Whats your opinion, why? Lets see what this brings up eh.

ooohh... one hundred percent slackware... umm, well, I chose slackware because it is a real linux and it lets me do things. However, some people are freaked out about it's newbie unfriendlyness, but it's not as bad as debian. However, as debian based, Ubuntu has nice package managment, is a one cd install and is newbie friendly. (they also have a really cool shipit for cds).
(that's my second choice)

Mepis? I haven't tried it, heard some wierd gpl unfriendlyness about it so- I dunno.

distro choice depends on your needs and preferences. I would say that this poll is not a good one, because it is asking "which is better" *better? in what?* for newbie friendly, go with ubuntu or mepis. for package managment, go ubuntu. for a rocking linux that makes you learn, go slackware.

titanium_geek

yeah, the problem is that the Slackware is drasticly different from Mepis or Ubuntu. A better comparison would use Vector instead of Slackware. I think Mepis is Debian too, so it is also missing a FCish distro.

Well, its just an opinion poll, Trying to see who favours what. And your right, Slack is not for new users which sets alot of people off, as where debian can be a little more newbie friendly. I do like them both, but id put slack on top of Ubuntu and, Well Ubuntu and Mepis are about at the same level in my mind.

Slackware:
ULTIMATE COSMIC POWER!
itty-bitty living space.

like the aladin quote.

There are three basic types of linux- the rpm type (Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, Fedora), the debian type (debian, ubuntu, knoppix, mepis) and the pure type (slackware, vector, arch?)
different people like different types.

titanium_geek

Glad you liked it.

Slackware

I'm not wild about most distro forks, such as Mepis and Ubuntu, but Mepis is pretty good and I do like it much better than Ubuntu.

Ubuntu!
I'd consider myself an intermediate linux user so i still appreciate all of the gui tools. plus synaptic is da bombdigity.

Since Gentoo is not an option, I woul have to side with the others and suggest slackware. Ubuntu is good though.

Just curious what you mean by it is a real linux?

EDIT: the following is the origninal post- what I mean is that slackware feels like a linux when you use it.

----------------
real linux- like a "real man" (brave, goodlooking, hearthrob etc etc)
so, it lets you USE it. Like really- commandline is favoured. Ubuntu (like the sig says- an ancient african word that means "I can't configure slackware") and Mepis are forks- not that lessens legitamacy as darn good products, I just apreciate that Slackware is Slackware and always has been. Though U and M have gui and nice yadda yadda, slackware just seems to have that feel to it. I dunno, I just prefered it. (not that there is anything wrong with pansies Ubuntu and Mepis. )
-------------

girls like a real man and a real linux.

keepin on keepin on slackin.
titanium_geek

So, real men let themselves get used?

I do not think "real" has anything to do with it. I think that "real" linux is any distro that uses the same kernel source as the one you can download for www.kernel.org. As for Slackware, "Ultimate Cosmic Power, Itty-Bitty Living Space" is an excellent description for it.

I think I'd better quit while I'm *hem* ahead. (or before I dig my self any deeper)

what I meant by real linux is that it feels like linux. When I first got linux (redhat 8) I felt a "wow feeling" and, as the years went on, it dropped. Even with mandrake, no feeling. I got slackware and WOW feeling! and it hasn't dropped- I'm still learning on it!

titanium_geek

mandrake, redhat/fedora, and "other" linux versions do not adhere to the FHS (filesystem heirarchy standards)..........Slackware does, just look at all the extra crap directories mandrake, fedora adds to the filesystem.............Pat V. maintains FHS standards to keep it simple and easy to navigate, just like it's supposed to be.........

this is what is meant by "real linux"