Why does Linux users fight about distros???
 

Ok, This thread will probably be closed in half an hour.

But I'm tired of the distro fight. I hear things like: I hate Fedora because I hear it's bad (Never tried it myself). Try not to critisize every distro, but look at the good thing in all of them. If you are so tired of many distro's we can make it as easy as Windows:

Remove Ubuntu because it sucks
Remove Mandriva because it sucks
Remove SUSE because it sucks
Remove MEPIS because it sucks
Remove KNOPPIX because it's based on Debian which sucks
Remove Fedora because it sucks
Remove Debian because it sucks
Remove Gentoo because it's not for noobs and that suck
Remove DSL because it sucks
Remove Slackware because it's commercial
Remove aLinux because it sucks
Remove BSD because it sucks
Remove the rest too because they suck

But don't remove Snøfrix! It ROCKS! Anyone tried Snøfrix? Who cares?! It rocks and therefore it's the only distro we need!

Is that the way we want Linux?

The moral is: Stop the distro war and stop telling others why $DISTRONAME sucks

Now you can close the thread

Why do comic book nerds argue about who would win a fight--the Hulk or Wolverine? People just like to argue about such things.

Nope. Thread will remain open. None of us really fight about the distro we like. We all simply have our favourites. The fact is that a huge number of us spend a long time trying a variety of distros before we hit on the one that's just right - it feels right, works the way we want it to and we are comfortable with it.

No distro wars, just friendly arguments.

Those who argue about it haven't figured out it's like arguing about wine, apples (as in fruit), or if it's better to live in the city or country, or which country is best to live in for that matter.

It's all just personal preference, and my reasons for picking Debian and Red Delicious apples are not going to fully satisfy anyone else.

This is not a failure of having too many choices. The reason we have so many choices is because there are good people with their own personal preferences who make their efforts available to others.

I would hate it if there were only one Linux distribution. So would you.

Prehaps if it was not called distro wars but distro love you might get a better idea of what it is all about.

People like to tell others about something that's made them happy - we do it all of the time, it's called word of mouth recommendation.

Linux is a very technical subject, so, its quite easy to find a reason for not liking a certain distro in the same way as you can love a distro for something quite small - and that's just the way it is!

I like Slackware for a few very simple reasons - its not produced by a large company, it reminds me of FreeBSD and its the 'truest' Linux I've found. Someone is going to post and tell me that there is a better choice which also has the same criteria. They are not neccessarally 'dissing' my choice, but mearly wanting to help me find the same nirvana as them!

The point is, if you let people go on and on about their fav distro, what harm does it do? You don't have to take their advise, but you might find, once in a blue moon that they have a point!

Have fun -


F0ul Oli

Yes, some is just friendly arguments and stuff. But I mean more like critisizing distro's without even trying them. Like, why does so many people hate Fedora? I started with redhat 9 and almost all the time I used RedHat or Fedora. I had a problem with GRUB a month ago and therefore deleted Fedora. Today I installed it again. I like Fedora. I like all the distro's I use. Even SUSE which is critisized for being "To much Windows"

Everyone has their favorite. Some people feel very strongly about "free software", which is part of the reason commercial distros tend to get picked on.

I am one of those that absolutely loves Debian. It does every thing I need it to do. I love Debian's Social Contract, and Reasons to Choose Debian.

On the other hand I am also a distro junkie and on my play system I install a new distro every couple of months; sooner if I screw it up.

I have ran Mandrake 10.0, FC3, Suse 9.2, OPenSuse, PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu, MEPIS, Xandros, Linspire, Vector, Gobolinux, and many others ; not even counting the dozens of LiveCds I have tried.

Nothing I have installed does for me what Debian does.

Different people have different needs, what works for one may not work for someone else. Some distros are also known to be more stable than others, Debian and Slackware in particular. It is pretty hard to screw up either one.

To each his/her own. Anything is better than being tied to a windows system.

Distro "wars" are healthy. They are all trying so many novel ways...

I started with Redhat 5.2 (kernel 2.0.36) back in 1998/1999. I had to setup everything manually: PPP, X, localization, etc. and there wasn't many forums like now.

Today it's easier to try any distro. There are live-cd's, screenshots, forums, etc. You must be willing to experiment and take risks to learn something.

The Gentoo installation may be lengthy, but it's extremely well documented (at the web site) and it's a rewarding experience and best suited for your personal computer. The choice of font & colors on the console and the web site are the most beautiful. This is when "fights" become subjective because users get involved with their distro in the emotional level too.

To install Linux on many machines you may use Slackware or Debian or Fedora (many universities like it). I wouldn't install Mandrake however. It must be the worst RPM distro in existence. They have like 3 versions of each library (shared, static & devel) and updating the kernel in the most legal way always messes with lilo.conf and symbolic links in a way that needs fixing (specially if you have >1 kernels). Their lack of packages (in the free to d/l 3-cd pack) is offensive if you want to compile.

All those other distros suck, everyone knows slack rules. ;)

I don't think it has anything to do with 'distro wars', it's just some users have a major case of distro snobbery.

Some distro's (and we all know which ones) have a reputation as 'advanced', which sort of translates that if you use such a distro, then you must be more 'advanced' than someone who doesn't. And here's where it sometimes gets ugly; some users of those particular distro's look down on others that don't; dude, you're using $distro which sucks - you'd be a lot better of using my advanced distro which doesn't suck.

Distro snobbery is one of the main things I hate about Linux and the Linux community.
And here's the rub; all distro's do pretty much the same thing. Some distro's do things differently. Does this make them better? Or more advanced?
No. It just makes them different.
Your 'advanced' distro doesn't do anything my 'newb' distro can't do just as well, so just get over it.

Once the Linux community stops attacking each other over which distro to use, (and other general in-fighting) maybe we can start encouraging more users away from Windows and onto Linux.

Just as long as they don't use Fedora.
Coz that would suck.

I thought gentoo ruled :confused:

Nope, Gentoo rocks, Slack rules ;)

That will never happen. To encorauge users from Windows and onto Linux there should be a way to develope commercial applications and just give away one binary that will work on any Linux system. But then Linux won't be as good as it is now, I like the free programs, it makes life easier in financial way's. Being able to distribute one binary for any Linux system, will never happen anyway.

First of all, notice that the people who impunge one distro vs. another have installed several of them. They are not casual users anymore. The experience of having used several different distros has changed them more than they realize.

Folks who expect users to switch from Windows to Linux sometimes seem to think that users will do so "because Linux is so much better." Is it better? To answer that question in a meaningful way you have to ask, "..to whom? Why?"

If the computer is simply an overglorified electric typewriter and message-machine, then the best solution is probably what often happens: status quo. A Windows machine, and probably one that has not been upgraded in years. A weird mixture of Windows machines, all in the same office, because you can't buy an older version of Windows with a new machine even if you wanted to -- and you'd probably want to, if you only could, which is precisely why you can't.

In an environment like that, Linux is simply another unwelcome change.

But in an environment where Linux is genuinely needed, it genuinely shines. It gleams and it glistens, and it gets used. Most of the Internet probably runs on Linux or Unix, and with good reason. Sites that run on Microsoft technology are easy to spot... they're slow. These are all situations where the difference between the two systems really made a difference, and the difference was really understood by the (highly technical) people who made the decision.

We have to realize, though, that many parts of the Windows world are not like that and never will be. Those people are unlikely to "convert." They don't even "upgrade!"

LMAO.....he he-----distro wars sounds like it might make a neat open source game........a scenario might go like this....

players spend all their waking moments trying to convert windows heathens to install/use a particular distro, and the one who converts the most heathens after 2 weeks or so wins........!!

There definitely does exist "distro-elitism" in the Linux community whether we care to acknowledge the fact or not. I have seen this especially with certain distributions like Slackware or Gentoo because they are perceived to be difficult to use by many.

On a general level, I've noticed that people who've used multiple distros tend to come across as more objective and more level-headed because they tend to compare distros better. On the other hand, those who have used only one distro clearly

1. Haven't a clue as to how other distros compare with respect to theirs.
2. Are biased to a large extent.

Slackware activists, in particular, tend to come across as elitist on many occasions. I'm not targetting anybody, let it be said. However, the very same people who come across as elitist are also some of the most helpful folks on the forums.

Yes. At least one out of five Slackware users do tend to attack distros like Debian, Gentoo and Suse more often than not. What really irritates me is the way they assume that all other Linux users are lazy and ignorant because we choose not to tweak our systems manually as much as Slackware. I use Slackware myself, but I don't see any special skills needed to operate Slackware any more than Gentoo or Debian. What irritates me is the air of superiority some of these people assume in the face of valid arguments in favour of other distros that allow users the option of using automated configuration tools.

I mentioned reverse elitism some time ago. Sorry to say that Slackware-elitism does exist and I've seen it more of this on this forum too... it's the truth and I'm not going to hide it for anybody's sake. Mind you, I'm not targetting the entire Slackware community, but the 10-20% of those who do indulge in bashing other distros.

Slackware is a very simple and elegant distro, but that doesn't make it better/worse than distro A or B just because ten fanboys repeat the same thing... It's just different. Slackware doesn't need advocacy. It just is its own advertisement. That's why I often feel sad when people feel threatened when Slackware is even slightly criticized... Slackware is one of the longest surviving distros of Linux for a reason, folks...

If you take offence to this post, then please think about whether this is a direct criticism of you or not and count up to 10 before responding...

Slackware activists? LOL. :p

Let's patent some more psychological terms and label every single thing and take the fun out of computing (and life, in general).

I mean, these kind of religious wars are harmless. 99% of all users are sane enough not to take the matter 100% seriously to take a gun a kill somebody for something we enjoy. We are not hooligans.

I agree with you.
I have OpenSuSE and Debian. I tried just for one month Ubuntu and no more.
I like Debian but i don't know why they are waiting so long for Xorg for example...
I started with SuSE 6.8 and i am still SuSE user (i was sas when became Novell-SuSE)

The elitism is possibly a part of why Linux has become popular in the first place.
Techies love to be in a position where they control the black magic - First it was just being able to use a PC, then it was MSDOS v Windows, then NT v 95 then Unix v Windows, Linux v windows, and now every Distro v other distros.

How are u going to prove to your colleagues that you have one up on them any other way?

I think the fact that Slack has a reputation of not holding your hand like Redhat or Mandrake does when it comes to installing is the key to it. If its true or not doesn't make any difference - its all down to reputation. Slackware does rock, but only because all the others have grown up a little to appeal to more people.


The problem for Linux however is that if you come from a non technical field, and have no interest in out doing or out posing your colleagues, all this dissing is just going to put you off.

As soon as Linux gets into the mainstream, and 'ownership' goes into management rather than the IT dept, Linux distro wars will quell and it will all be about BSD instead!!

I'm all about picking the right tool for a job. Nothing more, nothing less.

The only exception is/are: RedHat and Fedora. I refuse to use Redhat because they dropped the desktop solution (and I used to buy the retail boxed Redhat every release, well, up until 1998 or 1999), and don't use Fedora because it's officially perpetually unstable. Things may have changed slightly now that Fedora is independent of Redhat, but I'll wait until the next release before trying it.

With that said, I don't mind fixing client machines with Redhat.

My personal favorite for general use? SuSE. Reason: It comes with a lot out of the box, and when I sit down at my computer, I just want to get my work done or watch a movie, or go about whatever other task I want to complete. I don't want to spend weeks downloading a million different packages the next time I need to do a new task. Also: SuSE upgrades from release to release go very smoothly, in my experience.

My favorite for tinkering used to be Slackware, but getting to the point to where I can do actual work got old really fast. (Anyone else here spend weeks and weeks editing fvwm configuration files and building menus and window decorations by hand? I used to. Yeah I know, Slackware now comes with real desktops, but you still have to tinker more to get from A to B)

Slackware has just as much autoconfigurators and stuff as other distros, it does not make them front and center. It also does not force you to use them as much as other distros. Many distros make it nearly impossible to go into the configuration files manually if the GUI tool did something wrong.

I've often asked myself the same thing...

I encounter this kind of thing only amongst certain distros, however. I never see a Slackware user scoff at a non-Slackware user. I never see a Red Hat user obtain that firey brand of fierce loyalty. But suggest that other, viable Linux distros exist around either an Ubuntu or a Debian user, and you'll have the Flaming Sword of Zealotry clobbering you over the head all the way home. I downloaded and tried both distros just to see what all the fuss is about. I was unimpressed. I deleted them. I found other distros I like better. So what? So now I'm a heretic.

Yeah, I thought free software was partly about *choice*. If we were going to be the kind of people who blindly conform to what the herd chooses, we wouldn't be using Linux at all, now would we?

Would you mind rephrasing this statement to be a little less extreme? We're not all wielding the "Flaming Sword of Zealotry" around here...

Slackware is commercial? When did this happen?

LOL

I think most of the "distro war" thing is just in fun. I think most experienced Linux users know that the distro that works best for them may not be the best choice for someone else.

It really boils down to choosing the right tool for the job and some friendly "mine is better than yours" rivalry is to be expected and is ok as long as it isn't taken too seriously. Not much different than "my football team is better than yours" or "my race car driver is better than yours". Human nature.

I use Slack because it's the best distro out there...for me. I enjoy "tinkering" with other distros, but my primary distro will likely always be Slack because it suits me best. I will always say "Slack is best" but will also always follow it up with "for me".

Gosh, I guess I'm the only one here who likes Fedora...;) .

People have a tendency to become attached to things that they use and/or love. As a result, that person's perception of thier attachment becomes skewed. They begin to attack those who do not understand their passion. Perhaps they had a bad experience in the past with a particular distro and refuse to tinker with it again. Maybe they were having a problem getting a certain app to work and became infatuated when distro X ran it fine. I guess that disagreements over distributions is simply a consequence of the diversification of Linux.

...then again, maybe it's not that big of a deal.:D

Sorry, but yes, I would mind. I've literally had other threads where somebody asked "What distro should I use for purpose X,Y, and special purpose Z?" and I've recommended the best distro that I thought would suit the requested purpose and had a Debian user join the thread and CORRECT ME to Debian and then FLAME ME for not recommending it. That's Flaming Zealotry.

Every user of every other distro has humbly endured the pokes and jibes at his/her pet distro within this subject thread, but an Ubuntu user and an Ubuntu user alone so far has protested, having taken it too hard and too personally. That's Flaming Zealotry.

You're just going to have to hate me for the rest of my life.

Edit to add:
Ah, yes, there's the quote I was looking for...and my fave distro is Slackware, and I AGREE with this post!

Ok, if you insist.

I ride a recumbent bicycle as my primary means of transportation and am a member of a couple of cycling forums. Reading through some of the threads on those forums I couldn't help but think of this thread.

Linux folks debate that their distro is better. Cycling folks debate that their brand/model bent is superior to the others, even which style/configuration of handlebars is better and why (that's the thread that reminded me of this one). While I prefer hamster handlebars, others swear by tweeners which I can't stand.

I think it just boils down to everyone having their own opinions about things.