Hi

I am a new mandrake user an is new to Linux. I was wondering which one is better Mandrake or SuSE. Does SuSE use KDE? And what are the simmilarties and differences?

I haven't used Mandrake in a while, but I've been reading a few reviews. I use SuSE myself; this is my viewpoint.

Both distributions ship with both KDE and Gnome. Mandrake uses Gnome by default while SuSE uses KDE, but this is easy to change.

There are a few major differences between the two distros. The first is price; Mandrake works out a lot cheaper in the long run because SuSE charges around GBP60 for an update version every six months; also, you can't update SuSE on line (although they do still release bug-fix patches for older versions of course).

SuSE uses its own icon theme which I feel looks more professional; I tend to think that it's more office-oriented than Mandrake which seems to aim itself more at home users.

Another difference is the install/setup tools; they both write their own. Mandrake is apparantly not very good at installing updates and it tends to have installer issues (according to a recent review in Linux Format magazine at least). On the other hand, SuSE's YaST tends to be rather disorganised when it comes to the menu structure (eg. you can configure automatically dialing out to check your email settings are under Network Devices/Modem but not under Network Services/Mail Transfer Agent). But YaST was recently open-sourced after Novell acquired SuSE, so that's likely to change.

No doubt others will feel differently about some of the above.

Hey ddrfreak. Mandrake and SuSE are two of the most new user friendly distros out there. Most of what needs to be done can be done through a graphical user interface (GUI). Though I have not actually tried it, I also hear Fedora Core 3 is also very good for beginners. The big feature in SuSE is YaST. YaST allows the user to manage their entire system from one applicatin. You can: install new software (it'll even take care of any dependencies for you), update your current software, configure hardware, configure networks, and more. Of any feature, if someone to recommend SuSE to you, YaST would be the first feature they bring up. If you look at the post in this forum about why people chose SuSE over other distros every single post mentions YaST at some point.

SuSE uses KDE by default. You also have the option of using Gnome, the other major windows manager for linux. I know KDE is implemented well and from what I've heard Gnome is well done in SuSE 9.2.

I have used Red Hat, Mandrake, and SuSE. The main difference between Mandrake and SuSE that I've noticed, beyond YaST, is that SuSE supports hardware a lot better than Mandrake. I had so many difficulties getting Mandrake to accept my hardware and never really got it to run smoothly (3 minutes to open an Xterm at minimum). SuSE never gave me any of those problems.

I hope this helps.


Here is a recent review of SuSE 9.2: http://www.madpenguin.org/cms/?m=show&id=3038

Edit: Found the post I was talking about.
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=266798

I have changed from Mandrake 10.0 to SuSe 9.2 a few weeks ago. My verdict so far: they both are excellent and very user friendly distribution. I will stay with SuSe though, because in my case (a couple of not so common devices) the hardware support is that decisive little bit better. Apart from that, it is in my opinion impossible to say that one is better or worse than the other, they are both equally good!

If you are a new Mandrake user and a newbie, you are in a very good place. If your system works, I would stick with Mandrake until you feel that Mandrake is not doing the job properly anymore. That might never happen --- Mandrake is a very good distro. If you get to the point where you feel limited by Mandrake, you probably wouldn't change to Suse. You'd go elsewhere : Debian, Slackware etc etc. If you are interested enough, Mandrake won't stop you learning Linux. Of course, you might one day want to try Suse.. but that'll be your decision not mine.

Stick with Mandrake if you are not a guru. Suse is an unloaded system and you have to load every damm thing.

It takes far to long to get the systems up that Mandrake has installed. Problems all the way with LAMP and postfix and not having
all encompassing webmin is a real bind.

LF syas that is better to have the sytems not pre-installed, I disagree it's a damm site easier to remove applications than it is to
install them.

I only use it because it does work in my laptop better and I thought I would have the time to master it. It is the only distro to work on my
64 bit ASrock board so I have to use it. (Mandrake even charges more for a seperate disk for amd64, unlike SuSE which is covers both on the distro.)

You can perhaps, see why I have to use it , but if Mandrake fixed it's amd64, laptop keyboard problems I'd go back.

Whether "Distro A" is better or worse than "Distro B" is 100% a subjective call. Don't take other people's word for either one, try both yourself then make up your own mind. -- J.W.

I've used both SUSE and Mandrake. Both use kde by default, and both have options for using gnome also.

Both are about the same on the ease of use factor, mandrake seems a little bit slower than SUSE and a little harder on configuring lesser known hardware.

SUSE has been aquired by Novell, and it seems to me that the free download edition isn't as great as it used to be, while mandrake is still putting out the same quality free distrobution. Buying them might be a different story, though, haven't bought either.

Of course, all of my observations are based on my experience with my hardware, so you may have different results than mine. Your best bet is to try both and see how it goes.

As for me, I'm in the process of moving to the 'next step' in my Linux journey, somewhere more in depth than SUSE or Mandrake, but less than Slackware or Gentoo.

You can update via yast to newer versions of SuSE. You only need to buy it once, unless of course you have dial up like I do.

I run SuSE 9.1, with all the online updates applied, and would have upgraded to 9.2 through YaST by now if I could have done so. Novell maintains the current releases, but does not offer online update patches to newer versions. Nor does it update the software within a version; 9.2 uses XOrg while I'm still quite definitely using XFree86.

You can, however, click an icon in YaST to upgrade from your new SuSE update CDs as an alternative to rebooting.

SuSE all the way! I have tried Mandrake (several version), RedHat/Fedora (all versions), Libranet, and SuSE. I must say that SuSE was the only one that works and gets things right the first time (apart from a few things here and there which seem to plague Linux as a whole) . Never have I been happier with any other distro than SuSE. I highly recommend SuSE. Once you go Green you never go back :P

I just have mentioned you needed to use a mirror server, like say packman. Just goto yast --> change source of installation and point to a server with all the necessary packages. I can't name one off hand but there are plenty of them out there. Also there is some documentation on the suse website, its very basic to make it hard to do so you pay for it instead of this way, but it is legal.

I forgot to mentioned you needed to use a mirror server, like say packman. Just goto yast --> change source of installation and point to a server with all the necessary packages. I can't name one off hand but there are plenty of them out there. Also there is some documentation on the suse website, its very basic to make it hard to do so you pay for it instead of this way, but it is legal.

If you are more of a "Hobbyist" and like tinkering around / compiling sources / playing games etc then you might have better luck with Mandrake.
However if you use a machine for productive office type work where cast iron stbility and reliability is required I'd go for SUSE.

True with SUSE you'll have to install stuff if you want anything out of the ordinary --but if you are happy with a distro and don't need to have the latest stuff on it then I'd stick with SUSE.

The only risk I can see with SUSE is that having been taken over by Novell theu could conceivably go down the "Corporate" I.e Expensive route leaving a lot of home and small office users stranded as per Red Hat --- Fedora IMO is definitely not a Production Environment -- and whilst Mandrake is much better I don't think it's really a production environment either.

I've been a mandrake user for the last 2 years, and have now switch to suse 9.2 a couple of weeks ago. I found suse to take a lot longer to load the os, but after that i was really impressed by just the looks of the desktop. Suse is a lot prettier than mandrake, although i still feel mandrake is fantastic distro, I'm tending to lead towards suse for its hardware support and great looking GUI, but definitely try out both distro for yourself, you'll soon find the one for you.