.
There are some things that I feel SuSE is missing. Most importantly, RedHat's very nifty printtool. I miss that bugger. I'm going to see if I can get it working on SuSE tonight.
Fool@WorkRe:libjpeg (Score:1)
I'm not sure why they use such an odd set of libraries...
Re:YAST2 is great, but where is partitioning? (Score:1)
SuSE 6.3 is a very nice distro. (Score:1)
Why suse rocks. (Score:2)
For users with ISDN SuSE is the best distro available. Also, I think it's both great for workstations and servers. Yast is a really great tool for administrating your computer if you don't like editting scripts, but that can still be done. The last time I editted my sendmail.cf YaST warned me with a message like:
You seem to have editted your
I do have some experience with redhat, but I think SuSE just outperforms RedHat on a couple of points.
Why Europeans might LOVE SuSE (Score:1)
Re:"SuSE is the worst..." - Eric Raymond (Score:1)
What a disapointment (Score:1)
Different Criteria (Score:5)
Re:Why Europeans might LOVE SuSE (Score:1)
Re:Different Criteria (Score:1)
It only proves (Score:2)
SuSE 6.3 has a couple of irritating quirks (Score:1)
The person who said that you should be able to configure sound easily is right. In RH you just run sndconfig and you're away. With SuSE I had to compile sound directly into the kernel. Totally ruined the unofficial "smallest kernel" competition I was having with a friend who runs RH.
Is there really a best distribution? (Score:3)
I dont think so on both counts. Every distribution has quirks, pros/cons, etc that turn some users on, some off, and make some indifferent. Not to mention that having one "best" distribution that *ahem* "everybody" would use would be a Bad Thing(tm) for various reasons.
In the end, SuSE is a quite popular distribution, but the best? No, I dont think so, and I'm glad its not.
-- iCEBaLM
Re:libjpeg (Score:2)
I manually installed it from the Red Hat RPM into a different directory. It works ok now, but everything else is linked to 6a, making a real upgrade a real pain.
That's the only beef I have about SuSE, though.
Takes a lickin' ... (Score:1)
Thank you Europe for this...
P.S. - The one thing I do miss is something like Red Hat's sndconfig utility...
slashdot and bribery (Score:3)
I doubt the slashdot guys are likely to accept bribes for good press. Maybe for a chance to visit the moon -- not for a few bucks.;) Credibility (along with relevance, timeliness and interest) is their stock in trade.
And / points out: "Clearly SuSE isn't best for all people, since last I checked Slashdot isn't running on it." Well, right -- no one says that slashdot (or anyone) is required to do whatever's currently most popular, or grabbing the most press
Rankings like this are as useful as you want them to be. They won't tell you what *you* should like, but they might give you an idea of, say, what it might take to convince your boss to try it, or what distrib. might be interesting to try next time you feel like experimenting, or
Just thoughts,
timothy
Re:A first - story deleted. (Score:1)
Ahh ... CNN.com ... sure, you don't see duplicate stories that often ... but how about:
Of the two, I think I would hold CNN.com, who is the webfront for one of the largest communication companies on the planet, to a much higher standard than /.
Re:Running SuSE (Score:2)
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
Its better than *icrosofts vision of information at your fingertips. Here it is for real.
If only they could improve the setup of X and sound.
I think that is the only place where they are lagging after the "other" so called operating system
Re:Don't be afraid to stick the knife in! (Score:1)
Cry me a fucking river. (Score:2)
While you're complaining about the "corruption" of Linux, I'll be happily writing C code for my programming assignments in Cooledit with it's nice syntax highlighting, writing reports and proposals in Maxwell, playing MP3s with XMMS, making some *damn* purty graphics with the Gimp, playing Quake, watching TV with XawTV, playing SNES games with snes9x, and eagerly awaiting news that I'm (hopefully) a beta tester for Corel Draw 9. It's called progress. Cope.
What'll you be doing?
Probably complaining about the influx of "EVIL CORPORATIONS!!!" and "clueless idiots". Here's an idea, buddy. Stop trolling.
I know it's a troll, but I've spent the last three minutes typing this and I really can't stand people who are really like that. Yeah, I'm venting.
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
As far as the main points there though, I have to agree with everything else. Caldera is the only distro to recognize my Sound Blaster PCI 128 sound card (yeah, it's cheap - no reason to put a good card in with a suckass pair of speakers though). And browsing the CDs isn't difficult, it's damn near impossible for a newbie to understand. I'm still trying to get my sound and NIC to work.
kwsNI
Re:Oh shut up...there was no knife (Score:1)
If the flaws in the installer are obvious (which is implied, as no specific flaws are cited), then something as general as "improve the installer" is useless except as a simple vote. Good feedback tends to be appreciated, but that was not good feedback.
--
Kevin Doherty
kdoherty+slashdot@jurai.net
was the complaint necessary? [SC0RE:-17, Troll] (Score:1)
. . . and if I might add a comment, please improve the GUI installer . .
Oh, fuck you. You can't just make the announcement without including a complaint, can you? For God's sake, not everyone is so stuck in their M$ mindset that that can't install an OS without GUI widgets.
We all know that Andover.net was bought by VA a short while ago, so now is Slashdot obligated to start knocking anything that doesn't use the VA kernel?
Btw, have you seen the VA web site? LOL! Click on "About VA". Not only do they unecessarily put that paragraph in GIF form, but it's twelve separate GIFs. I guess that Linuxers are too l33t to use font and heading tags, huh? Not everyone has bandwidth pouring out of our asses, you know. I'm reading this on a 28.8.
Just wait. The next site revision will just be a collection of PDFs.
Re:SuSE (Score:1)
His posts are a joy to read
I think I like it
--
Re:hello (Score:1)
I've just put a flute in my ass
Dude, I hate to break it to you, but -- that's not a flute. And the guy that sold it to you, he's probably still walking behind you, isn't he? Now you see the truth... The flute is not magical.
Give it a few minutes.
Re:What a disapointment (Score:1)
Installers (Score:1)
Re:Why suse rocks. (Score:2)
I tried using Red Hat on a server at work, but it pretty much sucked for two reasons: one was that as the machine was server it wouldn't be running X; the monitor only did 640x480 and configuring RH was awkward. If you don't have X, or if you only have telnet access, text only config tools are particularly useful. I could have survived with that, but then I bumped into the other problem: RH has no direct ISDN support. SuSE does, and it worked out of the box, so the server runs SuSE.
One thing that annoys me slightly about SuSE: they split some of the packages up across /var, /usr and /etc (eg: apache and mysql). I (and a number of others I talked to) would much prefer them to just be left in /opt (or /usr/local), like KDE is, for example.
We've got SuSE on a number of machines, and it's been fine. Upgrading was no problem - boot off the new CD, select upgrade and it just does it. You can of course upgrade a running system, but it takes longer (have to stop/start things).
Multi-lingual support is very good too. There are plenty of people around here who don't speak much English (southern Germany). Und dann gibts ja au' no' Schwäbisch!
If 6 CDs are too many, you can get it on a DVD. (No, you don't need DeCSS to read it!) Either way, that's a lot of packages - although it's a bit confusing for anyone unfamiliar with Linux in general, who is trying to choose what they want.
I'm quite happy with SuSE, but I'm not sure I'd recommend it for beginners (unless they wanted to dive in at the deep end). I've not tried 6.3 though - I've heard that YaST2 is much nicer, but I've not had cause to upgrade yet. I'm still fine with vi!
-- Steve
suse's pretty good 8) (Score:1)
earlier today I bought SuSE 6.3 on DVD due to the fact that I managed to lose SuSE 6.1 Install disks 3 and 4 8)
I've literally just finished installing 6.3. I've yet to reboot. Tapped in my network details and here I am!
Anyway, just to add my 10p: SuSE is great, because it *works*. None of the ole redhat shite (I can't believe poeple put up with redhat. I have to use it at work, and it's dreadful at best. Seriously. Probably worse than that, and I've given it every chance since 4.2 (as in evaluate *every* version since 4.2))
SuSE "works". Promise. Drop in the CD/DVD, install, and it drops into a sensible shell. You don't even need to reboot on the latest version. And to be frank. the installer is precisely 1,023,473,121 times better than the DIRE redhat effort, provided you're not phased by a little german (if you're US citizen, you'll need switch the language to english on the first screen. If you're a moron, stick to windows - it's all you deserve).
Debian's good (providing you don't mind a 2.0.x kernel for a stable distro for the next month or two) as is Slackware (which I'd also recommend without pause but *please* avoid redhat. I can't emphasise this enough. And if you *do* have to install it, *promise* me you'll do a "minimum" and compile the rest from tarballs.
Having said that, I wish redhat very success - some of the stuff they come out with is utterly fantastic - but the distro (generally) is dire. Great ideas, but the implementation sucks.
(I mean that the "further up" the distro chain you go, the better redhat is. Gnome support is great, as are highre level OS functions - it's just lower down the OS that it's piss-poor)
Anyway, sorry about the rant; it probably won't do any good, if not for the fact that SuSE is European (and NIH), and RedHat is US. Which is a shame.
Do yourself a favour - install SuSE: and never look back! 8)
Chrimble
Re:Hahaha (Score:2)
shazam! oh mighty isis!
Re:Not LinuxOne? (Score:2)
Re:Is there really a best distribution? (Score:2)
I'm currently using Slackware, and as far as I can see, I'll stick with it indefinitely. I was not expecting it to come in first, but I didn't expect it to come in dead last by a wide margin in *all* categories. Slackware is the only distro that DOESN'T have unique features. It's the closest you could get to a "standard" linux without rolling your own.
I still see a need for reviews, especially for newbies, but I don't see a need for reviews or awards that tries to fit every distro into a one-size-fits-all category.
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
Getting Sound to work in SuSE (Score:1)
Assuming you've got SuSE 6.1 or newer (heck, it might even work with the older stuff), getting a soundblaster PCI 128 to work is *very* easy.
Su to root, and cd to
edit conf.modules, and there should be a section pertaining to sound, with commented out soundcard modules list a little down from the top...
uncomment out the appropriate card the lines for the es1371.o -- it will be commented as sb/pci 64/128 when you reach it.
exit, and you can usually count on sound working right after that (it did on my system anyway).
Just a note, the soundcard has no hardware support for midi iirc so you may have to find a different prog for that.
Hope this helps.
~FnkyAlien
Female geek in human clothing
Re:Is there really a best distribution? (Score:2)
Slack is small, extremely easy to download, the install can be daunting for non-experienced users, but its lean, mean, has great defaults, the init scripts are clean, etc.
I'd suggest something about Slackware users and this train of thought, but I'd get moderated down.
But really, having no centrally "best" distribution is a Good Thing(tm), those commercial apps that I notice are only for "Red Hat Linux" will start having to be more standardized.
-- iCEBaLM
Re:Oh boo hoo (Score:2)
Data-collection was very poor (Score:1)
Not to take any glory from SuSE, but I'd not take this one too seriously.
Thanks
Bruce
SuSE # 1 (Score:1)
papason
Re:Does SUSE offer an ISO CDROM Image? (Score:1)
and if you care
ftp://ftp.twoguys.org/suse/live-6.3.iso. gz [twoguys.org]
have fun,
Roland
Re:Does SUSE offer an ISO CDROM Image? (Score:1)
just replace the comma in front of gz with a dot in the 2nd URL.
sorry,
Roland
Re:suse's pretty good 8) (Score:2)
--
Soundz on SuSE6.3 (Score:1)
Must be my fault then I guess 8^)
I love the SuSE distribution because it fits my needs but its not everyones distro... Its TOO complete to fit everyones needz
Re:Installers? (Score:1)
This also helps people who have a low connection so they dont have to download some things of freshmeat.
"Your village called there idiot is missing"
-Teufel_Forelle
Re:suse's pretty good 8) (Score:1)
SuSE is a great distro, BUT RedHat installs on my IBM 365 laptop while the three times I've tried SuSE it failed.
Why Debian is fated to rule: (Score:1)
Plenty of gripes with Suse (Score:1)
I stood in the shop um-ing and er-ing between Suse 6.3 and Red Hat 6.1. Suse came with more CDs, so I plumped for that.
The installer (YaST 2) only did half a job; it got as far as trying to configure the graphics card (where it changed over to the German language for some reason) and not much further.
I managed to get most things working eventually (SaX really is easy) but no thanks to the useless manual (500 pages of wasted paper) or thier multitude of unnavigable CDs.
"SuSE Linux 6.3 features a new, revised easy installation" it says on the box. Pah!
(I suspect it was because I only had 1GB left to install it on, and it would probably have installed a lot more smoothly if I had had space for everything).
Re:SuSE eval (Score:1)
I am a relative neophyte, having run a couple of versions of redhat, and one less than satisfactory attempt with Debian (It may have been my hardware at the time, but I never ever did get on the internet through Debian...)
But, after experiencing Linux through Redhat, and learning enough to get x running and do the internet thing, I found SuSE to be very nice, easy to work with, most of the things I care about very easy to set up (x and internet access) and even successfully for the first time arranged for other users on my computer to have dial up internet access without being logged in as root. I know, I know, big deal.
Well, it was for me, and that's my point. I am a Personnel Director, not and IS director, so, am very non-computer technically talented. But, I love SuSE. msc
"Hey ya'll, hold my beer and watch this!"
-- Last 5 seconds recorded on black boxes installed in SUV's in Texas...
Re:So Easy a even a mac user installed it (Score:1)
I had to figure out about the boot partion and lilo. I did have to configure X manually (load additional video driver) and then reconfigure Xserver. Also had to configure DNS too. The manual they provide is pretty good. It runs well (X could run faster though. i'm on a 400 mhz G3, and its kinda sluggish in a way emulated NT isn't)..
Yast configured most stuff out of the box..Its was a good experience though, and I've got my "running Linux book" and am going to town learning what everything is (they're is a lot of stuff going on in linux and it isn't really intuitive). This is the price of power.
Next up is linuxPPC when they release a new version (CD Bootable it is rumored)
Re:SuSE 6.3 is a very nice distro.(part off topic) (Score:1)
As for why I chose RedHat over SuSE: It was there, and there wasn't three new versions before I installed it.
If I had to buy a distro, it'd be SuSE, because of the massive amount of stuff on there.
HOWEVER!
When I got home with my New 6.1 box, I read on-line that 6.2 was out. I wasn't happy. It just left a bad taste, even though I know that's the hazards of buying open-source (or any, for that matter) software.
I dunno, so, while my next linux installs will probably be SuSE until I get a faster net connection, I'm not happy about using 6.1, and no, I don't have the measly 30 bucks to get a new copy, because I want the manual.
Later
I don't know anthing about SuSE (Score:1)
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
I just installed 6.3 for the first time on two machines, one laptop, one desktop, both microns.
Things that went wrong:
1)the pcmcia start script hangs the laptop, even devoiding a reboot. After the first part of the install (both installers) I had to drop to single user mode and comment the script out.
2)the dhclient init script did not work right from a symbolic link. Had to hack it.
3)What? "default" installation includes no lp? (print spooler)
4)choosing too many checkboxes in yast2 can be harzardous to your health. Just get the box booting first before you load it up.
5)Consider 1GB of disk space a bare mininum. What's eating it all up? Auto-partitioning makes too big of a swap space.
On the plus side:
1)God, I love staroffice!
2)sax rocks!
3)It beats redhat anyday.
Pardon me while I go format my NT box now...
Re:SuSE eval (Score:1)
Most RPM's are written for redhat so anything using rc.d's need to be rewritten for suse, which is a pain.
I can usually find new rh-rpm's faster than suse ones. They're simply released faster because of the number of people using them.
As for pluses:
Yast's heirarchial installer is beautiful.
Why Europeans might LOVE SuSE (Score:1)
a> I suspect Europeans love SuSE because its half dozen CD's save a> DAYS of download time over those state owned and/or regulated a> wires. Sometimes throwing in the kitchen sing is a good a> thing. API
I don't think that is important: I pay by the hour for Internet access (in Switserland) but it's only the equivalent of 35 dollarcent per hour (and the ISP is free) so downloading the ISO still is much cheaper than buying the distribution.
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
By the way, is there a way to customize SuSEconfig (which is automatically started by YaST)? It always overwrites manually edited files in the
Overall, I do enjoy running SuSE and its wealth of applications. It has weird directories like
Re:Running SuSE (Score:1)
Yeah, and it's even documented!
Seriously I'm not in linux atm, but look in one of the "master" config files in etc.
If my memory serves right, it's rc.config. There's one option "ENABLE_SUSECONFIG=yes",
and if you read the comment, you'll figure out.
OTOH, you could try an educated guess
Re:Why Europeans LOVE SuSE .... ISDN (Score:1)
and SuSE has the best tools for configurating ISDN
"THERE ARE BETTER THINGS IN THE WORLD THAN ALCOHOL, ALBERT"-Death
nice, but... (Score:1)
Good or not, but as long as they do not GPL the YAST, it is not going to run on my machine.
I consider it utterly inexcuseable to put any other licence than the plain old GPL onto such a crucial pieces of software as installers and system-configurators. Especially installer: Since you cannot install a system withouth it, in effect YAST-licence becomes a licence of the whole SuSE distribution. This is imoral.
Re:Different Criteria (Score:1)
I certainly had to intervene when upgrading to potato.. it required some hacking, mainly whilst switching between "conf.modules" and "modutils", but then again anyone going from slink to potato will have the same problem.
Dunno about libc's, the machine that went through this is to my right, and the person behind it isn't complaining about much. Only problem I found is that when upgrading you lose corel's "hacked" version of KDE where you can dock the taskbar into the panel (is this opensource? I hope so, cause it's cool).
Re:Linux Distros (Score:1)
Re:"SuSE is the worst..." - Eric Raymond (Score:1)
Re:SuSE 6.3 has a couple of irritating quirks (Score:1)
At least that's what their webpage told me... After a couple man-years hacking away trying to get my antique SB16 to work, I just installed (and bought) a license to OSS!
It's a good thing too. By the way, what is "C" code?
Re:Getting Sound to work in SuSE (Score:1)
kwsNI
Re:Why Europeans might LOVE SuSE (Score:1)
In Germany it's more like $2 - $3 per hour for telephone charges alone. At ISDN speeds you're talking about 145 hours (assuming app. 4 GBytes) which costs at least $300. And that's to say nothing of having my bandwidth tied up that long, which even if it weren't expensive, would justify it for me to pay $40 for the full distro with docs, support, etc
Chris
Re:nice, but... (Score:2)
Pity, as with it the way it is no-one would want to hack it and make it work better, even if the rest of the distro is tolerable.
This confirms typical Linux user profile. (Score:1)
Of course, that cannot weigh against the SuSe distribution, since making it easier and friendly for people is extremely good for free software (some prefer calling it open source). That is one of the necessities for reaching the masses out there.
After all, most of the Linux users are now interested in normal, everyday, personal computing! It's almost the same user profile as Windows or Mac users! Still, we may hold the largest developer/user ratio. And that's just why Linux has the best technical support! 1 out of 20 people using Linux will be highly skilled in computing, either as a developer, as an artist, or as a webmaster, etc. And although suse's graphical installer is far from perfect (as I understand), it does appeal to the typical Linux user.
On the other hand, I don't know if slashdot people are biased towards SuSe distro, but personally I like the Debian distro because it's highly geared towards developers, and I am a developer! I think, among developers, Debian would get the highest vote. We should also not forget that it's outstanding as *the* free distribution, so to speak, but that's not the only reason to go for Debian.
SuSe Distribution is best - mostly (Score:1)
The one drawback to SuSe is their installation utilities, YAST 1 & 2. YAST 1 provides a somewhat flexible TTY based installation, but still prevents you from specifying exactly what you want to install. At least it allows you to specify more than one partition. YAST 2 is easy to use, but completely brain dead in its approach to partitioning (let alone package selection). I started to install using it, but after seeing what I would be forced to do, installed with YAST 1. RH 6.1 has a much better installation tool, too bad you can't mix and match. In fairness, I haven't seen Debian's last 2 releases and only installed OpenLinux once at a customer site last summer (hated it). One "feature" all of the Linux distributions' installation tools seem to share is brittleness. None of them recover from mistakes well.
I prefer to put
Re:Installers? (Score:1)
There is also the possibility of hardware problems requiring a reinstall (I have seen numerous hard drives die).
So, from an idealistic standpoint, Linux should have to be installed once, but from a more realistic standpoint, even a bulletproof OS needs a simple installer, because there are other reasons to install it.
Of course I reinstall Linux every few months on my machine, but I'm trying out every distribution I can get my hands on, and I like to start fresh each time as it is a fairer test.
Re:Linux Distros (Score:1)
TROO HACKERZ YOOZ SLACKWARE (Score:1)
1n 5l4ckw4r3 0.99pl4
h0h0h0
Re:libjpeg (Score:1)
Re:Installers? (Score:1)
beginners beware (Score:1)
SuSE ... almost *too* slick (Score:1)
I've been a SuSE user for about two years now, off and on, and only lately more on than off. I became committed to SuSE's distro when it configured X for me (6.1, maybe? Kernel 2.2.5 is all I recall for sure) and I didn't have to go through the migraine of getting it configured and running myself.
If anything, 6.3 may be too easy to install ... I prefer a commandline prompt, and wasn't given the option to boot to ASCII during the much-too-simple-to-screw-up graphical install.
Yes, this is a mighty step forward in getting Linux to the masses; installation was quick and painless, with minimal intervention required. And while I'll continue to fret about the dumbing-down of software to the lowest common user, the fact is that Linux installs have to be simplified if it's going to take over the desktop.
My first Linux install was an old Yggdrasil system, kernel 1.0.something, on a 20MHz 386SX with a whopping 4Mb RAM. Sure, it was a pain (don't even ask how long it took to recompile the kernel on that thing), and it was something that I honestly have to admit that the average user wouldn't have the patience to do.
The patience factor has now been taken out of the equation. All anyone has to do now is answer a few simple queries, swap out some CDs, and they've got a system that boots straight to X. The most complicated thing an end user is now expected to know is how to get into BIOS to make the system boot from CD.
And still ... I worry. I don't want to see Linux get dumbed down strictly for the purpose of competing with Microsoft -- if that happens, Microsoft wins anyway.
I see the results of lowest-common-denominator coding every day -- I wouldn't have a job in tech support if Microsoft wrote code that encouraged users to think about what they were doing as opposed to making them helpless the first time their mouse conks out. Point and click is convenient, but it's also mindless.
The long and short of it is - huzzah for SuSE, who IMO deserves the best distribution recognition; it's the most reliable release I've used, a straight up config is easy, and all the tools are there for the more complex configurations ... just make sure they stay there.
ikaros, anyone who says ignorance is bliss has not seen our call center stats.
Re:Winners Don't Matter (Score:1)
I think the only right response to the question of Linux vs. Windows is Linux without having to qualify it further. Distributions are for simplifying installations, and should be treated as siblings, not rivals. If the Linux community fragments into RH vs SuSE vs Corel vs Debian vs FreeBSD vs Slack vs whatever, Gates wins.
ikaros, off to learn the esoterica of maintaining one's own domain.