I've made some googling and i got that page>>>
http://www.frozentech.com/content/livecd.php

I'm now confused. Which one of these live cds is the best? i.e. easier to use or has a lot of functionalities ? Also, what about their sizes? Why are they different in sizes to that extent, from tens of megs to gigas?!!

From the votes, i think SLAX is the best, but the question is: WHY IS THAT?
..
.

Knoppix is generally regarded as the best overall live distro, as it has excellent hardware detection and a wealth of software compiled in.
For small live distro, or for use on old hardware, Damn Small Linux (DSL) is generally regarded as the best.
It's really a matter of personal opinion and what components/desktop environments/etc you prefer?

What do you want a use the live cd for?

it always helps if you post computer specs and what you plan to use it for because as navarro said it depends.
if i was using it on one of my computers i would probably go for knoppix or dsl. However if i was burning the disc for fixing other peoples computers i would burn something like backtrack

My live CD of choice is totally better than your sucky live CD of choice.

Knoppix is my favourite -- very good hardware detection and setup, and can read NTFS partitions as well.

i've tryed many livecd's and it really depends on what you want to do with it.
if you are looking for a glimps of the distro's, test them all.
if you just want to test linux, best use knoppix or maybe even suse.
anyway you see it, it is up to you to decide. get some info from the distro's official websites, find out what distro fits you best and try their livecd.
if you find it ***** then try another one.

the reason why one livecd is a couple GB and some just about 600MB is cause some live versions (eg: suse) are on dvd.
in general, the larger the cd, the more apps/drivers/tools you will find.

so the choice is up to you.
hope this helps a bit

I have tried Knoppix twice, with disappointing results. I couldn't configure my Epson printer, and the whole Live CD operation was slow, sticky, and uncertain.
Puppy is the one for me: light, perfectly operational right out of the box, fast. It seems to have all the right software, too.

a livecd will allway's be slower then an installed distro. another reason why knoppix is slower is because it starts a lot of software (that you may or may not need)

yes knoppix wasnt designed as a livecd. It is a full distro that was put onto a livecd. This is one of the reasons i like DSL. It is designed to be a livecd and therefore doesnt have a bunch of extra crap. as far as i know dsl is still using kernel 2.4 because it is smaller than 2.6 inorder to make the cd more efficient

I doubt it has anything to do with efficience. I think they are using an smaller kernel to take less space on the CD and because it DSL is usually target to older PC's and a lot of old hardware was deprecated under 2.6.x release... I think ^^

The only live distribution I ever got attached to is SimplyMEPIS. I use it on a laptop that must only have Windows installed. It seems to run just as well from the Live CD as I would expect it to if it was a regular installed distribution. I have a fair amount of RAM on that laptop, though (1.24 GB) and that may make a difference. Anyway, it boots quickly--more so than the other live distributions I've tried.

both are partially right.

Will DSL ever use the 2.6 kernel? Has it even been considered?

There are currently no plans to move to a 2.6.x kernel, for the following reasons.

* The 2.6.x kernel is significantly bigger than the 2.4.x kernel, so it would cramp DSL's functionality.
* The 2.6.x kernel drops a lot of support for legacy technologies, hardware, etc, and we want to keep DSL functional on as much hardware as possible

DSL FAQ

Heh. My local area sports team is far superior to your local area sports team.

To get back on topic, my answer is Knoppix, but to each his own

Take a look at this page:
http://www.frozentech.com/content/livecd.php

People who say knoppix or dsl obviously haven't tried puppy yet.