Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Jan 2007 21:14 UTC, submitted by Ursus
InformationWeek reviews OpenSUSE 10.2, and concludes: "All told, I consider openSUSE 10.2 to be a real winner for server duties in my labs. Given the number of pre-release packages that are included, this probably isn't a particularly good choice as a server platform for business-grade networks, but Novell doesn't position it as such, either (that's what their 'enterprise' products are for). I don't think it's as good of a desktop release as SUSE 10.1, either, and there are better distributions for that anyway, but other people are likely to disagree with me here."
Thread beginning with comment 198520
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-04-28
Yes, it's an interesting review, but his ideas about distributions seem a bit odd.
He says he needs a combination of stability and cutting edge features. SLED 10 and RHEL 4 are not enough bleeding edge for him, yet he uses SUSE 9.3. Then he finds Gentoo and Debian too bleeding edge. Well, Gentoo has an unstable and a stable branch (the stable is quite conservative) and Debian has unstable, testing and stable branches. None of them suit his needs? He goes on saying that the only one that could replace SUSE is Fedora (which is a bleeding edge distro)...
Not that it matters, the review itself was good and unusual. But I would have liked some feedback about how Debian or Ubuntu did in that same environment.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-10-13
Member since:
2005-10-13
This is a good review, in that it doesn't just list a couple of new package versions and post screenshots. He actually goes through several things that were good and bad.