Which is your Favourite Linux?

I use (K)ubuntu at work, and I've got FreeBSD and Ubuntu on the servers. Not to say that BSD is the most stable, but for the end medium-skilled end user ubuntu is probably the best and the package management is awesome. Anyway, I would suggest also pcbsd for non-technical users. Ubuntu is right for me because I try to keep it under control, and if you avoid some unneeded updates, your system will run fine.
 
Why I’ve finally had it with my Linux server and I’m moving back to Windows

Great rant, and it does sum up many FreeBSD users' frustrations with Lunix as well.

David Gewirtz said:
New motto: For all of us who have lives, there’s Windows.

This is a rant. But I’m so angry and frustrated right now that you’re just going to have to live with the rant. And, for you Linux people, you who know it all and look down upon the people who don’t spend day and night breathing in the insane arcana of all the little fiddly bits that make up modern distros, I have this to say: I don’t have your kind of time.

I’ve had it. I’ve had it with all the patched together pieces and parts that all have to be just the right versions, with just the right dependencies, compiled in just the right way, during just the right phase of the moon, with just the right number of people tilting left at just the right time.

I’ve had it with all the different package managers. With some code distributed with one package manager and other code distributed with other package managers. With modules that can be downloaded on Ubuntu just by typing the sequence in the anemic how-to, but won’t work at all on CentOS or Fedora, because the repositories weren’t specified in just, exactly, EXACTLY, the right frickin’ order on the third Wednesday of the month.
Click to expand...

Rest of rant: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/diy-it/wh...inux-server-and-im-moving-back-to-windows/245
 
"... disorganized, unsupervised, chaotic craptasm ...", epic!
Thank you for sharing it.
 
I like to try to keep some of everything running so i have breadth of knowledge (though i fear i may not know much about anything sometimes, just a little about many things).

I run a Win7 desktop at home, i have a OSX laptop (that i really should use more), a Ubuntu netbook, Backtrack on a 32G USB, FreeBSD on my work box, and a Ubuntu Server at home (that i may rebuild as Debian). I used to also work at a couple labs at school, one being 20 Fedora machines, the other a mix of Ubuntu, Debian, and FreeBSD.

Depending on what I'm working on, each has it's own little set of advantages.
 
Servers: Debian/Ubuntu
Desktop: Mint

Btw, a pitty actually why most can not just give a straight answer without bashing Linux. Of course most here will prefer BSD, but if BSD would have such a wide support for hardware and software as Linux did, there would be no Linux would there. Unfortunately we need Linux now and then, and if used the proper way, I think it runs good enough!
 
frijsdijk said:
Servers: Debian/Ubuntu
Desktop: Mint

Btw, a pitty actually why most can not just give a straight answer without bashing Linux. Of course most here will prefer BSD, but if BSD would have such a wide support for hardware and software as Linux did, there would be no Linux would there. Unfortunately we need Linux now and then, and if used the proper way, I think it runs good enough!
Click to expand...

GNU/Linux historically had the pr momentum due to the BSD lawsuit. But what hardware are you speaking of. BSD supports pretty much everything new and old.
 
Linux does have the upper hand for PC hardware anyway. FreeBSD, for instance, will not install on my laptop at all. Also, the Arch Linux i686 build seems boot and run significantly faster on the old desktop than i386 FreeBSD.

Otherwise, I'd probably be using it, because, got to say, even for a "casual"* user, I could tell that FreeBSD was the better put together OS in a lot of ways.

*(In that I don't have the expertise to run a server.)
 
Hey, I love Linux, I have used Ubuntu and OpenSuSE and I love them both. I would like to try more distros but there are so many and they all offer different stuff for each user.
Now I just installed FreeBSD and I am finding some difficulties however I am very positive about this experience and hopefully I will feel like home here too.
I am very thankful for the Open Source community and I show my respect to them by not making negative comments about their work.
With that said I wish you all happy holidays.
 
As a desktop user the criteria I use are stability, security and simple to understand administration guidelines. Stability wise, I have had the best luck building the desktop I want, multimedia codecs, libdvdcss, flash (can't rationalize linux emulators and need flash for cme lectures) with Debian followed by Slackware. My Debian Squeeze system is over a year old without a hiccup. Security and bug updates are a breeze in Debian and not too bad in Slackware.

Out of interest I will periodically try out a new feature in Arch Linux - the rolling release model tends to work very well for being bleeding edge and the documentation is up to date. Arch can give one an idea where development is heading, why KernelModeSetting has yet to find its way into any BSD, and what the all the heated discussion about the Gnome3 shell is about.
 
Servers - FreeBSD 9
Workstation - Windows 7 Ultimate
Laptop - Windows 7 Ultimate with Gentoo, FreeBSD, and Ubuntu in VMs (Hey, it's an Asus G53SX with 24GB of RAM and 1.5TB of disk space)

I moved back from Gentoo to FreeBSD last month. I basically got sick of the mentality of "Why do you need that?". If I didn't need it, I WOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR IT. The ZFS filesystem was basically the final nail in the coffin and I returned to the FreeBSD world.

I actually started on FreeBSD back in 1998 while I was active duty Navy. My friend, in 2005, exposed me to Gentoo and caught my interest almost immediately. Unfortunately, the reason that turned me off Linux in the past (freakin' script kiddies and "I'm so 1337" BS) started to enter into the Gentoo community. So, I'm back in FreeBSD and staying put.
 
Simba7 said:
Laptop - Windows 7 Ultimate with Gentoo, FreeBSD, and Ubuntu in VMs (Hey, it's an Asus G53SX with 24GB of RAM and 1.5TB of disk space)
Click to expand...

What a laptop! I would rather do a Linux/FreeBSD running Windows as virtual machine, eh eh.
 
I like debian more than other linux but not using that for about 1.5 year since i reduce my desktops/home server from 3 to 2 :)
but currently i use Android with root and terminal emulator and i like it. It is use a linux kernel after all.
 
Simba7 said:
If I didn't need it, I WOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR IT.
Click to expand...
Fair enough if you know what you're talking about, but you'd be surprised to see how many people are asking for things they don't need due to not knowing what they're doing (not understanding the problem rarely leads to a correct solution).

fluca1978 said:
What a laptop! I would rather do a Linux/FreeBSD running Windows as virtual machine, eh eh.
Click to expand...
+1 on that :h

Fonz
 
...I would love the Debian based - is my #1. Redhat is my #2 and Freebsd FreeBSD is #3.
...Debian, because, the arrangement of the files and the structures are easy to determine and understand.
...Redhat would be the second because, they are fairly stable, regardless of the file structure.
...Freebsd FreeBSD because the file structures are uniquely challenging, and fairly tough when it comes with SMTP-relay Server role or smarthost role, DNS role, firewall role, and router role. though, this can be also configured on some other disto but freebbsd is really unique.
 
calande said:
Ubuntu even though I have been disappointed by the 11.x series...
Click to expand...

What were they thinking with Unity, I really liked Ubuntu 10 and it's been ruined. Still using it now for desktop, but as soon as PC-BSD works out of the box like Ubuntu I'm moving.
 
nuxthrou said:
...I would love the Debian based - is my #1. Redhat is my #2 and Freebsd is #3.
...Debian, because, the arrangement of the files and the structures are easy to determine and understand.
...Redhat would be the second because, they are fairly stable, regardless of the file structure.
...Freebsd because the file structures are uniquely challenging, and fairly tough when it comes with SMTP-relay Server role or smarthost role, DNS role, firewall role, and router role. though, this can be also configured on some other disto but freebbsd is really unique.
Click to expand...

FreeBSD is not linux :p
FreeBSD is FreeBSD :stud and always #1 :e
 
Crivens said:
Why not? Stabillity is what you make of it ;)
Click to expand...

Well, yes, to an extent; But I've never seen someone use Windows ME as a Server for what I'm assuming, is that reason ;) Heh. That and Oracle is on my crap list right now.
 
gore said:
Well, yes, to an extent; But I've never seen someone use Windows ME as a Server for what I'm assuming, is that reason ;) Heh. That and Oracle is on my crap list right now.
Click to expand...

You did follow the link, did you? :e

And I know of a company which used '98 for the server because there were not so many problems for the PHBs when they wanted to manage the files - like "permission denied" and stuff.
 
Hahaha, I can't imagine Windows 98 as a Server, I mean, really, WTF would they be thinking? Windows 98 can barely stay up long enough to play a game.... Windows Servers need Viagra and a Wiener Pump to stay up at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top