Slashdot Mirror
Fedora, SuSE And Mandrake Compared
gmuslera writes "This weekend 2 comparisions were made between latest Fedora, SuSE and Mandrake Linux distributions. The first one was done by FlexBeta and in general goes deep, done by people that seem to know Linux, and good around its 9 pages. The later one was done by The Washington Post (yahoo news link) and shows another view of those 3 distributions, from someone that seems to dislike Linux and don't know enough about it. In what of those extremes are the average new user experience with those distributions?" Update: 07/06 01:01 GMT by T : Note that long-time Washington Post tech writer Rob Pegaroro doesn't seem to dislike Linux -- far from it; he's just writing what he sees as truth.
The only Linux based distro I've tried recently was Suse... and it blew me away. Previously, Linux Distros in general, weren't too friendly and you had to spend a lot of time configuring things yourself. When I installed Suse, EVERYTHING was detected on my text box... which is no small feat considering I had some rather obscure hardware in there. It literally blew me away... I don't think I've seen anything better than YAST at this point, even in my best case senario with Windows installations. Unfortunately, I can't say much about Mandrake or Fedora... but Suse was enough to convince me (and some other very leary friends) to make the switch. Mainly because of Yast itself.
It would seem to me that new users would know nothing, if not less than the Washington Post guy, at any rate. Plus, unless they had some friends that ran Linux, they'd probably dislike it as well.
Hello,
I recently read your FastForward article on the Washingtonpost about how Linux is still an awkward alternative. Towards the end you mentioned:
"That brings up Linux's biggest embarrassment: software installation. Outside of core system updates (ably handled by each distribution's auto-update software), my attempts to add new programs were routinely stymied by the chancy availability of prepackaged downloads and "dependency" issues, in which the installation failed because the computer lacked needed library files."
Are you getting these packages from the servers of the distribution you are using? You should only download rpms which are specifically built for the linux system you are using. For example, if you are using Mandrake linux 10.0 Official Edition, you should only download packages which are built for Mandrake linux 10.0 Official Edition.
But really, on Redhat/Mandrake based systems, you should use urpmi or the graphical installation managers that come with the distributions; they all manage dependency issues for you, if you have your mirrors set up properly.
I primarily use Mandrake linux, and I can almost always find packages I am looking for in the main or contrib sections on the online mirrors.
There is a great site for managing mirrors on Mandrake systems, it's http://www.urpmi.org/easyurpmi
This allows you to easily add main, contrib and external mirrors. You can use these in the Mandrake Control Center, which is a GUI interface that makes installing much easier than the command line.
Also, much of what makes linux what it is, is the community that surrounds it. There are many support channels on irc.freenode.net where you can get support for any issues you may have. Using a chat application such as X-Chat, you can connect to FreeNode and type
Where distributionname is the name of the distribution you're using; e.g.
or
etc.
Linux certainly isn't as friendly to new users as other operating systems such as MacOS or Windows, but in order to honestly evaluate the distributions, it's important to take into account the communities that surround them. Linux is definitely a different breed of operating system, and should be treated as such.
The main reason why distributions don't tout the communities is because the communities are not officially affiliated with the distributions. It is entirely a volunteer based system, and you can get any number of different types of people in those channels, ranging from experts who have worked for years in the field, to new users like yourself.
I know you're probably not looking to use linux as an operating system, since it doesn't seem from your article that you are seriously considering it, but it might be nice in the future to mention some of the things I have, to get a more complete picture.
Thanks!
Am I the only one who is getting tired of these "One Distribution _MUST_ be better than the others" articles? They never comment on that fact that open source means you can mix and match features for the perfect distribution. We need some sort of "Festivix: A Linux for the Rest of Us" that will capitalize on that fact, instead of leading readers to think that the Linux market is fragmented and dying.
The first one was done by FlexBeta and in general goes deep, done by people that seem to know Linux, and good around its 9 pages.
So it goes deep and good around its 9 pages? That makes absolutely no sense.
The later one was done by The Washington Post (yahoo news link) and shows another view of those 3 distributions, from someone that seems to dislike Linux and don't know a enough about it.
No comma needed. What am I pausing for?
In what of those extremes are the average new user experience with those distributions?"
Huh?
Depends on what you're doing. SuSe seems ok at leading newbies by the hand from what I remember, a task out of reach for Fedora. However, for an advanced user the newbie-friendliness can be a pain.
Personally, from these 3 I'd choose Mandrake, too - mostly because can fit more bills easy enough. The official release, if set up properly, is actually quite usable by newbies; and for tweaks, Cooker is the bleeding edge. Not to mention the boon that is PLF ^_^
Yes command line is bad for a beginner.
Command line lets the user input commands providing he already knows beforehand what commands he has at his disposal.
A graphical interface displays the commands, and lets him chose. This requires, obviously, much less knowledge beforehand.
When i learnt abt Linux, I dont know for some reason i chose Redhat .Looking back , Its the marketing for Redhat that pushes into the lead whne the compettition is tight.Easiness of use , good looks , robustness , help and support were the features that i relished.I never compared Redhat with other flavors as i was busy customizing my linux to defeat the co existence of windows .
And i never looked back for other Flavors.
Moral is : First impression is the Best impression.
Hello , this is my way.
Which way is yours ?
btw there is no right way
I like the idea of forcing people to the shell (or "command line") a little now and then.
It's like owning a car; sooner or later you HAVE to pop the hood and have a look, maybe refill the oil or something.
Forcing users to the shell will, eventually, teach them how the OS works. Or at least, give them a brief idea on what's going on "under the hood".
I remember back in the good ol' days when you bought the C64. You were handed the computer and a manual. You had to tune the TV yourself, and hell, you even had to type in BASIC programs by hand. This way, many users learned BASIC and became software developers -- like myself.
One thing that may work wonders is to just change some of the syntax to something perhaps easier to understand. For instance, instead of "mounting hda0", change it to "browse (disk label name)". Refer to a "window management system" not as a graphical interface but as the desktop or icons. Most people know what you mean when you say desktop or icons, but if you get into the KDE vs GNOME argument here then people will just get confused and leave.
As far as the Washington Post article reads I can relate to it. I tried using Linux before knowing how to code - that's rough. After learning a bit of c and c++ (enough to do some basics) I found it much easier to comprehend why things act the way they do. Perhaps Linux could stand to have an average Windows user hanging out by a programmer's desk saying "Why does that do this?" and "Can't you make this happen?". For example, my mom, who happens to be a nurse, has been attending a developer's conference in Oklahoma lately because the hospital is purchasing some new software being developed exclusively for them. Rather than just work off of the hospital's "to-do" list the developing agency asked for 15-20 end users to come down, play with the software, find any points of contention, and the developers would take care of it. I velieve this went on for 3 times at 2 weeks a pop, and the end result is a piece of software that cost a bit more to develop but was created with the end user, not the programmer, in mind.
I do believe that Linux's time is coming soon. I think the major sticking point might be some fragile egos and the "Well, EVERYBODY SHOULD know how to compile from source, download dependencies, and run command line syntax that looks like a keyboard went under a hammer." (I saw a comment in an earlier thread suggesting that ANY end user ought to be able to run complex command line code. Alas, this is not going to fly in the face of Windows or Macs, where command line is secondary to the GUI, whereas in Linux is is the exact opposite). I'm not asking for dancing paperclips or those damn pop-up balloons that won't go away...just an easy way to accomplish what can be done at the command line.
"This food is problematic."
Yes, how intuitive. How did the reviewer miss that? Heck, my mom could have done that in her sleep.
This will instantly be modded as flamebait, I know -- but he's right. For all the open-source community is waiting for that eleventh hour of deliverance when an intern in a cheap Penguin suit exclaims publicly that "the era of the Linux desktop is here" -- it's not happening for a while.
Why? Because every post thus far has been about why the gripes he has about various distributions can be simply, oh-so-easily changed by typing a few lines into a prompt, or replacing this file with that file -- or "God no, not the command line, sarcastically".
A few days ago I was teaching my friend how to use a few command line programs (like 'ls' and 'cd') in FreeBSD. This ended up turning into a two hour circus regarding where the spaces go.
Yes, the command line is that bad for normal people. And even a dancing paperclip?
YES, YOU IDIOT!! THE PAPERCLIP TOO!
Especially the paperclip. I don't care if it's a dancing penguin that takes up your entire screen, if it ends up being annoying as opposed to just plain hard for the normal user, that's a step up.
- granted, one of the reviews was published by the Washington Post, or as it is more affectionately termed by the clueful here inside the Belchway, "The Washington Fishwrap," due to its many mindless liberal-biased headlines and stories... - however, Pegoraro has regularly covered Linux/OSS issues in the Fishwrap's Tech section (hidden inside an embarrassingly small Business section for a major daily), such as Red Hat's distros and OpenOffice.org... he has done so with an objectivity not found on other tech sites (hint, hint: OSNews??) - it's frustrating to read about 'Joe Six-pack' views of Linux-based operating systems... - but frankly, while Pegoraro's views have not always been 'spot-on Linux knowledgable,' they have been objective... - my point? give the guy a break, send a *nice* email (you do know how to do that, right?), and be helpful! - i suspect, and IIRC, he is a Mac OS X user...
While I don't advocate the command line is removed as it offers a great level of flexibility, things shouldn't stay more difficult just because they can. It's this kind of mentality that stops a more widespread adoption of linux on the desktop. Distros are thankfully making the user experience more enjoyable and not targetting them solely at geeks.
;) and I don't think the conclusions are all that differ. Each offer their advantages, Suse seems to be the most polished. I'd been a mandrake user previously, might be worth taking a look at suse next time.
That being said, I've read both articles (and no I'm not new here
Glenn
The Smrt way to trade CFDs on the ASX
Geez, some of the partition foolery that I've gotten up lately to would frighten the pants off of the old Windows-using me of the past. QParted and GParted are my new favourite software tools.
Can't you see the fundamental wrongness of the bias presented here?
I mean, the write-up clearly soft-peddles the advocate review and downplays the consumer-oriented review. I think it is because the first review panders to the satisfaction unix-monkeys get in knowing the arcane and counter-intuitive technologia extremis of Linux, and condemn the consumer oriented approach for its simple, direct perspective of coming at Linux with no pre-conceived notions. The things they mention in the Washington Post article are quite accurate, if you are new to the Unix system layout paradigms.
The thing that bothers me is that there is an undercurrent of hysterical hatred for anyone speaking frankly about Linux and her Unix derived cousins. It's as if the question of OS somehow meant something deeper than what you have installed on your computer. All sorts of strident idealism and contempt for different opinions grip this community, and the community welcomes it!
This same undercurrent pops up from time to time through history, and it is quite dangerous! Consider all the book burning, witch hunting and other such miserable episodes in our collective past, and realize that what drove (and drives today) those awful episodes is the same contempt for difference that lies at the heart of the slashdot bias.
Now, I certainly don't want to conflate the relatively benign Linux over-advocacy problem and the tragedy of those horrible times in the past, but you people should realize that if you start allowing yourself to act like this here and now, indulging in what amounts to simple-minded bigotry, what is to stop you from carrying through with that thinking in realms more directly related to personal liberties, civic safety and common decency?
It's high time some of you stepped up to the plate and decry such flagrant ill manners along with me. It's not a matter of MSFT or APPL vs. Linux, it's a matter of being a decent human being. This sort of indulgent wankery is not decent at all.
yeah. Command line is bad. Sometimes (Don't flame me, I'm a unix admin). If i'm sitting on my bed with a wireless mouse, and want to toss on some mp3s, I want at least the option ot just double click on a playlist. If a friend who has never sat at my computer before wants to load up a movie, I'd rather have them be able to click on an icon rather than try to figure out whatever cryptic command-line method there would be to do the same thing.
The fact is, for a lot of things, GUI is better. And a desktop, in most cases, is one of these things. I really love a GUI, but at the same time, i really Need to be able to slip under the GUI into a command line mode when i feel the urge.
+5 insightful? more like "-1, cleverly disguised flamebait" I'm sure you already understand the use of a good GUI. Meanwhile, chances are that you're composing this from windows XP.
Not intuitive, but the grandparent didn't claim it was. They were just merely offering a solution. Sheesh... If sarcastic replies like this is why people are hesitant to help sometimes, I don't blame them.
"Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
-- Ryan Stiles
From someone that seems to dislike Linux and don't know a enough about it.
Translation: "From somebody who is obviously biased against linux and spreading M$ FUD about linux being hard to use, and who is a stupid 1u53r who doesn't want to learn anything how his computer works, who wants everything all pretty GUI and clickity-click-like, who has been brainwashed into proprietary-style thinking that the command line is evil, and whose so-called 'usability problems' are nothing more than him being used to Windows."
I don't think the Washington Post article said very much about the state of desktop linux, but I think that the reaction to it speaks volumes.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Fedora is an RPM based distro. Fedora's default desktop is GNOME. Fedora's GNOME does not have a default file association for *.rpm files. DUMB
When you do have a program associated with RPM, you can double-click the RPM, only to spend a few minutes realizing that each of the packages you downloaded need each other installed first. Sure, you can do an "rpm -ivh blah-*.rpm" from the command line (or whatever the switches are - I don't use RPM distros anymore), but is it so freaking hard to have the graphical RPM tools "see" the other RPMs sitting right there in the same folder, and handle them intelligently? DUMB
Way, way, way, way too many packages that aren't available through the distro's repositories themselves. There's only about a dozen RPM repositories for Fedora Core to chase various packages down from. This is the one biggest thing that makes me dump SuSE every time and head back to Gentoo. Instead of Pacman and usr-local-bin and etc. etc. etc., would it really be so hard to have a "contributed" repository maintained by SuSE (and "known" to YaST at install time), where these places (and god knows what others) just submit their packages to? Virtually everything I can imagine, I could get through Portage in Gentoo. Why can't the "big" distros have their prebuilt package repositories be similarly comprehensive? It was such a task for one of my buddies to get/install divx4linux - all the guy wanted to do was watch a little pr0n on his fresh Linux install! Even though it's not that hard, nobody should *have* to fall back on tarballs and ./configure / make / make install. DUMB
There's a lot of little things that keep pissing off potential Linux users, and sending them back to Windows. It's the "little things" that the Mac platform usually does so well. It's those same "little things" that Linux distros, desktop environments, etc, need to pay attention to.
He had has a lot of other "facts" wrong. He indicates that fedora core2 costs $199 at one point, and also implies that to install Linux on a Windows partition reqauires buying some partitioning software, which is wrong, since at least Mandrake and SuSE will repartion a disk no-destructively. As a journalist goes, his ability looks limted.
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
IMHO the place that these distro's keep missing the target is when they try to do too much for too many.
Linux is massively customizable by its very nature regardless of how it's packaged. So let the people that want to customize every little aspect of their system figure it out for themselves.
A desktop disto should be a windows workalike or work-better. Like Mozilla's Thunderbird or Firefox. That's how you steal market share... work better.
The desktop distro should be able to do (and do well) everything that a windows box can do from a default install. Workalike interface, SMB networking, browsing, mail, music and video, brainless hardware detection and configuration, printing, and IM. Out of the box, default install.
Anyone who has an answer to the question "KDE or Gnome?" does not need this sort of distro, But the rest of the world does.
If you want to see unix working better than windows on the desktop then you need look no further than OS X. OS X has it's problems too (like being handcuffed to Apple hardware), but it can do all of this out of the box, it's *nix and my grandma can (and does) use it.
Not very intuitive. Unlike Windows where everything is easy. Like when you want to get rid of those annoying balloon tips in XP. All I had to do is open the registry, go to HKEY_CURRENT_USER, find Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer \Advanced
change the dword value of EnableBalloonTips to 0, restart the computer and I was done!
GUI designs are great as long as you don't won't to do something the designer didn't take in to account. If you do, realize that systems follow a standard practice, in Windows you typically edit the registry, in *nix systems you typically edit a text file. Do a quick Google search, and you can usually find an answer to what file to edit, and what value to change.
I actually thought the mainstream media account was pretty well-balanced. I've used multiple distributions, including Red Hat, Mandrake, Debian, and most recently, Gentoo.
Many of the experiences I've had match what the author experienced. I have yet to have a distribution where everything worked 100% out of the box. I've run into numerous occasions where I've had to play musical chairs with RPMs to get things to install.
I generally have had pretty good luck sorting out these problems out since I'm a pretty advanced computer user, but I have also had problems that were very perplexing. I could see how the experience for a user who does not have the experience or the inclination to spend hours configuring their computer would still find the experience daunting.
While the author brings up all of these issues, he also notes that some of these problems are due to poor manufacturer support. He also expresses faith that the user interface problems with yum will quickly be solved. The fact that a mainstream news outlet would note Linux's strong security record and mention it as a strong possibility for replacing Windows is encouraging since it will raise the visibility of Linux for the mainstream.
I've seen great improvements since starting to use Linux. I enjoy the fact that my scanner now will only work on Linux, while the drivers for Windows 2000 are fairly worthless. Gentoo has been pretty satisfactory on my 64-bit Opteron, while Microsoft is still not shipping 64-bit Windows XP.
Let's acknowledge that works needs to be done and keep improving. I'm looking forward to trying new versions and seeing this platform mature.
======
In X-Windows the client serves YOU!
This assumes:
1 That the distro has a manual written for someone new to Linux.
2 That a newcomer can be good at extracting useful onformation from Google. Not a trivial skill in itself.
3 That he knows what IRC is and how to use it effectively or how to find an appropriate mailing list for a beginner.
You should not need specialist knowledge to do basic things with your computer. You usually don't with Windows (and often you can stumble your way through menus to work it out). You often do with Linux, and if you do its probably buried in an obscure config file and not terribly well document.
That is the key reason Linux hasn't taken off. Not everyone wants to be a computer programmer/admin. RTFM is fine for someone that makes their living from their computer knowledgem but just doesn't cut it when you're talking about a general computer user. Its the equivalent to telling a car owner to RTFM and fix it themselves when their head gasket is blown. The sooner EACH AND EVERY Linux developer comes to that realization the better.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Well just reading your answer, the email you sent him, prove the Washington Post guy points. Reread yourself, it's awfull the stuff you consider normal and easy, and by the way, "almost" is not enough.
going on chats to install stuff or find it is totally counter-intuitive, even more when you need info. Hell, IRC is counter-intuitive! I never have done IRC more than 20 min. in a row, too much commands, specifications, preferences, abreviation, assholes... if you have to go trough this "simple" step to understand how to install a software, you're doomed. And I'm not a noob or something I just consider knowing the equivalent of a dictionnary to use a software stupid, I'm the type of geek that prefers productivity, simplicity and getting the work done, not marveling in front of my supa skillz mastering the chat commands and understanding every acronyms in existenz!
Yes. Fedora, SuSE and Mandrake approach Linux differently. So what? So does Gentoo and thirty other distros at least one person on earth "swears by".
Let's lay to rest the distribution game and start working together for one common goal: Linux that works well enough to replace a desktop OS in business, one that a COO has confidence in.
This distro squabbling is what's holding Linux back. After all, isn't Open Source for us all and not for specific distros?
This is my $0.02.
---
IMHO, of course.
May the SOURCE be with you.
Sure, you can roll your own, but most people don't want to. Let me restate that: Sure YOU can roll your own, but most people CAN'T. Just because it can be done doesn't mean the general public is capable. If you can't deal with that reality don't read reviews intended for the general public.
Well said and a well written article.
I am someone that is less interested in the technological elegance of any solution and more interested in how the solution empowers ordinary people to work, or even play. I think you address the issues generally right on (even if not 100% correct on every detail). I think the typical Slashdot user may miss the bigger picture: just because you can do something with a system is different than being able to do it well or easily.
I've read through a number of the comments and many are missing this big picture; many are getting it, too. Hopefully the more serious members of the open source community will hear this and respond, not with flames but with better solutions.
Thanks again!
SCB
it's really getting on my nerves !!! ANY modern distribution has an automated dependency checking and HUGE online repositories with up to date software and makes software installation as easy as it can be. But there are still comparisons between suse, fedora and "real" distributions, ignoring the web forums are FULL of suse and fedora users whining because of dependency issues. DROP that stupid suse and fedora and get to a modern distro in the year 2004! Mandrake has an equal system to debian and also huge online stable and testing repositories. Software installation is super easy. Last time i was sitting aside a suse user and told him he had to install cups, he went to "www.cups.org" and stared at me. Any more Questions about "fedora and suse -users" ?
And this is why Linux isn't a desktop OS. And may never be.
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3