Which linux OS?

Give you an example of why I adore Ubuntu/Kubuntu.

I plugged in my USB bluetooth dongle I had just bought. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in an external USB wireless card. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my USB modem. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my skype phone. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

My hard disk on my laptop crashed, so I installed ubuntu onto an external hard drive. And it worked.

The support for ubuntu is amazing (www.ubuntuforums.org ), the step-by-step instructions in the help wiki are fantastic. Updates and installing cant be simpler. It just works (tm).

Ubuntu rawks.
 
Snake Blisken said:
I recommend ubuntu.
Please see the post on the new linux vista. Looks to be promising ;)
Click to expand...

I would rather eat my own face than use a version of Linux done up to look like Vista.

It's kinda like going into a church with stain-glass images of Satan on the walls.
 
Kasyx said:
I would rather eat my own face than use a version of Linux done up to look like Vista.

It's kinda like going into a church with stain-glass images of Satan on the walls.
Click to expand...

That's pretty Metal. Me like.
 
w1z4rd said:
Give you an example of why I adore Ubuntu/Kubuntu.

I plugged in my USB bluetooth dongle I had just bought. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in an external USB wireless card. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my USB modem. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

I plugged in my skype phone. It worked without me having to install any drivers.

My hard disk on my laptop crashed, so I installed ubuntu onto an external hard drive. And it worked.

The support for ubuntu is amazing (www.ubuntuforums.org ), the step-by-step instructions in the help wiki are fantastic. Updates and installing cant be simpler. It just works (tm).


Ubuntu rawks.
Click to expand...

After battling for about a week to get my e220 to work on kubuntu I gave up. Ok I know its simple but I just could not get it to work. Saw Mandriva 2008 on the latest Linux Format DVD. Installed it, everything works, I have not had to do one thing in the console.

I just tested your list and it came through with flying colours.
Connected to the windows network at work really easily e220 works straight out of the box.

Must say really impressed the installer was really simple and I wish the other distros dealt with the partitioning the same way was an absolute breeze.

So far so good just now have to find a .dwg viewer then I can be free from windows. :D
 
Use which flavour works for you. Ubuntu is my coffee, hehe. The linux user base is growing quickly these days. Faster than I have ever seen it grow.
 
web,
Pity Ubuntu did not work for you. I have the same experience with RPM based Linux distro's--they just do not work on my notebook. I am trying out Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 beta, and it "just works". So as wizard said, just try out other distro's you will be surprised which one just take on to your hardware. Other issue, is regular updates have to be on local server for me, as local bandwitdh is now free. Does Mandriva offer ZA servers for applications and updates?
 
Yip there are ZA servers for updates etc. I was keen to use Kubuntu but I am a little stuck without the internet connection through the e220. Was just really suprised how easy it was on Mandriva. I haven't played with Mandriva since it was still Mandrake but must say really am impressed.
 
Smiley_lauf said:
web,
Pity Ubuntu did not work for you. I have the same experience with RPM based Linux distro's--they just do not work on my notebook. I am trying out Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 beta, and it "just works". So as wizard said, just try out other distro's you will be surprised which one just take on to your hardware. Other issue, is regular updates have to be on local server for me, as local bandwitdh is now free. Does Mandriva offer ZA servers for applications and updates?
Click to expand...

I HATE RedHat-based distributions. I can deal with YUM, but .rpm? I'd rather just install Vista.
 
web said:
After battling for about a week to get my e220 to work on kubuntu I gave up. Ok I know its simple but I just could not get it to work. Saw Mandriva 2008 on the latest Linux Format DVD. Installed it, everything works, I have not had to do one thing in the console.

I just tested your list and it came through with flying colours.
Connected to the windows network at work really easily e220 works straight out of the box.

Must say really impressed the installer was really simple and I wish the other distros dealt with the partitioning the same way was an absolute breeze.

So far so good just now have to find a .dwg viewer then I can be free from windows. :D
Click to expand...
This is the biggest thing I have never understood about LINUX. If it works on one distro then why doesn't it work on another if the underlying kernel is the same??

Are they competing so furiously with one another instead of cooperating on a Windows killer app??
[If so, then this is why Linux doesn't work and will never take off properly]
 
Skeptik, except the point of Linux is not top be a Windows killer. There are those who run to it as an anti-MS type stand for sure. But it's purpose is to provide an alternative OS. Not to become the dominant OS. Though actually that might well be Shuttleworth's aim with Ubuntu. But other distros like Fedora, Red Hat, Gentoo, Slackware or Debian to name a few certainly don't have OS domination as their principle goal. Nor does Linus from what I've read of his statements.

At the end of the day each distro is different and the mainstream distros each make their own changes to the standard kernel. Hence why you can sometimes find hardware working on one and not another.
 
Last edited:
milomak said:
what is it exactly about RPMs that gets to you?
Click to expand...

Dependencies :mad:

I have always wondered, philosophically speaking...

If the package you try to install has 6 dependencies, each of which has 6 dependencies of its own, and so ad infinitum, will you get to a point where you have eventually downloaded every package in existence?
 
Kasyx said:
Dependencies :mad:

I have always wondered, philosophically speaking...

If the package you try to install has 6 dependencies, each of which has 6 dependencies of its own, and so ad infinitum, will you get to a point where you have eventually downloaded every package in existence?
Click to expand...

Not sure I get you. It’s not like deb packages don’t have dependencies (or required packages). Even if you compile you will need to have dependencies/required packages installed.
 
milomak said:
Not sure I get you. It’s not like deb packages don’t have dependencies (or required packages). Even if you compile you will need to have dependencies/required packages installed.
Click to expand...

Generally with deb, it downloads the required dependencies for you, rather than just complaining that something is missing, and leaving you to hunt it down as you whimper to yourself in a vain attempt to stop from going insane.
 
oh i see what you are saying. i find smart to be able to deal very intelligently with dependency issues ie actually pulling them. but yes the deb route certainly less frustrating.
 
Im dealing with an OpenSA setup that I have to do RPM builds. Ouch!
 
In an attempt to promote all open-source O/S's...

You should also consider one of the *BSD's as well.

NetBSD -- uncommon/old/new hardware
OpenBSD -- focuses on security
FreeBSD -- Workstation/Server

My favorite is FreeBSD which I have been using for years...

Its different to Linux in a number of ways and uses a more steady development approach.

The latest FreeBSD kernel (v7) is also faster than the fastest Linux kernel.

The learning curve is steep but if you are willing to learn you will find that FreeBSD can be used to make a powerful/highly secure workstation or server.

If you are curious about FreeBSD, try google :)

Or ask a question, I'll see if I can help.

However, If one of the *BSD's is not your cup of tea then my vote must go to Debian Linux.
 
BSD is pretty awesome, I will admit, but I wouldn't use it as a workstation myself as it is just too much effort. I can understand using it on one's servers (although OpenBSD is probably a better chocie), but for me I just don't see any reason other than masochism that would lead one to install it on their workstation :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X