General discussion


Year of the Linux Distro

By Dumphrey ·
Well, another year has come and gone, and Linux is still not a household name. Great strides have been made by many companies to put Linux in the hands of the masses, (Everex and Dell), but there is a long way to go.
Historically, Linux has been viewed as too "technical" for the average user, and "nothing will run on it".
Of these two "faults" only one can be laid at the feet of the Linux Gods, that being that "Linux is to technical". And, I would say this is no longer true. It is, in my opinion, less work to set up a Linux workstation (on bare metal) for office tasks then a Windows machine, and Linux window managers and desktops are giving a "windows-like" feel (though to be honest, was Mac not the first commercial GUI?).
All that being said, do you think Linux Distros are going overboard in their attempt to "dumb down" Linux in an attempt to reach the ?average? user? Should Linux remain ?pure? and in the hands of ?geeks??
Note: Please limit this to Linux Distros, this is not a Linux/Windows whine fest =\

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Jaqui, I hesitate to ask, but?

by Ed Woychowsky In reply to yes!, completely and un-e ...

Where does PC LinuxOS fall into the scheme of things? Remember, that you?ve already talked me out of Fedora Core. If I have to change, again, which distro should I use? Go easy on me; remember that I?m on the Windows twelve-step program.

Collapse -

Thank God

by Dumphrey In reply to Jaqui, I hesitate to ask, ...

he talked you out of Fedora. I recently spent some time "getting aquainted" with Fedora 8. Let me say, bug central. One update disabled the functionality of the firewall settings =\ I assume it will be fixed at some point. A point to remember is that Fedora is a "Testing" Distro, not a stable distro. It focuses on features more then stability.
As for what distro to use, most are more stable then Fedora. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, PCLinux. I have always avoided Suse, as I just do not liek how it "flows" while using the os. Debian is my favorite OS. Its stable, installs fairly painlessly. Supports most hardware, and is easy to customize. Jaqui is more of a purest then me, so he wil have different suggestions. But really, in the grand scheme of things, using any distro may be better then not using Linux at all.

Collapse -


by Jaqui In reply to Thank God

sorry but when I try to install screem and it says apache, php, mysql are requirements of it, that is not good.

not good at all

novell's app armour.. bogs a system down huge, specially if you do what I did and install it on a 166 MHz pentium-mmx laptop with only 128 mb ram and a 3 GB hard drive.

Collapse -

Bloated it is

by Dumphrey In reply to suse? AAAACCCCKKK!!! BLOA ...

And I can just not bring my self to like it, never have and prolly never will. I will stick with XP over Suse/Fedora as an only OS.

Collapse -

do you remember

by Jaqui In reply to Bloated it is

when Mandrake was the bleeding edge distro, that fedora is now?
That was my first experience with Linux, Mandrake 6.1
never went back to windows.

But I remember the headaches I had getting it running, I'll never recommend that type of headache to anyone just starting out with linux. most people would hate linux when they hit the first snafu.
[ oddly enough, I still have the single cd install disk of Mandrake 6.1. ]

ohhhh... evil evil thought.
do not make and iso of it Jaqui, do not compress it into a tarball and upload it for people to download. do not, do not, do not...

Collapse -

Hehe I started with

by Dumphrey In reply to do you remember

redat 7.2 and then moved to persons ricer is anothers control.
A single disk iso... it might run on some of the old boxes I have left around here (well one of them). He, nothing worked right until you had tweaked the **** out settings, and in some cases, flat out changed hardware..
I almost miss it. What I do miss is the economical use of resources. Processors are getting faster, ram is getting cheaper, but the net gain is small when you look at what programs and OS's are using.

Collapse -

~evil cackle~

by Jaqui In reply to do you remember

but picture the latest crop of newbies and how they would react to those old versions. ]:)

I think I have a copy of RH5, from a book on learning linux kicking around somewhere. ]:)

you want old and pretty much useless, RH5 is the way to go. Mdk 6.1 I stil occasionally install on older systems I get given to me, like that old pentium-mmx laptop.
though kernel 2.2 is very, very poor on the hardware support compared to current versions.

Collapse -

That Cackle was well deserved

by Dumphrey In reply to do you remember

I can easily imagine a whole new crop punding away at a 2.2 kernel on a pentium 4. <Snicker> I would be willing to bet not many peopel keep anything slower then single core 1.5 Ghz around anymore.
But ya know, we plugged at it, others plugged at it, new to linux today could plug at it.

Collapse -

Mandrake 6.5

by j-mart In reply to do you remember

This was the first Linux I tried, I don't know if it was just shear good luck but it installed easily and faultlessly on the machine I put it on. I have 2 sets of disks from a boxed set along with the box and manuals for one of them. The whole process of using this Distro made me a Linux convert.

Collapse -

Although it took a few hours to install

by The Scummy One In reply to suse? AAAACCCCKKK!!! BLOA ...

I installed it on a much faster notebook, it took some time, and yup, it is full of bloat. BUT, it is pretty stable (has been for me).
It is easy to use, and most things are avail easily. However the install time.... May make someone jump to another distro before trying SUSE.
Personally, I like the setup/speed of PCLinuxOS. But for a slower, more bloated system, SUSE does fine for me.

Related Discussions

Related Forums