Sorry if it has already been posted, but I just found that article:

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10t...-a-chance/2481

It's not too bad... Of course some people in comments can't help to criticize but it's still a positive "review" of Slackware...

I'm Slack and I'm proud !

The article has the strengths right, but not always the underlying reasons.

I think a key reason for Slackware's stability is that we test it.

I very much appreciate Slackware's stability. I have gotten a few blue-screens on my Windows 7 work computer. My home Slackware 13.37 machines just work.
Ed

1 members found this post helpful.

...Well a big point for me is simply... THIS community... People here are helpful, humble, funny... I was already attached to Slackware, but the way of slackers added a lot of pride and pleasure in making the best choice using Slackware.

Thank you Pat, Thank you Alien Bob, Thank you the Slackware team, and thank you all of you Slackers

4 members found this post helpful.

"No sir, I didn't like it.... I didn't like it at all!"

There were a few minor errors in there, facts and the like. Still, good article and I agree with him. Of course. But to give you the most "severe" error, lets just get it out of the way.


Really? So I'm definitely not USING it? Well.. I didn't think I was scared of using it..

Oh all right. This isn't an error. Lets just face the facts. I'm a nerd and I THINK about using it all the time. When I'm not at my computer, I think about using Slackware. It must be it.

A good propaganda article While all or some things written there are or may be true, it sounds like advertising and advertising automatically gets you negative response. This is natural, because no one likes to be told "you should do that", "you should use this", etc. Many open source software has articles like this, but do we agree with them? We may agree with this one, because we are using Slackware, but would we believe same article written for Ubuntu? In the end we all use what we discover is best suited for our needs. So a really good article should not take sides, it should only provide facts, so the user who reads it would get a fair impression of one software and the other, then the choice would be his, and honor would be ours.

I have to agree with Ed: the author's reasoning is 'off' most of the time. His choice of phrasing and terminology is poor (e.g. all that "GPL Compliance" nonsense) and though his conclusions are positive it just doesn't add up right.

Not a good piece, IMO.


I also agree with NoStressHQ that a distro is more than the sum of it's parts: The community and the people behind the distro make a significant difference.

I would like to second that.

Hi,

Author claims to have been using Slackware. Apparently not long nor in-depth to make the comments that were not complete nor thorough. Nothing more than poor opinions or reflections.

I wasted time reading the post along with comments. I stand with my fellow slackers: Useless Post, comments & slanted review.

Indeed, this is a nice community. I'm surprised it's not more like the Debian community. Not everyone that belongs to that community are elitist asshats, maybe not even the majority, but they certainly are the loudest.

Oh, shut up, Mr. Horse! We all know you are NEVER happy!

Now that I have read TFA, I will throw in my 2 cents worth (if this were slashdot...).

While we may niggle about the quality of the "review;" it's not really a review; but rather, a comparison list blog post as seen from the author's viewpoint that rehashes what most of us already know. No doubt, writing under a deadline he had to toss something up.

The part I like best is the mention of Slackbuilds.org (http://www.slackbuilds.org), the de-facto community driven "official" Slackware repository (yes, I am a SBo script maintainer, and, no, don't get me started on the dump linuxpackages.net has turned into.). Slacky.eu is another good site, but my Italian is nonexistent!

The measure of on Operating System is the ability to allow the user to do work. Work might be games, office, network services, etc. Slackware allows me to "work" without all the fiddling other distro's and operating systems require.

Of course, some of us old timers bristle any time someone dares to review Slackware. Why, Of course it ts PERFECT! Slackware runs on ANYTHING! If I had my old, trusty AMD 486DX-100 system (4 MB DRAM, S3 Trio64 VGA, 2GB MFM HD), on which I dual booted MSDOS 6.22/Win 3.1 and Slackware (3? 4? it was one heck of a lot of floppies to download at 14.4kbps), I doubt Slackware 13.37 would boot in its current form.

In conclusion.

1. The article provides needed exposure for Slackware.
2. The article is a bit skimpy.
3. I am a die hard Slackware fan boy. So?
4. Happy Happy Joy Joy Happy Happy Joy Joy!

More importantly: I finally cracked 100 posts since joining in 2003!! Woo-Hoo!

haha

One thing - Slackware, or rather KDE is not something that should be called "stable", especially with KDE 4.5.5 in Slackware 13.1 and 13.37. Plasma can crash anytime, Phonon...well, it's really funny thing...when we want to listen sound from two source (i even don't mention that Phonon likes to crash and we don't have sound at all or the thing where we have only sound trough software that uses alsa directly: audiacious; when Amarok doesent' so i can't play sound at all trough it). There is also thing with "device xxx crashed - segmentation fault" thing.

I don't understand it. My friend who uses Slackware for years often said: it's rock solid stable. Whell, Slackware is my first and only linux distro that i'm interested, and i can't really tell that it's stable. Sad...sad...


Don't get me wrong - as i said earlier, Slackware is the only Linux distro that i'm interested in (because i can learn much from it, i don't want to have another system - like ubuntu - where system is designed for all the people, and we can click instead of learning commands, scripts etc.), as a matter of fact i loved Slacware right after first installation (and i won't back to Windows - i even got original) but i'm dissapointed that crashes happens - as a matter of fact - more often than on Windows. I really don't remember and i can't recall the last time when Vista crashed. I hope that somebody will fix KDE and the stability will be like that from KDE3.5.


I nearly forgot: i love this community. People can find support here, answers without jokes about their lack of knowledge. Even when we are on beginning on our "Linux journey" people will help others. I've decided to register after help that i "recived" from my local Slacware site in my native language. I felt dissapointed, and my friends told me about Linuxquestions.org - and here i'm. Fantastic.

firekage,
Don't equate KDE crashes as a Slackware-specific problem. I gave up on KDE after 3.5.10 because of its instability and just plain design craziness, although sometimes it is X.org that flakes out. The issues you describe effect all distros that load KDE. Although Xfce 4.6 is getting a bit antiquated, it gets the job done without locking up. It does have its own quirks but my GUI uptime is a lot better.