Judging from your experience and knowledge using many Distros I believe you have good enough knowledge to gear me towards the right direction. What do you consider more simple to manage for a server side developer Slackware or CentOS. Just asking your opinion thats all. Its usually better to get an experienced persons opinion in such a case.

Other people's opinion on those distros are not relevant. You stated this in an earlier post:To achieve this goal you have to have knowledge on every relevant server distro. RHEL/CentOS (and maybe Oracle) are definitely relevant, Debian also and maybe Suse. You will have to learn them, regardless which opinion we have about those distros.
Which distro you use at home is a totally different thing. But our opinion is here also not relevant, you will get the same answer as any newbie that asks for recommendations: Try and decide for yourself, only you can decide. Choosing a distro is not a thing that can't be changed afterwards. If it would be I would still use Ubuntu. Or Debian. Or Arch. Just try.

They have a saying, once you go slack o never go back. LOL
But I agree with all you have told me Tobi, and thanks for your help.

@Mercury305, forgive me if this seems to be offending. But to me it looks like you are either posting something that would start a flame war or something that has been discussed endlessly on this forum (the windows vs linux thread on this forum lasted for about seven years and I doubt anyone is any more wiser for it).
I have been reading your posts since your introduction (I do not believe anyone here has had 3 pages of introduction) and sometimes it seems like you simply go over the edge. The mods here are (as you know) _very_ linient and will let you say anything as long as they feel that you have a valid reason to say so.
Please tell me why anyone should give any damn for you _feeling_ slackware is better than ubuntu.
But, please, when I looked at your first post I felt here was someone who would add some value to the forum, help the firs time posters with their issues, give insight to some issues that have pestered even the seniors and in general share his wealth and knowledge of *nix. Honestly, I am disappointed.

I still hope when I read your next post I would understand or learn something of value.
I apologise agian if I hurt someones feelings.

@Mercury305, honeybadger does raise some valid points. I must admit I am also getting kind of bored of all your constant Slackware Red Hat disscussion. Particularly when you already know what you should do, since you already have an answer that I suspect you like (you wrote it):

Also, you already started four threads that seem to be primarily about about discussing "Slackware Vs. Red Hat":

KISS Principle in Redhat
Slackware too Complex to use?
Introduction to myself and thoughts of Slackware and its future
Redhat emerging dominance in net servers

Why are you asking the same questions again and again, when you apparently already know the answer?

You also resurrected another thread on the same topic, that had been dead for more than a year just to say you liked it (presumably hoping for yet more discussion):

"Difference between centos and slackware" and "also how to install scratch on centos"

Additionally, you have brought up various Red Hat/Fedora/CentOS comparisons in a numerous other threads:

Help me understand Patrick's words
ATI Radeon™ HD 6250 Graphics Support (thread started by you)
Slackware Command Line Manual (thread started by you)

Perhaps you should give it a rest for a bit. I don't think any of the rest of us are that interested in discussing it any more.

It depends on where you are coming from and what you want out of it.

If you are a Window$ user and want something that works exactly like Window$ (probably because you don't have enough money and are afraid to pirate it) and works out-of-the box and has wine installed so you can run all the trial software/malware you use in Window$ on Linux. Oh, and by Linux I mean *buntu, because to Window$ users *buntu = Linux. Slackware will seem impossibly complex, difficult, awkward, backward, ancient, outdated, archaic, anachronistic, and useless. Not to worry tho, because you will likely go back to Window$ soon.

If you want something other than / nothing like Window$ and clones or knockoffs of it like *buntu, then you'll try the better distros like Slackware, Arch, Debian, Gentoo, etc. These are for power users and for those who want to learn more and do more. Slackware may seem complex at first, but you'll quickly get the hang of it. Out of all of these, I think Slackware is the best for what I need. I want something that is easy and quick to install (that rules Gentoo and Debian out) and that is close to what I want to end up with so I just have to compile a few programs and it's up and running. I do like the Slackware package manager better than Arch's so I use Slackware.

Yes, I'm inclined to agree with honeybadger & ruario.

So do I.

Both CentOS and Slackware are excellent distros. I really appreciate the fact that Red Hat gives back to the community by making Red Hat Enterprise Linux source available for free in the form of CentOS (wonderful)! It really depends on your needs. Slackware meets my needs. Slackware does assume that you will take the needed time to thoroughly read and understand the available documentation for installation, configuration.

Thanks, I have tried Debian and I agree with you so I stayed away from it. Unnecisarily complex is how I can rate Debian so I put it out my selection. Fedora is crazy. Arch I haven't tried but I prefer Stability over cutting edge so that's out as well. Gentoo, I won't even touch with a stick from what I hear lol. Ubuntu? I prefer Windows over Ubuntu, at least I have better support and hardware integration.
But overall I actually like Slackware a lot otherwise I would not even be here. I also liked the stability of CentOS to be honest. Currently I am using both all though I prefer Slackware, I have gotten a few good opinions on the 2 that will give me a better idea of the differences of the 2 distros and eventually I believe I will end up shifting towards 1 of the 2. It seems like comparing distros really rubs people the wrong way to go after you as opposed to the question so I am just gonna hold back and no longer compare the 2 in this slackware forum. For example one of the users has gone as far as to look at my posts in the Redhat forum about my comparisons. But I already gave up on it... I will just decide my own and that will happen through experience.

(Edit)
BTW, I have tried the Ubuntu 12.04. Its really not that bad in stability compared to Windows lately. I think it is definitely catching up to Windows. Have you tried the latest version? I guess if I did not have an invilink wifi and other hardware difficulties I would prefer Ubuntu over Windows. For example Ubuntu runs great on my Asus UL30A. I am actually gonna get rid of that and install Slackware onto it however because I know that Slack won't give me a problem with my Asus. Its just the 2 Acers I have that have been giving me the problems.

give it a try out of curiosity -- it's worth it. You can learn things. Also you can give CRUX (arch is based on ideas from it) a try -- then you will learn things for sure :P

Yup, I am just like you on all you said. Love both in different ways.

I'm experienced with Slackware and RHEL.

10 plus years ago, before I went full Slack, I used to setup redhat boxes for clients, many of them being web developers. It didn't take long before I noticed a trend that most of my clients had very specific requirements and behavior from the OS. It seemed that they always wanted some behavior from some daemon, library, or other piece of support software that hadn't made it into redhat yet, because whatever version of the software, library, etc was too new.

I learned about building rpms, and dealing with dependencies, and working around redhat updates while having wholesale ripped out the existing version of software like php, sendmail, and countless libraries... all the while trying to keep up with security updates, and fixes.

I tell you what, maintaining redhat servers with special tweaks was a real pain in the arse.

It was about 2004, when I had already been using Slack for my desktop, when a buddy of mine wanted a server put together, and on a whim I decided to use Slack. When the server was done, and he had been poking around for a few days, he told me that he needed a different version of postgres. After a little bit of reading, I was able to look up the earliest version of postgres that supported the feature that he wanted, and it turned out to be only a couple of point releases newer than what was already in Slack. I found it ridiculously easy to upgrade postgres in slack.

From that point forward I started using Slack for servers wherever I could. I had been tinkering with a custom postfix mail server solution on redhat for a couple of months, and when I decided to start over and do it on Slackware, I got it done in 3 days. Again, I would research the software that I needed, and I would pick the oldest stable versions of the sources (often newer than anything that had been rolled directly into any distro) that would contain the behavior I needed, and build it on the Slack box, and it "Just Worked". It was beautiful.

How does the terminal differ from redhat to slackware? I never really noticed a difference in the "terminals". The terminal is just my interface to managing the OS at a low level. It's the structure and layout of Slackware that makes it a pleasure to use the terminal. For example, I remember reading something about the possibility of log files going to binary on some of the mainstream distros. That's totally unfriendly to terminal users. So it's not the terminal itself that is different, it's the fact that Slackware's layout/architecture lends itself to being very friendly to manage from the terminal.

d

3 members found this post helpful.

I've run Arch on several occasions, it is absolutely bleeding edge and has an amazing package manager. It does require more tinkering than Slackware and breakage does happen. I would recommend Arch as an educational experience in a VM.

Wow! Thank you! This is definitely a GREAT REPLY! I am seeing things clearer now from your experience I won't have to repeat it. That is exactly what I want in a distro. Something that you can control and do easy without hassle. Yea, its true Redhat dominates the corporate world. But does that make it Right? In my opinion NO! What is more Popular is not always the best Solution... In that case I would have went with just windows for everything. Yes about the compilation issue, did you know that systemd that Redhat is planning on adopting will get rid of the init files with a compilation base? That will make it impossible to hand edit /etc/ init files.