Because the so called Linux community has long associated Linux with those crappy and buggy monsters like Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc.
So the trend is: ah, Linux, the cheap alternative to windows 98, eh? And the rest of the press: yeah, cool! 99% of my fellow LUG attendants are ready to swear that Slackware had no user interface, whatever that means. I have met a relevant Debian developer saying this: "How can you use a distro that has no user interface in 2008?" What a bunch of idiots! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Each to his own:-) |
Quote:
Do you think people like that, if they saw the name Slackware, or any other Linux distro, in a headline, would know or care enough to read the article? The press knows this so they don't bother wasting resources. I have had a few ask me what Ubuntu is because they heard about it from a friend. When I say it's a Linux distribution the conversation goes like this: "Whoa! What's that?"..."An alternative to Windows."..."So, do I use it in Windows?"..."Um, no, you use it *instead* of Windows. You download and burn the CD, boot from your new disc, and it runs entirely from the CD without affecting your Windows files."..."That sounds too complicated. I'll keep Windows." Businesses are different. If someone in IT is fortunate enough to make decisions they might choose Slackware. Managers, who most often make the decisions, tend to be attracted to buzzwords like enterprise and license and support. And they tend to suffer from tunnel vision so they only see RHEL or SLES. Especially SLES now that the buzzword Microsoft appears. And they tend to have problems with ear wax accumulation so they don't hear when someone offers other possibilities. If they saw something with the name Slackware in the headline they won't care enough to read it. The press knows this so they don't bother wasting resources. |
Quote:
All in all, I'm fine with Slackware not being one of the "mainstream distros" because our community does fine without the press. I think trying to be mainstream would go against the beliefs of Pat and Slackware. |
Quote:
http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major And I think they do give a pretty fair review of it there. |
Quote:
I thought the review was OK. It said a lot of good things and caught the heart of the Slackeare philosophy. However, it leaves the reader with the impression that Slackware is not a complete distro in itself but rather a small unuseful core. It talks about the conservative selection of software but fails to mention that it contains most of the libraries you would ever need right out of the box. Perhaps the review has not been updated for Slackware 12, because I certainly think that it is a good distro for desktops and does not require that "much manual post-installation work before it can be tuned into a modern desktop system." |
Quote:
What always surprises me: People, who are totally horrified if they even hear the word "command line" buy tons of books in order to learn really scary things like Windows batch and VBA programming... I'll never get that... gargamel |
popularity?
Quote:
--- I've been using Slackware for about 8 years and have just switched to Ubuntu7.10 (64). I've even trialled gnome for a week ... it's not gone too well though: loved the eye candy (via compiz) and great for doing simple things, neat layout etc.. Found it impossible to get anything complex done though OOo wouldn't work, no tabs in nautilus, can't create links even, kwallet alternative was a complete mystery. Automated network widget kept screwing with my default route. Even Dolphin is better than Nautilus, and that's saying something. Ooo, rant over. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:08 PM. |