OpenSUSE 11.0 Released

Nate D writes "It's here: a new major release of Novell's community-supported distro is now available, and can be downloaded from the mirrors. Linux Format has a hands-on look at the new installer, SLAB menu and Compiz Fusion, and weighs up whether the distro can fight competition from Ubuntu and Fedora. Is this the start of a new era for SUSE?"

Comments

Probably not

[morgan_greywolf]

Is this the start of a new era for SUSE?"

Probably not. Competition between major distros doesn't really exist, because all features are available for all distros. Neither Ubuntu, nor Fedora nor SuSE specialize in anything in particular, so in the end, there's not much difference between them aside from package management and menu layout.

Re:Probably not

[allcar]

Don't underestimate package management - it is critical. It is the main differentiator between distros and it is the key to Ubuntu's current success. It's also one of the main reasons that Linux is so much more stable than Windows.

Re:Probably not

[drinkypoo]

The whole fucking world has been saying it wanted Debian with updated repositories and cutting-edge software (but that has actually been tested by a human at leastonce.) Ubuntu comes along and gives it to us and people are confused about why it is successful? It's because they give us what we ask for!

Re:Justin

[catscan2000]

At the risk of being labeled a troll, I typically tell colleagues who ask about the Microsoft deal that Apple has numerous patent and other technology licensing agreements with Microsoft, and yet we don't see a groundswell of people on Slashdot calling Apple on the carpet for their Microsoft agreements.

In response, I've heard that the difference is that Apple doesn't pretend to be fully open-source whereas Novell does to an extent, though Apple does have an open-source kernel and other bits in addition to a proprietary system. Similarly, Novell's SuSE (not openSuSE) is a product that users typically need to pay for. From a high-level view, this looks like both companies offer a proprietary system as well as an open-source subset of that proprietary system.

As a result -- at least, from that simplification of the issue -- I think that anti-SuSE people on Slashdot are treating Novell unfairly versus Apple. I'm not a fan of the Microsoft deal, either, but I do like openSuSE on technical and, especially, usability grounds, and that is why I both advocate for and use it both at home and at work.

Now I'm off to download the latest version :-)

(there goes my karma, though :-(. Please be nice!)

Re:New Era?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, because by running OSX, you're clearly a saint when it comes to free vs proprietary software.

Re:New Era?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple made a big stink about patents a number of years ago wrt spring-loaded folders in the Nautilus file manager.

Apple has also purposely broken the iPod database so that Free Software iPod software broke after the update.

Apple also have a similar deal with Microsoft as Novell has.

I know, I know... "Apple shiny. Me like shiny" makes it all better, right? Whatever.

Re:Why people should stay away from it

[SplatMan_DK]

and we all know SuSE is now at least half-evil. Would you care to explain WHY? I mean, really explain. With rational arguments - not emotional, religious or similar irrational explanations. Honestly, give me SOLID ARGUMENTS here. And perhaps a few examples. Did somebodys business close because of the MS/Novell deal? Did someone get sued? Did FOSS projects die? Did customers end up with fewer choices? What????
:-)

your boss says "let's try a Linux distro for a while", please, don't suggest OpenSuSE A good recommendation in a corporate setting is always based on a good business case. I would be happy to evaluate your arguments for not choosing SUSE for a company, if they are solid and based on rational arguments.

Untill then I will most certainly recommend SUSE if the business case supports it. And in some cases it will - no questions asked. Novell makes great cross-platform products, so if a company needs, say, a cluster of servers capable of running both J2EE and .NET, it would make a lot of sense comparing SUSE with MONO/JBOSS vs Windows 2008 with BEA (just an example, insert other similar server-cases here).

Or perhaps we could imagine a company wanting to convert their outdated XP clients with Linux clients in order to postpone hardware upgrades (which would be needed in order to migrate to Vista). Perhaps the ability to show webpages with Silverlight elements was an important criteria? What about browsers capable of showing PDF documents, MS Word documents, Flash content, etc? All these are cross-platform initiatives, and I honestly believe that Linux won't make in into the corporate environment without these.

I don't understand why some people think Novell and their projects (for example Mono and Moonlight) are "bad" while other cross-platform initiatives (such as WINE and SAMBA) are "good". I also fail to see why the same people often argue that IBM's investments in Open Source projects are "good" while Novells are "bad". The discussion about Microsoft/Linux/Novell needs to be elevated to a level where it is based on the same standard you would demand in other more scientific debates. Drop the emotional and irrational arguments. Give me facts and examples from real life.

Users and customers benefit from a free market. It gives them the widest range of products to choose from. Any community or company who is engaged in software projects which enhance portability and interconnectivity are "good" as far as I am concerned. Even more so when they are releases them under open source licenses - like MONO and Moonlight.

:-)
- Jesper