-   Linux - Software (
-   -   What do you personaly think of redhat ? (

xconspirisist 10-09-2003 12:17 PM

What do you personaly think of redhat ?
I personaly love redhat - ive tried :

slack, mandrake, dsl, bbc, knoppix and debian ( sort of ).

I love its hardware compatibility, rpm's !!, its wicked ui, and its excelent network.

But im affraid of being called a newbie for using it - it doesnt require too much effort to use - just wondering what you lot thought of it...

ps : is slack / debian the most ' advanced ' distro ?

salparadise 10-09-2003 12:27 PM

not my cup of tea at all

too corporate


now there's a lovely thing

slakmagik 10-09-2003 01:10 PM

I've never used it. Does that still count? I personally think RH, Mandrake, and SuSe are all too corporate. I don't like rpms. I don't like SysV inits. I don't like too many (if any) specialized GUI tools. I don't like funky filenames or directory structures. I really don't like the idea of shipping broken compilers or excessively 'specially' patched kernels. I don't like that any one distro is essentially synonymous with 'Linux' in Joe Public's mind, if Linux is in Joe Public's mind at all. I don't like how many pages they take from the Microsoft playbook - which is why I think of it as MicroHat. In other words, everything I've heard, read, or imagined about it has made me decide to never bother with it. SuSe's way too corporate, doesn't provide proper downloads, I hear their support sucks, and they're too close to SCO. Mandrake has advertisements and corporate links and whatnot but that's the one of the three I've actually used. I didn't like it but I can see why people would and I sometimes recommend it with reservations to certain people looking for a distro.

Just what I think. :)

As far as whether Slack or Debian are advanced and RH is newbie, that is the general impression but if you like RH, use it, and screw what others think. On average, I find Slack users more knowledgeable than RH users but an average is a fake thing made up out of real people, almost none of whom are actually average. There are many RH wizards and many Slackware idiots (not that I'd have any personal experience with being - er, knowing about - that last).

I have a Debian install I don't use much - or like much - but the only thing particularly 'advanced' about it is actually primitive - it has the worst installation process I've ever suffered through, excepting only Core. After that, there's not much especially 'advanced' about it. People get freaked out having to use fdisk to install Slack but Slack's install is fine. Configuring Slack is probably a lot harder but mostly in an optimizing sense. Just minimally running it is not too hard. I dunno. If you like the command line and text files and don't much mind reading some docs, Slack doesn't seem so hard. Maybe if you don't, it seems impossible. It's more an attitude thing than an advanced/newbie thing. The most advanced distro is running Minix and creating a kernel. The gulf between that and Lindows puts Slack, Debian *and* RH pretty close together nearer the Lindows end.

trickykid 10-09-2003 01:25 PM

I like Redhat. I think they are good for Linux. I only liked a few releases personally but there's always a way around that, customizing, suiting your own needs, etc.

Redhat is my second choice after Slackware.

But just because you don't like RPM's doesn't mean you have to use them. When I used Redhat, I still installed from source, etc.

slakmagik 10-09-2003 01:45 PM

Is that about what I said about rpms? That's true - that was just something I threw in my laundry list. :) I don't really even use *.tgz either, beyond the initial install and security updates and whatnot - my add-on apps are usually from source. I used a lot of funky distros early on and compiling was a real pain and part of the joy of Slackware is how smooth many compiles go. Part of what I understood (or misunderstood?) about RH was that compiling could be a headache due to RH peculiarities.

If it wasn't about what I said, then never mind. *g*

Mega Man X 10-09-2003 01:51 PM

I'm with trickykid. Redhat is also my second choice after Slack. Although, lately, I'm using a lot J.A.M.D. It's pretty much like Redhat, but with a single CD and apt-get/synaptic by default. That helps a bunch to update stuff and doesn't have unnecessary stuff, as 4 browsers, 5 windows managers and all that you know Redhat is shipped with.
I also have to disagree that they (Redhat) is too close to SCO, in fact, I think they have sued SCO a few months ago. And the support is very very good, both from Redhat and the rpm's around (if there's a rpm, there's surely a Redhat rpm).
Note: J.A.M.D ain't good for compiling stuff. In fact, it does not come even with gcc, but you can apt-get for it. Personally, I think that it's a very worthy try for those used with Redhat ;)

slakmagik 10-09-2003 01:55 PM

Nah, I was digressing on SuSe when I mentioned SCO and the support. :)

Mega Man X 10-09-2003 02:09 PM

Oh I see :) sorry, mix up :(. I also don't like Suse so much, ghehe. Making so hard to get a version with ftp only .

hw-tph 10-09-2003 02:40 PM

I agree with most of what digiot said.

I'm not particularily fond of RedHat even though I have used it pretty extensively. RPM hell isn't my cup of tea and the eerie similarities between RedHat and Microsoft (register! register!) put me off.

I mainly use Debian because I am used to it and the package system is excellent. One can complain about the install process but it's actually not that hard. But OK, it's not a "wizard" if that's what you want. ;)

Out of the things that annoy me most about the mentioned corporate-focused Linux distros (and Mandrake) is that they are basically trying to be the next Microsoft - they want GNU/Linux to be the next Windows. That's pure crap if you excuse my language. Linux should be Linux and even though I agree on making it more user friendly can be positive in attracting new users, pretending that Linux isn't Linux - like Lindows (who must be a bunch of complete idiots - running as root per default? Ha!) is very wrong.


galaga88 10-09-2003 02:49 PM

I've always used Slackware, it was the first distro somebody loaned me on CD way back when.

I tried Redhat out once, and I couldn't figure it out. I in no way blame this on Redhat, but on myself. I just found it amusing that I hammered my way through one of the "advanced" distros, and got befuddled by the one that's supposed to be the easiest to use. :)

kasperhans 10-09-2003 02:52 PM

ok if have tested a lot of distros like red hat(5-8),mandrake(7-9),suse,debian,knoppix,freebsd... just for fun and to learn more about linux and different concepts
but in the end i love my slack its fast and custom also its not overloaded with guis or programs no one ever needs ...
but of course i can understand people using rh,mandrake,suse, because its easy to install,easy to use ...
so people who just want to use their computers without getting into and getting to know what really happens in a system its ok
if someone wants to know an easy to use distro i mostly say get rh,mandrake,suse but for myself i have tested them and learned, that i want to have a more customable distro, thats why i rested at slack and i dont think ill change in the future .

Col Panic 10-09-2003 03:02 PM

I used slack from ver 3 up to 9. I liked it for its stability and adherence to unix file systems. I switched to RH9 when I got the 3 cd set with a magazine subscription lol.

After a few years of Linux admin at home and Unix/Novell at work, I LOVE the rpm's and the gui wizards for settings. I'll stick with RH for everything but a firewall/router.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11 PM.