Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions
User Name
Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on... Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.


  Search this Thread
Old 03-14-2003, 09:00 AM   #1
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Fredericksburg Va
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 59

Rep: Reputation: 15
Smile Basic SuSE info

Ive been running Redhat 8.0 for a few months now, and learned alot thanks to these fourms. I have also noticed many people prefer SuSE, and with a new version of thier distibution comming out in april im thinking about giving it a try. As I am curently happy with rehat, but curious as to what SuSE could offer me over my current set up what sort of changes in usability/compatability/stability sould i expect to see between the two?

Also, still being new to Linux, what sort things should i worry about? Is there as wide of selection of RPM's for software as redhat has avaliable?

Also, the machine im running on is a wee slow (500 mhz p3/256 ram) which is *slightly* sluggish with redhat. Is this going to cause a problem with SuSE?

I have heard the installation of SuSE can be a tad daunting to a newbie. Any truth in this?

And last, as I'm not opposed to buying a copy of it, I'd like to download it and try it out before I commit cash to something I may not like. Do they offer ISO's for download anywhere? I glanced thru thier site and didn't see any, and have also heard downloads are not avaliable anywhere.

I'm sorry in advance for all my spelling/gramatical/typing errors.

thanks alot!
Old 03-14-2003, 09:13 AM   #2
Registered: Aug 2002
Distribution: RedHat 8.0 & Suse 8.1
Posts: 58

Rep: Reputation: 15
Redhat 8.0 is just slow. I noticed when I installed it that it was 10x slower then other distros I use but it should be faster when redhat8.1(or if they decide to call it 9.0 to make money) comes out.
Suse is a very nice distro. They have very nice tools to help you manage your system(suse is much easier then redhat8!) and in the normal account suse looks very nice with all the extra little effects that they add(in root they take all the effects out and everything cuz root is for just changing certain things). ALso suse is very fast. Even with almost all the effects added in a normal user suse is fast.

TO install suse you have to do what they call an FTP download which is kinda hard if the installer doesn't reconize your ethernet card. That happened to me so what I did was download the whole /8.1 (around 5.8 gigs in total) and then tell it to install from my windows partition. As long as your ethernet card is reconized then all you have to do is enter in the ftp address (and directry) to suse 8.1 on the ftp and then it downloads and installs what you need.
Heres where to get instructions and to download the ftp install:
Make sure you download from a mirrior in your area (by clicking the link that says" If possible, please download SuSE Linux from a mirror in your vicinity. ") and then you get started (after reading the installtion instructions )
Suse 8.1 IS by far the best linux distro IMO.
my system is:
Celeron 550mhz
256mb RAM
7200RPM 40gig HD
5200RPM 10gig HD
Soundblaster Live

Last edited by HellBound; 03-14-2003 at 09:15 AM.
Old 03-14-2003, 08:33 PM   #3
Senior Member
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: PCLINUXOS
Posts: 2,876

Rep: Reputation: 88
Hello KePSuX,
I would prefer Suse over Red Hat myself. You would need to judge if the differences are good or bad yourself. Many people use Red Hat.
It seemed to me that one was not able to use all the "Red Hat" RPM oddball software in Suse (as you usually can in Mandrake).
As far as Suse install being hard, my opinion is that Suse works better out of the box than either Red Hat or Mandrake.
I am considering checking out Suse 8.2 myself.
I hope you are talking trying Suse rather than replacing Red Hat cold.
Good Luck.
Old 03-15-2003, 07:38 PM   #4
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Distribution: Slackware 9.1
Posts: 482

Rep: Reputation: 30
SuSE>Red Hat if you're new to linux.
Old 03-16-2003, 02:20 PM   #5
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sarge, Gentoo
Posts: 70

Rep: Reputation: 15
My biggest problem with SuSE was the lack of support by third parties.

It seems that when people develop new software for linux, they make it work with RedHat, and so they make Red Hat RPMS and tarballs that compile readily under Red Hat, but need tweaking for SuSE and Debian.

This tweaking can be pretty daunting at first, so if you are going to be using loads of software off the internet, for obscure purposes, avoid the non-redhatalike distros. That said, SuSE Pro does include a disgustingly ENORMOUS range of software on the DVD, doing everything from debugging the cat to making tea.

I also have a problem with the SuSE manual, which seems like a pretty poor translation from the German, and the lack of good Gnome support.

The YaST tool is good - a centralized setup tool that makes redhats menagerie if little tools for setting up every system look pretty amateur. But RedHat does tend to have tools for really obscure, small jobs that I would usually use a terminal for under SuSE.

I can't corroborate HellBound's account of RedHat being slow- I have found it as fast if not faster than the other distros that I have used.

The installation systems are so similar for RedHat and SuSE, I wouldn't pay much attention to them when choosing between the distros. Both have a nice pretty GUI, an intuitive hard-drive partitioner and good package selector. SuSE's is better, in my opinion, as it allows more control over individual packages.
Old 03-17-2003, 10:55 AM   #6
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Fredericksburg Va
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 59

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
yea, the idea of not having easly installable software from the net is the biggest deterant for me. Im trying to find a buddy that can burn me off a copy of 8.1 so i can try it out, and if i like it ill pick up a copy of 8.2 next month. Thanks for everyones input thus far, any more info is appriciated.
Old 03-23-2003, 04:33 PM   #7
Registered: May 2001
Location: Pangaea
Distribution: SimplyMepis2004
Posts: 78

Rep: Reputation: 15
Thumbs up

I can only speak from my own experience. I purchased SuSE 7.1 a couple of years ago, just before 7.2 came out. Installation takes about 30 minutes for the default setup. The first time (two years ago), I had difficulty getting my modem recognized, it took about three days of playing around with YAST, and I still don't know what I was doing wrong. I installed from the very same discs last week, and this time around, the modem worked right the first time. So, perhaps I overlooked some simple step during that first installation. I suppose the important point is that everything else worked just fine, the installation programs guided me through step by step, it really was quite easy.
The installation last week was onto a Pentium 166 machine assembled from various parts discarded by a local university. SuSE doesn't exactly fly on this old machine, but it seems to run well enough. I've never used Red Hat, so can't compare, however I've seen Windows machines run as slow or slower than this one. Red Hat does have a good reputation for being user friendly, I would say that SuSE has been friendly to me, not as easy to set up as Windows 98, but not unreasonably difficult.
I find it fun to tinker with Linux, sort of like customizing your car, instead of just accepting one the way the factory made it.
You have to admit, SuSE does have a very cool mascot!

Old 03-23-2003, 05:05 PM   #8
LQ Newbie
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Westminster, CO
Distribution: SuSE 8.1
Posts: 15

Rep: Reputation: 0
I had RedHat 6.1 afew years ago, and gave up when I had trouble with the win modem and the remote printer. SuSE 8.1 has been easier to setup except for the sound card on my Compaq Presario 5280 doesn't work yet.
(anyone know how to talk to the BIOS).

Samba after proper net confiuration set up my W2k HP LaserJet 1100 with ease Komodo 3.2 works fine exept for VPM which didn't work at first on XP box.

Still mucking about with MySql and Apache but....

However the major difference has been a cable modem connection to the net.
Old 03-23-2003, 05:24 PM   #9
Senior Member
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Perry, Iowa
Distribution: Mepis , Debian
Posts: 2,692

Rep: Reputation: 45
(anyone know how to talk to the BIOS).

when the big red compaq is on screen at power up press F10


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Basic Samba connection info... redrobin77 Linux - Networking 2 09-20-2005 11:01 AM
any books with basic info? sfzombie13 Linux - Newbie 5 08-06-2005 06:52 PM
Basic lin-gaming info TomalakBORG Linux - Games 2 05-09-2005 07:05 AM
Basic Wireless Info on Cards JockVSJock Linux - Wireless Networking 3 05-12-2004 07:21 AM
I'm a BASIC chap, looking for some info on BASIC programming CragStar Programming 2 01-21-2001 09:19 AM > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:47 PM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration