Linux Desktop Distro Shootout 383
An anonymous reader writes "InfoWeek has posted an open-source OS comparison. Linux Shootout: 7 Desktop Distros Compared pits openSUSE, Ubuntu 8.4, PCLinuxOS, Mandriva Linux One, Fedora, SimplyMEPIS, and CentOS 5.1 against each other. And the winner is ... Ubuntu. Author Serdar Yegulalp writes: 'Ubuntu 8.4 remains one of the best desktop distributions for many good reasons: it works with almost any hardware you throw at it, and has tons of features for both existing Linux users and prospective converts from Windows.' He also gave openSUSE points for ease of use on the desktop, and Mandriva kudos for ease of administration."
8.4? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:8.4? (Score:5, Insightful)
Fedora 9 will be launched soon, they could have used the beta.
Fedora 8 could be compared to Ubuntu 7.10
Re:8.4? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
why CentOS? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:why CentOS? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If they include CentOS and RHEL, surely Debian could have made a bow... or is that too advanced for your average Linux Desktop?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So 2 versions of RH and no SLACKWARE!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess they were scared of Slackware's awesomeness!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What about it do you loathe? I've been using Linux off and on since pre 1.0 slackware, and pretty much constantly for the past five years; Ubuntu's the easiest to install and use out of the box that I've seen.
Granted, I've been only using Ubuntu for the last year, but 8.04 was
Add free version. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That said, Fedora 8 was tested, and the beta for Fedora 9 is currently in full-swing and will be released in 8 days [fedoraproject.org], so the comparison is slightly weighted (as all Linux desktop distribution comparisons tend to be) to the most recent release: Ubuntu in this case.
Re: (Score:2)
Just the other day on
So this comparitive test does not really lend Ubuntu an unfair advantage, if it were done with Hardy a bit matured one would be able to say that...
Re:Add free version. (Score:4, Informative)
And "begs the question" doesn't mean "raises the question" or "ducks the issue". It refers to a specific form of argument which _does_, in fact, attempt to answer the question--but does so by assuming the conclusion in one of the premises. Specifically it's an argument of the form
p implies q
suppose p
-> q
Where "suppose p" really is "suppose my side of what we're arguing about is true".
Better methods of statistical comparison. (Score:5, Funny)
2 - Build many identical robots.
3 - The round starts upon insertion of the disk.
Last standing robot wins.
THUNDERDOME!!!
Hey!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Nothing is off-limits to Ubuntu's crazed, fundamentalist frenzy.
Ubuntu: Answer me this Mr. Suse, what good is that superior firepower of yours if you can't even boot. [cut away to a man masked with a smiley face mutilating an innocent young grub]
OpenSUSE: St. Linus perserve me, I'll exact my revenge on you, all of you monsters!
Re: (Score:2)
No mention of Yast (Score:3, Insightful)
Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a bit split on this, I guess. It seems like they shouldn't release an unfinished product, but on the other hand I like that they actually stick to a 6-month release schedule.
I think I'd rather see them releasing every 6 months as best they can, and if during my testing I run across any showstopper bugs, I'll stick with an older version. After all, that older version will be (at most) 6 months old.
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want to download the latest SVN snapshot every 6 months that should be your prerogative but I've been burned too many times by "stable release"s that weren't actually as advertised simply because someone said "it's release day... SHIP IT!".
I always do some form of testing but it's a lot of wasted effort if you're installing something that you assume is already as clean as it can be, and it's really not.
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess I just figure that a lot of "stable" software won't really have all the kinks ironed out until after release. When something is released, it's probably going to put onto hardware that no one was testing on, and it's probably going to be used in ways that it wasn't used during testing.
I agree that if there are known major bugs that will be extremely common, or bugs that are show-stoppers (e.g. cause significant data loss), then release should be pushed back. But if you want something extremely stable, then you might consider holding back your upgrade for a little while.
But I'm not making an argument from principle. I'm just saying that, from experience, I've never seen anyone get something 100% bug-free. Even Debian stable can have some quirks. So I'd rather have a regular release schedule than have progress on Ubuntu held back until every little bug can be worked out.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ubuntu 8.04 (Score:5, Informative)
I find that it's as wise to wait for stability in an Ubuntu release as it is with an MS Windows release. The difference is that stability comes to Ubuntu faster. (o:
I will give Heron a month or two to settle down and then switch.
Ubuntu does more right than any other Linux distribution ever has.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a decision to use the old scheduler on the Desktop version of Heron. It is causing problems. Try the Server version.
Yes, the scheduler in the Server version may give better responsiveness, as well as fix some sound crackling and related issues. The relevant switch (CONFIG_FAIR_CGROUP_SCHED) will be coming to the Desktop kernel soon [launchpad.net] in 2.6.24-17, which is currently in the hardy-proposed repo (you can install it by enabling the 'proposed' repo, but note that in general stuff in proposed hasn't yet been 100% tested, so you might want to wait).
Re: (Score:2)
Just make sure you keep your kernel and initramfs in your menu.lst when the update manager wants to do a kernel update. Personally, I keep a bootable external drive for recovery.
This is a classic YMMV situation; I realize that many people have never had this experience. However, given my personal experience, I tend to think of Ubuntu as a "enthusiast" distro. I wouldn't put it on a Linux novice's
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/188226 [launchpad.net]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/boinc/+bug/177713 [launchpad.net]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
overall, hardy feels very rough, and the upgrade process is even rougher. the upgrade removes the network manager applet, so i had to configure wi-fi from hand and sudo apt-get install ne
And the winner is ..... (Score:3, Insightful)
No matter which distro takes the #1 spot, the real grand prize winner is
THE USER !!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Or even trying to choose between the lesser of 5 or 10 evils
Fedora (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Fedora (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:5, Informative)
I sincerely enjoy the Linux experience and appreciate the community, but this statement is positively absurd. Ubuntu's own help files [ubuntu.com] contain extensive lists of wireless cards that have a big fat "No" listed under the "Works out of the box" column. And that's just wireless cards.
One of the primary reasons that the average person abandons Linux is the frustration caused by these types of misleading claims. Somebody says, "Hey, virtually everything works out of the box!" and they think... wow, well, I buy my stuff at top retailers from top brands, surely then my stuff is supported.
Unfortunately for them, their stuff may not work at all, or may work partially. Lots of gotchas for Video cards [ubuntu.com], scanners [ubuntu.com].. the list goes on and on. Nobody is well served by making statements that indicate anything except that hardware support is still a major obstacle for the adoption of Linux on the desktop.
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a pain and a big can of worms even when it's "working" under Windows.
It's hardly the best thing to hold up against Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but on the other hand, I've found Ubuntu to generally provide better hardware support than Vista. Also, while Windows tends to make you install drivers, more things seem to be supported in Linux without any user intervention.
So overall, I probably would say that Ubuntu offers very good hardware support.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The average user has enough trouble keeping his machine from being hijacked and free of viruses and malware. If Linux is ever going to be the OS of choice for a consumer desktop, it has to be something a consumer can get running just by popping in the CD.
I was fed up with Windows and I c
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'll point out that OS X works with even less hardware than Ubuntu does. That didn't stop you from choosing it. Why should hardware support stop anyone from choosing Ubuntu?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that can come even come remotely close to this with Windows is an OEM restore CD.
Linux falls down in this respect sometimes because IT IS NOT THE MONOPOLY. Even so, it already does a number of things in an easier and more accessable way than Windows.
Windows is the OS that makes USB vendors resort to little warning stickers: "don't plug this in before you install the driver".
The real problem i
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:4, Informative)
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:5, Insightful)
And, no, I don't know a solution to this short of waiting and hoping for the better. But we certainly shouldn't be telling people that "most hardware works in Linux" - because that is outright lie.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Users, for the most part, don't care why something is not supported - if it isn't, they are simply not going to bother with that particular distro/OS.
Sure, and that is also why the reception of Windows Vista among ordinary users has been so lukewarm. They have a working system (Windows XP), so why switch to a system with widely reported incompatibility problems and driver issues?
they just shrug and say, "what do we care about your niche geek OS?"
Just like they'll say, "What do we care about your craptastic Windows downgrade? I'll stay with XP, thank you.". As you can see, this isn't only a problem with "geek OSes", but also a problem with OSes developed by multi-billion-dollar corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Resolution is 640x480, ethernet doesn't work, wireless doesn't work, I had to resort to burning CDs with another computer to get the basic drivers on there.
Re:"Almost any hardware you throw at it" (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you actually LOOK at some of those things you linked? The video card section, for example, is more or less completely filled with "Yes" under the important columns.
I'm sorry, but when was the last time you actually tried installing Windows? How much hardware works "out of the box" there? How much hardware requires you to go huntin
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
*Webcam: old Philips. 2K/XP doesn't work at all, no drivers exist. Mepis can be coerced to work without much trouble.
*NI PCI GPIB controller card: 2K doesn't work at all, XP works great once I install the official drivers off the disc (although the downloaded ones don't work.) Mepis can be coerced to work with lots of trouble.
*USB PIC microcontroller programmer: 2K doesn't work at
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, brilliant! Users were almost universally disappointed with Vista's inability to live up to its hardware support claims, so why not ride that train right through Ubuntu's face?
I mean, come on, folks. Microsoft could have setup 5 computers that would have run Vista flawlessly as well. As my links pointed out above, claiming that Ubuntu (or Vista) supports almost everything you throw at it is not "telling the truth". It is just another irresponsible claim made by overzealous writers and marketers that wo
How many of those distros (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Why Mandriva One? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lastest Ubuntu, Older other distros (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
However, to be fair, there is never a perfect time when all distros have just recently come out. In fact, Fedora was supposed to be have been released by now, but was delayed by a few weeks, which led to an older version being tested here. Ubuntu released on time, and got it's latest version in the door for this review; sometimes making your deadlines is helpful. (This, btw, doesn't seem much of a coincidence - Ubuntu treats its deadlines very seriously, constantly sta
Recent Linux convert from Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Recent Linux convert from Windows (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So far as I can see they finally did one or two things right, but I know for a fact some of the fixes were began so late in the development cycle (check
Debian (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Poor research (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of research is that? He just shows a separate review of each distro, to finally announce "and the winner is...". I call this bull. Much more informative is the "girlfriend linux test" article.
Mod article down.
Xandros - shot up in popularity (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ubuntu 8.4? (Score:5, Funny)
Thank you.
Re:Ubuntu 8.4? (Score:5, Funny)
Speeds & Feeds Perils (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Focusing on a couple of winners. In Ubuntu's case they've got PR hucksters doing the shouting for them
2. Eliminating new features. These shootouts leave no room for testing new features, programs, etc. It's yay or nay and the nay's always win when something is -really- new.
3. There are a number of "What about distro X, Y or Z?" comments and they are, for the most part legitimate questions. Most of those non-chosen distros simply haven't made a good enough impression in media circles. Those aforementioned "good impressions" usually cost some money.
4. Eliminating new distros. There are -lots- of other linux distros who's first purpose is _not_ a desktop. The problem I'm pointing out is multifaceted and troubling. To boil it down: "Everyone knows that Linux is that other computer system they buy for less and put their stolen XP OS on."
My 2 cents: Debian Testing -still- manages to be completely ignored when it's a good apples-to-apples comparison to whatever new version Ubuntu puts out.
Re:Speeds & Feeds Perils (Score:4, Informative)
Relatively worthless, even harmful, comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
This review sais very little about the current state of affairs and is of minimal real benefit to anyone not already initad in the Linux world. It might even do a misfavour to newbies wanting to take the plunge.
Admittably, it takes some time testing seven distros on five platforms, but that doesn't change the fact that it fails to represent the actual state of LinuxLand and the distros pitted against each other.
You want Linux on the Desktop for non-geeks? (Score:2)
Otherwise, they need to have somebody to resolve the problems that come up because no Linux distro can test on every possible combination of hardware. It's not hard to do for US. It's an insurmountable frustration for the. So unless you are prepared to always be there for them, find a vendor that supports them.
Dell, I know, has a narrow but adequate range of choices with Ubuntu preinstalled. Since they
Almost Any Hardware...? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm going to go to BestBuy *TODAY*. Can anyone here tell me which wireless network adapter will work 100% out of the box. I'd like for it to support WPA and WEP and not require any WINDOWS DRIVERS or any of that crap.
If someone could please provide a link to a wireless network adapter from the www.BestBuy.com website; I'll go and buy it and use Linux and tell everyone how great Li
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sadly I've given up (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's finally get over the aversion to one main distro, or one of each tool and app. No one cares about choice when all it means is 40 buggy half-assed apps and no single solid one. It is a lot of wasted talent, time, and effort. With some direction and drive Linux could surpass anything out there.
Until people begin to wake up, I'll keep it for servers only. Oh, and I'd personally like to thank the genius who decided to go with a beta version of Firefox for a long-term support version of an OS... now THAT is how to FAIL.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, and I'd personally like to thank the genius who decided to go with a beta version of Firefox for a long-term support version of an OS... now THAT is how to FAIL.
Having a beta in a stable LTS release might seems a bit stupid at first, but the reason the beta is in there is exactly because it is a LTS release. Would they have gone with Firefox2 they would have been stuck with that for many years to come, going with Firefox3-Beta allows them to upgrade to Firefox3 once it comes out (i.e. very soon), so they don't have to worry about supporting obsolete Firefox2 down the road.
That aside, I agree. I would much prefer if all those distros out there would just die or mer
You don't sound like a "Linux guy". (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't sound like a Linux guy to me. You sound like a BSD guy.
And the winner is... (Score:4, Funny)
Good on Fedora (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, to whoever modded me offtopic: booooo....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu installs and activates this stuff by default. I am sure all the other genuine desktop
distros in the current roundup do the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)