LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   Slackware Review 12.1 (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/slackware-review-12-1-a-646255/)

todders 06-01-2008 03:26 PM

Slackware Review 12.1
 
Dear All for those of you that might has missed this,over on lxer.com they have a review of slackware 12.1 with an interesting discussion in there forums regarding the review.

http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/103421/index.html

http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/27322/

regards

Todders

onebuck 06-01-2008 08:40 PM

Hi,

I just finished the review and forum replies. Basically the same old review that Slackware 12.1 is not newbie/user friendly. That repositories don't have enough available and the package management is not up to date.

This type of review is most certainly biased and I do interpret it as such. The basic RTM was covered but PV and team provide the text files with loads of information. If one can read a README to get some future directions as to what to expect or how to do something then what more do you want? Turnkey or Turkey? I prefer the former if I was someone who didn't want to know the inner workings. But Slackware does require that you know how to read for content and how to do some research to get there. Not a hand holding as the reviewer seemed to imply with the dated install methods for Slackware.

How much software does one need to have installed on your distribution to be up to date? Slackware actually has more than I want on my machine. I trim to suit myself.

I've wasted too much time on another bonker review! Game On!

[stinger] 06-01-2008 09:06 PM

Quote:

How much software does one need to have installed on your distribution to be up to date?
Enough for a newbie to hang himself with I suppose. I wish these clueless boobs would stick with what they know and leave Slackware to those of use who appreciate it's simplicity. I read a review a couple years ago where the reviewer thought there was no X because he booted to the CLI after install. That's when I decided to stop reading fluff journalism that clearly only exists to generate clicks on the advertising.

Thanks, but I'll pass on the read. I think I'll use the time to create my Slack 12.1/KDE 4 test partion instead. ;)

dugan 06-01-2008 09:09 PM

It's the worst type of review. She says that Slackware is not too hard for her, but most likely too hard for her readers.

[stinger] 06-01-2008 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dugan (Post 3171520)
It's the worst type of review. She says that Slackware is not too hard for her, but most likely too hard for her readers.

Nothing like having respect for your audience. ;)
I guess she's lucky it doesn't take too much mental effort to click on the ads.

hitest 06-01-2008 09:48 PM

I had a good chuckle reading the review. According to her you must_be_a_genius to be able to install, configure slackware. Only super-advanced users, sysadmins should attempt slackware. Funny stuff:-) Yet another stupid slackware review:-)

jjthomas 06-01-2008 10:03 PM

I’ve never really found Slackware all that hard, installation or anything else.

I replaced Slackware with Mandrivia. Mandrivia would seize up on a machine that just sat there doing nothing. Back to Slack. Then Ubuntu came out with their new version, so I threw Ubuntu on the machine. I did a bunch of updates and it started crashing. Solaris was unstable. FreeBSD throws UDMA errors.

Until recently I could not install Debian or any of its derivatives due to the way the installer maps the drives. Gentoo does not sruvive the reboot..

Fedora installs fine, but locks up on the reboot. SuSE likes to eat itself.

Personality I would rather have an installation that forces me to layout my drive, that an installation that automagically does what it thinks is right.

Seriously, Slackware is not all that hard.

-JJ

Slacker_Rex 06-01-2008 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dugan (Post 3171520)
It's the worst type of review. She says that Slackware is not too hard for her, but most likely too hard for her readers.

Wasn't this (basically) the same sentiment that Steve Ballmer used describing South Africa and their use of OSS not too many weeks ago?

It appears that the underlying problem is that too many people (calling themselves 'technical experts') are attempting to measure the value of a distribution based on how little an individual is required to know in order to install it, that seems like a real oxymoron, but I suppose it proves that protectionism is alive and well. After all, if 'Joe User' knew enough about his OWN hardware to partition his disk and decide which directories are mounted where, I tend to think that many of the 'technical experts' would not appear so expert in their field any more.

I started playing with Slack at version 4 and remember downloading (a couple weeks as I could) via dial up. I did it so I could learn something about *nix and everything I read said Slack was the way to do that. The only credential I have to my name is a P.H.D. (Plain High School Diploma) and I don't work in the tech industry at all. I guess I better dig out Ubuntu now and install it, since I am obviously unqualified to know enough to get Slackware up and running on this laptop of mine.

SqdnGuns 06-01-2008 10:28 PM

LOL @ the Review..................

If someone really wants to learn and take Linux seriously, they won't be frightened of the lack of GUI installer and CLI.

So be it...............it's not for everyone, not even Caitlyn.

Maybe she should read Woodsman's "Technical Writing Tips" here:

http://humanreadable.nfshost.com/how...iting_tips.htm

dugan 06-01-2008 11:40 PM

I feel so cowardly saying this here, but one of her points (in the discussion) deserves a counterpoint:

Quote:

Hand a Slackware disc and an Ubuntu disc to a newcomer or a non-technical user and see which one they can cope with and which one is an exercise in frustration.
I say install both on separate partitions, learn to use both, and 6 months later try to upgrade them. Which one is the exercise in frustration then? Ubuntu upgrades are notorious for failing. Just read the Ubuntu forums each time a new version comes out. Slackware upgrades, on the other hand, take about 10 minutes.

SqdnGuns 06-02-2008 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dugan (Post 3171621)
I feel so cowardly saying this here, but one of her points (in the discussion) deserves a counterpoint:



I say install both on separate partitions, learn to use both, and 6 months later try to upgrade them. Which one is the exercise in frustration then? Ubuntu upgrades are notorious for failing. Just read the Ubuntu forums each time a new version comes out. Slackware upgrades, on the other hand, take about 10 minutes.

Granted the user will even bother to read the documentation Pat provides on the CD/DVD for upgrades.

brianL 06-02-2008 03:52 AM

This review was featured, and commented on, in the News forum a while ago:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ssions-645283/

H_TeXMeX_H 06-02-2008 12:46 PM

Quote:

The installer assumes you know what you are doing (think Expert install if you're an Ubuntu user) and that you want the ability to control every aspect of the installation. A newcomer to Linux would be utterly, totally lost.
That's a good quote actually, because it's true, and it's due to the fact that most newcomers don't RTFM !!!

And what an evil thing: you can control every aspect of the install, OMFG, stay away from it Ubuntu users. Stay far away, you are not experts, stay away. Don't read the manual, only expert can read it. And one can only became an expert by RTFM. It's a vicious cycle, stay away. Save yourselves ... the trouble of reading it, if you can read, can you ?

Oh, and I love this one (just saw it):

Quote:

You can tell you're dealing with a distro for serious Linux geeks when booting into the GUI isn't even offered as an option by the installer
Hell yeah baby ! I'm a serious Linux geek, an UberGeek ! A haxxor !

But, I guess they're right a curses interface isn't really GUI, it's using official terminology "GUI-like", yeah. I like to call it CUI.

symatic 06-02-2008 02:00 PM

I got bored today and installed Ubuntu. I don't get this newbie friendly thing. It didn't work, it actually annoyed the crap out of me. Wouldn't let me change things and installs things in non-default locations. How is this newbie friendly. If a newbie cannot read the man page or docs to fix it, how is this newbie friendly? I just don't get it. My theory is if Ubuntu users want a system that works properly install slackware and it shall do your bidding. Maybe I'm getting old and all that good stuff, I can't program the VCR type stuff.

I'm tired and have drank way too much Lambrusco!! <--maybe thats the problem.

H_TeXMeX_H 06-02-2008 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by symatic (Post 3172355)
I got bored today and installed Ubuntu. I don't get this newbie friendly thing. It didn't work, it actually annoyed the crap out of me. Wouldn't let me change things and installs things in non-default locations. How is this newbie friendly. If a newbie cannot read the man page or docs to fix it, how is this newbie friendly? I just don't get it. My theory is if Ubuntu users want a system that works properly install slackware and it shall do your bidding. Maybe I'm getting old and all that good stuff, I can't program the VCR type stuff.

I'm tired and have drank way too much Lambrusco!! <--maybe thats the problem.

I completely agree, I had the very same experience when I tried Ubuntu. It restricted me from doing things I was doing even on FC. And many things are not put where they should be, which caused problems when I tried to install some software and compile programs. I don't get it either.

Maybe it's just like movies.

I like a movie for the same reason someone else hates it.

Maybe it's like that for distros too.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:33 AM.