Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Wed 3rd Nov 2004 07:07 UTC
To paraphrase one of the best "Star Trek: The Next Generation" episodes, "Best of Both Worlds", both Arch Linux and Slackware represent the best of all the OS worlds: the power of traditional Unix, the elegance of BSD and the ease of mind of Mac OS X. This is an article outlining the differences between --what I believe-- are the two best Linux distros around today. Mind you though, "best" doesn't always mean "easy".
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think you people need to start thinking like a user, instead of a computer geek. I've used Arch for over a year now as my main system, because it's small and provides a fast and easy way to install/upgrade packages (something I missed in Slackware). But right now I think but one thing: "why oh why do I have to wait one more week for Fedora Core 3 ...".
The more you use Arch intensively, the more you realize that it is loaded with bugs you can't find anywhere else, and go unfixed for a really long time. For example: this morning I spent 68 minutes of continuous rebooting (while rebooting takes less than a minute) just so my keyboard would work in X (this problem has been reported in bugzilla before and didn't happen but once in a while, until a week ago).
Also, Arch developers stick to DevFS device names and install Gnome in /opt, both of these choices have causes lots of bugs for me (and still do).
So although I liked Arch at first, I have completely given it up and wait impatiently for a system that will just work (yes I tried Ubuntu and like it, but I really needs more work).