Prolly starting to sound like a broken record by now, but I pick SuSE above ALL distro's I have used. But in order from most favorite, to least.... SuSE (Pick a version any version) Slackware (Takes a bit of work, but great once its how you want it) Caldera (Cute distro to play with) ^^^ My Top 3 Red Hat Mandrake Debian ^^^ My least favorites and lord knows what others I have attempted on a whim and just decided "screw it SuSE is so much better". Granted, if I had a choice between my least favorite distro's and windows I will still go for linux over MS. Ease of use has NOTHING on actual usability and customization in my book. I would rather spend 20 minutes tinkering and reading mailing lists and how to's to get something working perfectly then sit on an OS that likes to spit, sputter and beg for reboots in less then a day of uptime. Robert K. Davies On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 08:59, Tim Prince wrote:

On Monday 22 April 2002 02:04, joe lerch wrote:

...

I have been using SuSE since 5.3, never really took the time to look at any of the other distributions. Are there any other distributions near SuSE in completeness and ease?

I have grown used to YaST and liked being able to use it for everything, and enjoyed having all the various software included ready to install and run. If you are a seasoned SuSE user and had to pick another distribution which would it be? Do any others include all the KDE and gnome , and allow you to easily switch between them? Is SuSE a one of a kind type of distribution, if so why? .

redhat 7.x, of course, give the option of installing KDE and gnome, and selecting at boot. KDE won't be as up to date as with SuSE. redhat is as easy to install as SuSE in a smaller range of situations. Dual boot with Windows is somewhat more difficult, and the range of supplied applications is much smaller. Development utilities (gcc et al) are not standard fsf versions. -- Tim Prince

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com

-- ********************************************************************** This post is encrypted in the "english language method", any attempt to decipher meaning from these symbols is a violation of the DMCA. This includes, but is not limited to: interpreting the symbols through use of biological, visual decryption devices, translating the symbols into another language encryption scheme, and digital processing the symbols into a form conducive to oral intrepretation. Thank you for your time. **********************************************************************

On Monday 22 April 2002 2:00 pm, Poing wrote:

----- Original Message ----- From: "joe lerch" To: Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 11:04 AM Subject: [SLE] If not SuSE, what other distribution?

...

I have been using SuSE since 5.3, never really took the time to look at

any

...

of the other distributions. Are there any other distributions near SuSE in completeness and ease?

I have grown used to YaST and liked being able to use it for everything,

and

...

enjoyed having all the various software included ready to install and run.

If

...

you are a seasoned SuSE user and had to pick another distribution which

would

...

it be? Do any others include all the KDE and gnome , and allow you to

easily

...

switch between them? Is SuSE a one of a kind type of distribution, if so

why?

...

.

thanks in advance

joe

If you feel this is off topic, please send your reply directly via email rather than continue to post on the list

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com

It is not off-topic for me.

I used SuSE 7.0 and 7.2 and so far I think it is the very best distro nowadays.Some people prefer other distro's,but it is a question of taste I think. I will install suSE back next year when i have money to buy a new HD. Anyway,really pleased with XP. If SuSE wants to do better,be my guest. But it will be a tough job beating XP. i hope SuSE can do it,however...

Poing

Ha! Ha! That's a really good joke. The bit about XP. Haven't had such a good laugh for a long time.

Are we talking about XP processor or Windows XP? My impression from the context was MS Windows. Maybe I need to reread that message. Eddie On Monday 22 April 2002 2:37 pm, Anders Johansson wrote:

On Monday 22 April 2002 15:31, Eddie Howson wrote:

...

Ha! Ha! That's a really good joke. The bit about XP. Haven't had such a good laugh for a long time.

What's the joke? Those babies are really great processors.

And since SuSE doesn't do hardware it *will* be hard for them to beat XP.

Anders

Uzo Kemdi Anyamele wrote:

On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 14:37, Anders Johansson wrote:

...

On Monday 22 April 2002 15:31, Eddie Howson wrote:

...

Ha! Ha! That's a really good joke. The bit about XP. Haven't had such a good laugh for a long time.

What's the joke? Those babies are really great processors.

And since SuSE doesn't do hardware it *will* be hard for them to beat XP.

Clever Cloggs !!! Hehehehe........ So, have you had the one about XP running far to hot to be of any use ? <<PUFF>>

I just signed on to this list after a long absence so I missed the beginning of this thread. What is the joke? Possibly this subject is one of interest to me. Why? When I started working in this lab 6 years ago, the project involved Pentium 100 PCs with Windows 95. A lot has changed since then and we have a mix of PCs but still with Windoze of varying versions. Recently one of our leased IBM PCs with 400 MHz Pentium II, NT4 got replaced with a new IBM with Pentium IV and Windows 2000. Everyone who has used this new PC and the old one have noticed that this new one seems to be slower than the old one with NT4. It seems that though the processor is much faster, the new operating system has dragged it down to the level of older PCs :-( So, now more than ever, I am interested in Linux once again. In the past when I experimented with Linux I thought that it seemed to run a bit slower or require more resources than W95 but with the latest performance of Windows 2000 and XP, I figure that perhaps Linux is now way ahead in the performance area. Is anyone willing to give an honest opinion of W2K/XP versus Linux? Am I correct in thinking that now Linux will blow away W2K/XP? In the past I hadn't really pursued switching to Linux because I was still trying to learn C++ so that in the future I would be able to use Borland's Kylix to port my projects to Linux. Now that I have learned some C++ and have ported one of the projects to C++ I would really like to know more about Linux performance because the latest MS products seem so bad. Damon Register

On Monday 22 April 2002 17:39, Damon Register wrote: [snip]

So, now more than ever, I am interested in Linux once again. In the past when I experimented with Linux I thought that it seemed to run a bit slower or require more resources than W95 but with the latest performance of Windows 2000 and XP, I figure that perhaps Linux is now way ahead in the performance area. Is anyone willing to give an honest opinion of W2K/XP versus Linux? Am I correct in thinking that now Linux will blow away W2K/XP?

I dual boot Win2K and SuSE7.3, and have noticed dramatic speed and preformace differences between the two OSes. Linux far outperforms Win2K. The hardware: AMD 1GHz, 700MB RAM, 108GB drive space across 3 harddrives, Sony CDrewriter, GeForce2 video. Some examples: - Burning a disk in Win2K ties up pretty much everything, and the OS is so busy that you cannot do anything else during the burn. In Linux, I can do everything but watch DivX movies while I burn CDs. - Gaming is much faster in Linux. I play the new Return to Wolfenstein, and I get better framerates and can set the video quility higher in Linux than in Win2K. - Drive activity - copying and moving files is much faster in Linux (using Riser FS if that makes any difference). The list goes on and on. I only have Win2K installed to do the few odd tasks that I cannot do in Linux - for example my bank has custom software that is Windows only for example, and I cannot get it to work right using WINE. When I am using Windows for some task, I usually find myself cursing at how slow it is because I am used to the speeds of Linux. C.

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 10:35:28AM -0700, Alex Daniloff wrote:

Are you using M$ Money for your banking needs? I couldn't make M$ Money work with WINE, nether I could find a financial application to substitute M$ Money. Looks like Linux doesn't have strong position on personal financial software market. Alex

Moneydance is a very good application. It won't integrate directly with your bank, yet, if you need that, but it has all the basics covered, double entry accounting, splits, reconciliation, reports, graphs, etc. Best Regards, Keith -- LPIC-2, MCSE, N+ I can C for miles and miles Got spam? Get SPASTIC http://spastic.sourceforge.net

On Monday 22 April 2002 19:35, Alex Daniloff wrote:

Are you using M$ Money for your banking needs?

WHAT!? They have a currency *too*? I know they've been issuing passports for a while now, but I didn't know they'd taken the plunge and introduced their own money as well... So what's it called...? the "Micron"? oh, no wait, that word's already spoken for... how about a "Truth"="100 Liecents"... Jon Currently listening to: Motörhead - Dr. Love, from the new album 'Hammered' -- .signature ;)