[opensuse] triple boot : Vista, SuSE and Ubuntu
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 09 July 2007 12:39, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
Hello Hans, Sure. Just make sure you install Ubuntu on a separate partitions. No partition magic mambo jambo please. Use the true-and-proven fdisk. And the install sequence: Xp first (always first), then Opensuse/Ubuntu (doesn't matter). I have it install on my notebook OK: Xp, Opensuse, Ubuntu. Ubuntu or Opensuse will recognize each other's bootloader and adjust the grub entry accordingly. Superb! -- Fajar Priyanto | Reg'd Linux User #327841 | Linux tutorial http://linux2.arinet.org 1:12pm up 3:01, 2.6.18.2-34-default GNU/Linux Let's use OpenOffice. http://www.openoffice.org
On 2007/07/09 13:13 (GMT+0700) Fajar Priyanto apparently typed:
On Monday 09 July 2007 12:39 (GMT+0700), Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D
Why do you think so? It has a whole bunch of different CD you need to choose from according to which desktop environment you want (Gnome, KDE, XFCE), and whether your installation will require advanced install features. Ubuntu is a Debian, which makes it quite a bit different from SUSE. If you really want some other distro, and I can't imagine why a SUSE user would, try another RPM distro, like Mandriva or Fedora.
i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
Sure. Just make sure you install Ubuntu on a separate partitions. No partition magic mambo jambo please. Use the true-and-proven fdisk. And the install sequence: Xp first (always first),
He already has 2, so it's not like he has a choice. However, it's really dumb to tell people to *always* install windoz first, as windoz is the only system that periodically requires reinstalling, and you *can't* install it *first* after Linux is already installed without wiping things out to do it. Installing doz first IS NOT NECESSARY!!! In many cases, it isn't even desirable. It merely requires some understanding of what to do and what not to do in order to avoid booby traps. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/install-doz-after.html -- "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteoousness." 2 Timothy 3:16 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
ubuntu is quite tempting :D
Why do you think so? It has a whole bunch of different CD you need to choose from according to which desktop environment you want (Gnome, KDE, XFCE), and whether your installation will require advanced install features.
And SUSE doesn't have several CDs and/or DVDs? You're not keeping up with what is happening in opensuse-factory I take it :-) In addition to the usual DVD and 6 CD set (for 10.3), there is also now a KDE specific install CD, and a Gnome specific install CD. Kinda sounds like Kubuntu and Ubuntu to me. It makes sense. Why download Gnome if you don't like it (ie the entire 6CD or DVD set) and all you need is the 1 CD KDE (or Gnome) version (or vice versa) and a connection to the Repositories?
Ubuntu is a Debian, which makes it quite a bit different from SUSE.
It's not that different. OK, based on deb not rpm, but... so? What difference does that make in the proverbial grand scheme of things? (other than that some files are not in the places you may be used to.. eg apache is not in /srv/www, it's in /var for some reason). OK, you can't (easily) install a SUSE built RPM on Ubuntu... but.. they have a huge repository of software (larger than openSUSE's in terms of volume/numbers) built for Ubuntu. Once it's installed, on a day to day use basis it's still Linux... it does all the same things as openSUSE. It even does some things far better - repository package management being the number one thing that Ubuntu really does well... and where openSUSE lags far behind. (my opinion of course, but also why several friends of mine I converted over to SUSE over the years have dropped SUSE in favor of Ubuntu for desktop use) One thing really worth noting about Ubuntu (and it's variations) is, that it really suffers for a lack of a decent system config tool like YAST. We like to complain about YAST until we're blue in the face, but once it's gone, you suddenly discover how much you used YAST, or at least appreciated YAST. I've triple booted and more on my computer. It works fine - the Ubuntu installer will find the other OSes installed and create GRUB entries for them. Just be aware that the last Linux installed will (usually) be the one who supplies the boot manager (GRUB usually). If you prefer the openSUSE GRUB, boot to openSUSE, edit GRUB to add in the details for the new install, and rewrite openSUSE's GRUB in place of the new Linux install's boot manager. C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2007/07/09 09:46 (GMT+0200) Clayton apparently typed:
Felix Miata wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D
Why do you think so? It has a whole bunch of different CD you need to choose from according to which desktop environment you want (Gnome, KDE, XFCE), and whether your installation will require advanced install features.
And SUSE doesn't have several CDs and/or DVDs? You're not keeping up with what is happening in opensuse-factory I take it :-) In addition
I was going by what comes in the latest available retail box, and I did mean per architecture. Factory I install via HTTP. ;-)
to the usual DVD and 6 CD set (for 10.3), there is also now a KDE specific install CD, and a Gnome specific install CD. Kinda sounds like Kubuntu and Ubuntu to me. It makes sense. Why download Gnome if
It makes for confusion among nOObs trying to make an intelligent choice. In *buntu there aren't just architectures and desktops to choose from, but also certain other installation options are only available in either the standards or the alternates but not both.
you don't like it (ie the entire 6CD or DVD set) and all you need is the 1 CD KDE (or Gnome) version (or vice versa) and a connection to the Repositories?
Actually once you have an OS installed on a system, you don't need anything but an installation kernel, installation initrd, and something that can load them - no iso or CD or DVD is necessary, so I rarely have need to download or burn them.
Ubuntu is a Debian, which makes it quite a bit different from SUSE.
It's not that different. OK, based on deb not rpm, but... so? What difference does that make in the proverbial grand scheme of things?
While that's certainly a consequential difference, it's hardly the only thing I was referring to. Debians dump everything but single into runlevel 2, which can make a number of otherwise simple troubleshooting and configuration tasks more vexing. You can't drop from runlevel 5 to runlevel 3 to halt a broken X. You can't drop to runlevel 2 to kill all networking. You can't feed a grub prompt a 3 to prevent X from starting on boot. Try and figure out what they substitute for chkconfig. I haven't found anything yet.
(other than that some files are not in the places you may be used to.. eg apache is not in /srv/www, it's in /var for some reason).
Duh!
Once it's installed, on a day to day use basis it's still Linux... it does all the same things as openSUSE. It even does some things far better - repository package management being the number one thing that Ubuntu really does well... and where openSUSE lags far behind. (my opinion of course, but also why several friends of mine I converted over to SUSE over the years have dropped SUSE in favor of Ubuntu for desktop use)
How do their users use a command line to locate a particular package they don't know the name of? With such helpful repository directory names as 1, b, 3, d, etc. it can take quite a bit of time to hunt down and fetch a package compared to looking in distribution/version/repo/type/suse/arch/ with mc ftp.
One thing really worth noting about Ubuntu (and it's variations) is, that it really suffers for a lack of a decent system config tool like YAST. We like to complain about YAST until we're blue in the face, but once it's gone, you suddenly discover how much you used YAST, or at least appreciated YAST.
Not an inconsequential reason why I replied to the OP. Buntu's Adept GUI package manager should be named inept, and smart isn't a characteristic I'd apply to its Smart GUI.
I've triple booted and more on my computer. It works fine - the
All mine except a few old clunkers are multiboot. Most have more than 2 OS installed, many more than 6.
Ubuntu installer will find the other OSes installed and create GRUB entries for them. Just be aware that the last Linux installed will (usually) be the one who supplies the boot manager (GRUB usually). If
That's an unfortunate circumstance of most Linux installers, which assume unnecessarily that the best place to install a boot loader is the MBR.
you prefer the openSUSE GRUB, boot to openSUSE, edit GRUB to add in the details for the new install, and rewrite openSUSE's GRUB in place of the new Linux install's boot manager.
Unlike some installers, at least Buntu's will permit you to install no bootloader. Once you've got Grub installed in a suitable place (an active primary partition), there should be no need for anything but you to touch it, and only menu.lst at that. -- "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteoousness." 2 Timothy 3:16 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
It makes for confusion among nOObs trying to make an intelligent choice.
Most (in my experience) simply go for the vanilla Ubuntu. Those that know enough to make a choice usually have enough information available to actually make that choice without the confusion. :-)
*buntu there aren't just architectures and desktops to choose from, but also certain other installation options are only available in either the standards or the alternates but not both.
Hmmmm didn't know that. I simply went with the Cds I picked up at trade shows... or downloaded.
thing I was referring to. Debians dump everything but single into runlevel 2, which can make a number of otherwise simple troubleshooting and
Ok, that explains a lot of the issues I was having with Ubuntu. :-P and why I eventually got fed up and relegated it to a VirtualBox instance.
How do their users use a command line to locate a particular package they
Do they? The target audience for Ubuntu is definitely not the same as SUSE aims for. SUSE is at a higher level of expertise and use. SUSE is fine for a desktop, but also does a great job on the server and enterprise level. Ubuntu doesn't do so well there. I haven't yet run into a full time Ubuntu user who spends time on the command line tinkering with his or her package management. It"s Synaptic only.... It's interesting to hear your take on the drawbacks of Ubuntu. I hadn't got so far with it as to want to tinker in the various run levels or CLI package management.. (stuff I do with SUSE from time to time). C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Felix Miata wrote:
Installing doz first IS NOT NECESSARY!!! In many cases, it isn't even desirable. It merely requires some understanding of what to do and what not to do in order to avoid booby traps. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/install-doz-after.html
Some installs from a recovery partition blow away *EVERYTHING* on the disk. If you've got one of those, there's no way to install Linux first and have it there after the Windows intall. -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 2007/07/09 07:19 (GMT-0400) James Knott apparently typed:
Felix Miata wrote:
Installing doz first IS NOT NECESSARY!!! In many cases, it isn't even desirable. It merely requires some understanding of what to do and what not to do in order to avoid booby traps. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/install-doz-after.html
Some installs from a recovery partition blow away *EVERYTHING* on the disk. If you've got one of those, there's no way to install Linux first and have it there after the Windows intall.
I think most of those blow away everything, but I also think it's a stretch to call any of those an "install". What those really are is an OEM configuration recovery, and I have yet to hear of a multiboot OEM configuration. Good that you pointed this out, something I didn't think of when writing that page, and needs to be mentioned. -- "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteoousness." 2 Timothy 3:16 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 12:39 +0700, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
My main system is quintuple boot, and I have SuSE handle the booting. I just did not care for XP's, Ubuntu, or LinuxXP's booting screen/options. I'd suggest that you have your normal OS of choice handle booting, as this is the one that you will keep on hand the longest. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike McMullin wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 12:39 +0700, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
My main system is quintuple boot, and I have SuSE handle the booting. I just did not care for XP's, Ubuntu, or LinuxXP's booting screen/options. I'd suggest that you have your normal OS of choice handle booting, as this is the one that you will keep on hand the longest.
Hmmm... booting between 3 OSs I would have regarded as pushing it slightly. At one time as it was required that I worked with about 3 different variants of windows in a number of different configurations and Linux, we had a machine which booted off a disk caddy which had a drive slammed in according to which configuration one needed to work with. I tried setting up dual booting with Red Hat a while back and it was not an experience I wish to repeat, Things may have improved but neither OS was totally happy with the others implementation of the partition and file system structure with quite destructive results. - -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGkztUasN0sSnLmgIRAorDAJ4w9JyfiPtF/P2tuoXlhq3/qhyoSwCg8gNH CLw5zYybMiYtMOWsyP+TjjM= =dAys -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 09 July 2007, G T Smith wrote:
At one time as it was required that I worked with about 3 different variants of windows in a number of different configurations and Linux, we had a machine which booted off a disk caddy which had a drive slammed in according to which configuration one needed to work with.
Had the same thing. So much trouble and time to switch between OSs. Junked it, went to Vmware Workstation and never looked back. -- _____________________________________ John Andersen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 08:55 +0100, G T Smith wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Mike McMullin wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 12:39 +0700, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
My main system is quintuple boot, and I have SuSE handle the booting. I just did not care for XP's, Ubuntu, or LinuxXP's booting screen/options. I'd suggest that you have your normal OS of choice handle booting, as this is the one that you will keep on hand the longest.
Hmmm... booting between 3 OSs I would have regarded as pushing it slightly.
When I get the disk space, and MAC ports MacOS for pure Intel use, I'll be adding that. I've been toying around with the idea of trying openSolaris, and perhaps one of the BSD's. It's just questions of time, compatability and ability on my part.
At one time as it was required that I worked with about 3 different variants of windows in a number of different configurations and Linux, we had a machine which booted off a disk caddy which had a drive slammed in according to which configuration one needed to work with.
Aren't those neat. :) I'm curious as to why the 3 differing Windows installs.
I tried setting up dual booting with Red Hat a while back and it was not an experience I wish to repeat, Things may have improved but neither OS was totally happy with the others implementation of the partition and file system structure with quite destructive results.
The partitioning experience is one of the criterium I use when assessing a new distro. If I have to use a Live-CD for partitioning then the thing starts out with a strike or two against it. My Ubuntu-6.06-LTS DVD had a bug in formatting to Reiser, but on the whole I'm pleased with it, and I'm thinking of putting 7.04 on my son's laptop in place of his 10.1 and wonky wireless problems. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 05:52 -0400, Mike McMullin wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 08:55 +0100, G T Smith wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Mike McMullin wrote:
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 12:39 +0700, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
My main system is quintuple boot, and I have SuSE handle the booting. I just did not care for XP's, Ubuntu, or LinuxXP's booting screen/options. I'd suggest that you have your normal OS of choice handle booting, as this is the one that you will keep on hand the longest.
Hmmm... booting between 3 OSs I would have regarded as pushing it slightly.
When I get the disk space, and MAC ports MacOS for pure Intel use, I'll be adding that. I've been toying around with the idea of trying openSolaris, and perhaps one of the BSD's. It's just questions of time, compatability and ability on my part.
At one time as it was required that I worked with about 3 different variants of windows in a number of different configurations and Linux, we had a machine which booted off a disk caddy which had a drive slammed in according to which configuration one needed to work with.
Aren't those neat. :) I'm curious as to why the 3 differing Windows installs.
I tried setting up dual booting with Red Hat a while back and it was not an experience I wish to repeat, Things may have improved but neither OS was totally happy with the others implementation of the partition and file system structure with quite destructive results.
The partitioning experience is one of the criterium I use when assessing a new distro. If I have to use a Live-CD for partitioning then the thing starts out with a strike or two against it. My Ubuntu-6.06-LTS DVD had a bug in formatting to Reiser, but on the whole I'm pleased with it, and I'm thinking of putting 7.04 on my son's laptop in place of his 10.1 and wonky wireless problems.
Mike, Are you sure your not a "pain junky"? ;) I had at one time Windows 3.11 , Windows 95 and NT4 on one disk for a teaching lab, it hurt on a daily basis. I would try 10.2 to fix the wireless issues before moving to Ubuntu. 10.2 has the kernel modules for Broadcom support if you want to work with the fwcutter, if not, the ndiswrapper setup is quite easy and stable, I just did my sons HP dv6000 with SLED10sp1 it's awesome. -- James Tremblay Director of Technology Newmarket School District Newmarket,NH http://en.opensuse.org/Education "let's make a difference" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
G T Smith wrote:
I tried setting up dual booting with Red Hat a while back and it was not an experience I wish to repeat, Things may have improved but neither OS was totally happy with the others implementation of the partition and file system structure with quite destructive results.
I have found it very easy to dual boot with SUSE. The install recognizes the existing Windows partition and adds it to GRUB. Works fine. -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 James Knott wrote:
G T Smith wrote:
I tried setting up dual booting with Red Hat a while back and it was not an experience I wish to repeat, Things may have improved but neither OS was totally happy with the others implementation of the partition and file system structure with quite destructive results.
I have found it very easy to dual boot with SUSE. The install recognizes the existing Windows partition and adds it to GRUB. Works fine.
They recognised their own partitions fine, it is what happened to the other OSs partition which was a problem (fsck city...) ... However this back in 9.x days and one had to a fair of manual grub hacking to get the two OSs to even begin to collaborate.... Things are probably better now ... I hope... - -- ============================================================================== I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. Bjarne Stroustrup ============================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGk4CYasN0sSnLmgIRAuwLAJ92QazqNPnLtIRlrn3UOYqrghD5dwCgvvr7 djMNhTGTKJOQOFSz/XaADKk= =jsej -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot? would ubuntu set triple boot automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before? It should be possible to do that, though I have no idea if Ubuntu will find all bootable systems. If it doesn't, it's not hard to add them.
-- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 09 July 2007 00:39, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot?
Why? Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)? would ubuntu set triple boot
automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, SOTL wrote:
On Monday 09 July 2007 00:39, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot?
Why?
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Well he already has one lesser Operating system (Vista) so maybe he's thinking Vista + Ubuntu will add up to Suse? Seriously, why would you discourage someone wanting to try other Distros? Its good practice. After all, I suspect you were looking for a good distro when you found Suse! -- _____________________________________ John Andersen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 22:20 -0500, SOTL wrote:
On Monday 09 July 2007 00:39, Hans Linux wrote:
ubuntu is quite tempting :D i would like to hv it install on my laptop. currently i have dual boot for my Vista and SUSE already. Is it OK for me to install ubuntu to have triple boot?
Why?
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Please rethink and repost your objection. *Both* OS' are Linux.
would ubuntu set triple boot
automatically, or i hv to edit manually some menu list? anyone experience this before?
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 02:40, Mike McMullin wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 22:20 -0500, SOTL wrote:
...
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Please rethink and repost your objection. *Both* OS' are Linux.
Am I to understand you think all Linux distributions are equal? None is lesser than another? Randall Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 10:01, Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 02:40, Mike McMullin wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 22:20 -0500, SOTL wrote:
...
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Please rethink and repost your objection. *Both* OS' are Linux.
Am I to understand you think all Linux distributions are equal? None is lesser than another?
Randall Schulz
Linux is Linux, but what makes the differance IMHO is what the devleopers put into it to make it user friendly, functional,and fun. I have tried other Linux versions including the new KUbuntu, I still like and use Suse, but as always each Os and flavor of has it's good and bad points but serves a usefull function for someone. (now I wish I brought home a set of my flash / fireproof clothing from work :>) ). Mike -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 15:34:15 ka1ifq wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 10:01, Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 02:40, Mike McMullin wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 22:20 -0500, SOTL wrote:
...
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Please rethink and repost your objection. *Both* OS' are Linux.
Am I to understand you think all Linux distributions are equal? None is lesser than another?
Randall Schulz
Linux is Linux, but what makes the differance IMHO is what the devleopers put into it to make it user friendly, functional,and fun.
I find switching between different distros frustrating as it can get confusing with each version doing things differently. I've got platforms at work that I'm expected to look after that have combinations of Suse, Fedora, CentOS and Ubuntu with a spattering of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Gentoo, Slackware & MS Windows for good measure, managing them is a nightmare! There's nothing Ubuntu can do that Suse can't and vice versa it's the way it goes about doing it that creates the distinction and thus the preference. I've always found Suse the easiest to use and most consistant, it's never let me down in anyway that another distro would be preferable. It's frustrating when having a problem on a Ubuntu box and having to look on the internet to see how to resolve it when had it been running Suse I'd have fixed it straight away. I often encounter a load of enthusiasm for Ubuntu (and the exact opposite for Suse) never understand why! Often hear criticisms of Suse that aren't true, wonder why if it has an image problem? Matthew -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On 7/10/07, Matthew Stringer <qube@firstnet.co.uk> wrote:
I often encounter a load of enthusiasm for Ubuntu (and the exact opposite for Suse) never understand why!
Good at marketing? Good at generating hype? It's no secret that now and in the past the most popular distribution (of the _online/vocal_ community) is not the one that is the most excellent technically.
Often hear criticisms of Suse that aren't true, wonder why if it has an image problem?
Bad marketing? ;-) Though there are quite a few people that hate Novell unfortunately, and sometimes they target this towards SUSE too. A few very loud and very vocal people unfortunately. Kind thoughts, -- Francis Giannaros http://francis.giannaros.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
I often encounter a load of enthusiasm for Ubuntu (and the exact opposite for Suse) never understand why!
Good at marketing? Good at generating hype? It's no secret that now and in the past the most popular distribution (of the _online/vocal_ community) is not the one that is the most excellent technically.
It's the hype, but it's also the target audience. Ubuntu is really pushed as a home user desktop, and it does a reasonably good job of that... particularly in the area of package management (as I've pointed out before). Once Ubuntu is installed the user fires up Synaptic, and the first thing it asks is if you want to add in all the repos. Click yes, and you have quick, easy access to all the applications in the repo. Do the same in SUSE. and it takes forever to parse through the repos... if you manage to figure out (as a new user) how to add 3rd party repos. Everyone says use Smart.. which has a dog's breakfast of a UI.... so you're only marginally better off. I'm really looking forward to 10.3 and it's repo management improvements :-) C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 07:01 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 02:40, Mike McMullin wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 22:20 -0500, SOTL wrote:
...
Why install a lesser operating system (Ubuntu) than the one you already have installed (SuSE)?
Please rethink and repost your objection. *Both* OS' are Linux.
Am I to understand you think all Linux distributions are equal? None is lesser than another?
No that would not be a good understanding, Randall, and it would not be a good reading of what I wrote either. Both Ubuntu and SuSE are Linux OS's, as to their relative merits, I run both, I like both, ymmv. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
participants (14)
-
Clayton -
Fajar Priyanto -
Felix Miata -
Francis Giannaros -
G T Smith -
Hans Linux -
James Knott -
James Tremblay -
John Andersen -
ka1ifq -
Matthew Stringer -
Mike McMullin -
Randall R Schulz -
SOTL