Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 24th Sep 2003 01:45 UTC
Slackware, Slax For almost a week now, I've been using Slackware 9.1 (RC-1 released today), and I am having a blast. Slackware doesn't have more than 6-8% of the Linux market these days, but it used to be one of the most-used distros back in the day. Today, many think of Slackware as a true classic, a thought that is often accompanied by a feeling that Slackware is not a user-friendly or an uber-modern Linux distribution. There is some truth in that statement, but there is always the big "But". Read on for our very positive experience with Slackware 9.1-pre. Update: In less than 24 hours since the RC-1, Slackware 9.1 RC-2 is out.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Linux hype
by none on Wed 24th Sep 2003 02:28 UTC

Linux is slower and less stable than windows
My windows box uses about 40 megs of ram to boot, Linux uses about 175 (and Linux is a monolithic kernel)
Linux crashes much more often than windows, way more
The few Apache/MySQL vs IIS/MS SQL tests I have seen have been won (sometimes dominated) by Windows
X is a one size fits all poor implementation at a responsive display server (both Apple and MS are moving to hardware accelerated GUI)
KDE is maybe the only thing on earth more integrated than windows explorer, everything under the sun imbedded into konqueror, it makes it clunky as hell, Nautalus is nearly as bad
Ease of use for the newbie is not as important as ergonomics for powerusers, but Linux has yet to bring an environment to the table that I can efficiently get work done it.
WinXP Pro comes with a 480 meg CD, Mandrake is 3 CD's and SuSE is 7
NTFS is much more stable than any Linux file system, hard shut down in Linux and watch it fsck your box
Installing software on a Linux system is badly broken, often you end up fixing make files, chasing dependencies, or in situations where you can't update a library with out breaking other apps, many libraries are not very backwards compatible and someone still has yet to write an installer for Linux. Nullsofts SperPiMP installer for windows is only 498K but such a simple installer has yet to exist for Linux because its design is fundamentally flawed.
Even windows 3.11 had an installer and you can install the 32 bit libraries for it and still run binaries that were compiled on XP, lets see Linux do that
Developers will often use GPL just so they can avoid having to create and test separate packages for the last 3 versions of every major distro, GPL lets someone else do it.
Say what you will of LSB but I can think of no reason to have all 15 or so text editors in seperate directories, where is /apps/texteditors when you need it?