Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 21st Mar 2005 11:22 UTC
Linux 2003 was the year with Gentoo written all over it in the Linux universe. Last year was Ubuntu's & MEPIS'. I believe that Arch Linux's year is the current one. Read more for a comparison of Arch to existing distributions, and why we think it rocks and where we think it still requires some work.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
just few points
by bozo on Mon 21st Mar 2005 14:26 UTC

1. Stability or low TCO means *BSD, Solaris, OSX or Windows...
and you claim that there's no need to update *BSD, Solaris or Windows once a year?
2. Ive been long time slack user, switching to arch is just a matter of evolution
3. Debian is slow, that's not a matter of configuration; besides apt is nice and can be a great tool for those lazy system administrators...
4. I don't see a reason why arch sould set up everything by default if you will have to change almost everything to suit your needs anyway
5. unfortunately linux based systems are still percieved as distros not different operating systems based on linux kernels and GNU tools; you use an operating system named Slackware, ArchLinux or anything else, try to mind that
6. to Pikachu: silly post, this is clearly a kernel problem
7. giving points for hardware support offered by GNU/Linux system is also useless, you would have to grade the kernel hardware support rather thatn the OS that has nothing to do with the drivers (OS can actually suggest you what drivers to use)
8. OS specific configuration files are a bad idea - see Debian. OS should be as generic as possible