Jump to content
36 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

He speaks the truth. The GNOME team has completely lost their way. Xfce has the functionality of GNOME without the ridiculous bloat, and KDE just can't be beaten.

 

Until openSUSE 11 comes out, I'd also avoid KDE4. There aren't any real KDE4 distros out there at the moment. Fedora and Ubuntus are just standard upstream KDE with all its problems.

 

Gnome is bloated? Maybe if you have a computer with 128MB of RAM. Chances are pretty good that you will be using either GTK2 or QT libraries no matter what window manager you choose. As soon as you load something like Firefox or Openoffice, any advantage XFCE gives over Gnome vanishes. Gnome is fairly light and also fairly unique. It doesn't try to emulate another OS and still provides the functionality most users will need.

 

That said, Arch Linux is my distribution of choice. It is a sandbox distribution but it doesn't require you to waste time compiling like Gentoo does. It also has the best package manager in the Linux world.

It doesn't try to emulate another OS and still provides the functionality most users will need.

 

Just because kde has one panel by default doesn't make it windows, kde still has thousands of features windows doesn't have.

 

Now that kde 4 is out its gnome that looks like windows.

I am currently Running Vista ultimate (64bit), Mandrivia 2008.1 X_64, and 10.5.1 on a HP Pavilion dv9207us, I changed to a t7600 cpu and 4 gigs of ram to beef this thing up....

 

I been playing with Linux for 7 or 8 years, and I have had good luck with mandrake, which eventually turned into mandriva....the IRC channel is pretty active, as well as #lfd and helpful(freenode #lfd, #mandriva)....there are some devolopers in there, which is helpful.

 

Yes unfortunately windoze is like a bad nightmare, but some of us do need it, as for my work server needs i/e for all the features to be enabled.

 

10.5.1 I Just started using, and I love it, runs very fast and stable....only thing I had to do was get a USB wireless as the internal intel 3945abg is still being worked on, and I crashed it when I tried a beta driver, but in fairness they warned of a kernel panic, and it wouldn't boot...so it is just too time consuming to repair a triple boot system, so I will wait till it is stable.

 

Not the same as what you are doing by any means, but I thought I would share these ideas.

 

no_gates_fan :rolleyes:

After playing with multiple distributions this week. I conclude Ubuntu 8.04 will be the easiest for anyone to setup and heres why...

 

OpenSUSE 10.3 (Gnome) would not get my screen resolution right. It is very beautiful and put together well, but eye candy doesn't mean {censored} if you can't read the fonts. (the resolution I was seeking was 1650 x 1080 on my new Hanns-G monitor).

 

OpenSolaris 2008.05 is still too new and too beta. It has flat out bugo problems. I forgot what the main problem that made me say no was, but I remember it was important.

 

Fedora 9 is another beautiful distribution. I get chills when I boot it up. But for the life of me, I could not get it to install its bootloader on a tri-boot system with Vista and OSx86.

 

gOS Space and gOS Rocket (Gnome) are awesome in theory. They are put together well and well thought out. They are not ideal for people who actually want to get work accomplished though. They are built around entertaining websites like YouTube and MySpace. For gods sake, the News stack in gOS Space has sources like Perez Hilton, TMZ, and MTV, yeah, for NEWS (not spelled NEWZ mind you). They don't have sources like Google News, NY Times, USA Today, or World News.

 

 

And last, as usual, Ubuntu was a breeze to install and setup. No problems installation wise, I install Grub to a floppy (which I put away because I boot into Linux via EasyBCD and Windows Vista) and went on configuring stupid little details like the NumLock being on at boot up.

 

Ubuntu is easy (I hate the phrase made for Humans, because what distribution is not made for Humans?) to use, and always a pleasant surprise. Not to mention tons of support and help in wiki form (in which Ubuntu's is easy to read).

 

My 2 cents...

 

Feisty

 

Gutsy

 

Hardy

Actually u have to compare Ubuntu 8.04 with opensuse 11.0 which is not out yet and opensuse 11 will have better hardware support than ubuntu 8.04 cause of the kernel version.

 

Ubuntu 8.04 2.6.24

opensuse 11 2.6.25

 

OpenSUSE 10.3 the one u r comparing with has kernel 2.6.22 and that has to be compared with ubuntu 7.10

Actually u have to compare Ubuntu 8.04 with opensuse 11.0 which is not out yet and opensuse 11 will have better hardware support than ubuntu 8.04 cause of the kernel version.

 

Ubuntu 8.04 2.6.24

opensuse 11 2.6.25

 

OpenSUSE 10.3 the one u r comparing with has kernel 2.6.22 and that has to be compared with ubuntu 7.10

 

I am not comparing any version to any other version. I just made a list of Linux variations (all the latest non beta releases) that I have recently downloaded and played with. I noted that overall, Ubuntu would be the most compatible and usable for a person who is just starting off with Linux and would like to encounter the least amount of problems as possible. That's all.

 

In regards of unfairly comparing Ubuntu and OpenSUSE...

 

No, I don't have to compare Ubuntu 8.04 to OpenSUSE 11 because [A] there is no final non beta release out yet, therefore, I can't use it; because I did employ some bias in my testing like using Gnome distributions because I don't like KDE; and finally [C] because I don't have to. :)

Try suse 11 when its out and see if u like it more than ubuntu. ;)

 

About the hardware support, ubuntu 8.04 gave a resolution for me about 640x480 when I tried it whereas Ubuntu 7.10 gave me the correct resolution of 1280x1024, so your hardware experience will vary from distro to distro.

 

One thing is certain though that if some hardware device works with one distro then its going to work with the other as well.

×
×
  • Create New...