i'll deff have a go with slack soon >=) as soon as i get xsupplicant to not hang and just chew up ram like bubble gum,

Why isn't Slackware the most popular distro?

Because I feel that it isn't an "intro-distro" that people look for when they want to try out linux. However there's also a marketing problem as well.

Mandrake and Suse are available at Best-Buy, right next to Windows XP, right there in the Operating Systems section. I've seen it, and now I see what choices people have when they want to try this linux-thingy they've seen on tv or in an article or from a friend at work. They don't know what an ISO image is, hell - they probably never renewed their 90-day introductory AV subscription when they bought their new Dell PC! But that's for the true-blue noob. They pay $50~ for a linux box distro, take it home and just expect it to work, like Windows XP, but better. They don't understand that linux is very capable, but hand-holding is not what linux is known for. When Suse\Mandrake\Fedora start up, it's a GUI that explains what is going on, attempts to setup their system for dual-boot (if wanted) and makes it really easy to install a complete distro in a few clicks (most of the time). Do I think that makes them better? God no. I still, to this day, can't get Fedora or Suse or Mandrake to install on my system (which has relatively new hardware) easily. Not for a lack of trying mind you. But I get frustrated with their installers, the hangups and never really getting to the desktop and always end up putting Slackware back on the box. I actually find it easier to install because I feel it gives me more control (whether or not it actually does is debatable). I think the major thing that would help improve slackware's acceptance amoung new users (noobs as well as enthusiasts) is utilizing just one function that FreeBSD has in it's installer. When you start the harddrive setup portion, there's an option to auto-size an entire drive (or slice) and it automagically sets up all your mounts ... it's beautiful. And that's what we're shooting for here folks, the LCD (lowest common denominator), the regular folks that have never seen the inside of a computer, ever. There are other things that could help people as well. Maybe there could be a "Beginner Setup" in the slackware menu, that would auto-size partitions, auto-configure any detectable hardware, etc, etc. Don't ask me to write it, I don't code, I'm just a user that keeps thinking about whether or not my mom could use it - that kinda makes up my mind as far as a usable linux distro for the LCD. I mean, she still has problems sending email with an attachment.

Patrick is a one-man marketing machine at this point AFAIK. The big three distros have major $$$ supporting them; which major company has come out supporting Slackware as the best platform for their software? I haven't heard of one ... but then again, I'm not always up on these things. I would LOVE to see Slackware in some slick packaging on a store shelf in my area (Southern Maine), but I know that's not going to happen until slackware is dumbed down. And if it gets dumbed down, then it wouldn't be slackware anymore. I see slackware as an enthusiast distro, and I consider myself an enthusiast. I feel comfortable using slackware because it's not over my head ... I can control the aspects I want and the machine handles aspects that I don't want to deal with. For some people, different distro's are like a rite of passage. You start with Redhat, Suse, etc ... then move to Slackware, Debian, Gentoo, etc. I consider slackware a middle-ground in difficulty - it's not Suse, but it's not a Stage 1 Gentoo install. It's a nice medium and I recommend slackware to fellow enthusiasts for desktops and FreeBSD for servers - both are great to work with. Hopefully in the future, we'll see more about slackware being targeted to the LCD, but that was never the original intention - so in some ways, I hope it never changes. My $.02 ...

- JJ

I say most users are slackware users because, think about it. Slackware has been around for more then 10 years, its got a commutity stretching all around the world. People fed up with the limits in Mandrake and Red hat convert to slackware (or gentoo). Slackware has alot of users, around the same as Mandrake and Red Hat do. Plus, we got over 10 years worth of growth under our belt :}.

U r absolutely right....... It is hard to find out which distro is the most popular ( as server or desktop ). I am agree with you.... distro wars suck.....

U r absolutely right....... It is hard to find out which distro is the most popular ( as server or desktop ). I am agree with you.... distro wars suck.....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bang on!! I can't believe I just wasted half an hour of my life reading this drivel. Besides, personal choice is just that - personal . Of course Slackers think Slackware is best! And Mandrake users think Mandrake................bla,bal.
That's my two pennyworth. Im off to do some work.

How about this for statistics?

http://counter.li.org/reports/machines.php

"Distribution
144148 registrations entered 146427 values"

If you think 146-thousand makes for a good sample... sure.

i'd guess redhat is the most used distro, followed by debian, then suse or possibly mandrake third. but as i said, that's just a guess.

Back when Linux really was just an OS for the super techie-minded, Slackware seemed pretty tame. Times have moved on though, and there are hundreds of distros that cater for different tastes, tasks and time-constrictions. Linspire *coughs* is catered for the complete idiot-user. SuSE, Red Hat and Mandrake tend to cater for people who have a vague understanding of what an OS is. Debian is intended for people with a little more understanding, but not overly techie-minded. Knoppix is meant for users on the move between computers or just simple demonstrations. Gentoo and Slackware however, are indeed intended for the power user, but what you have to ask yourself is, what does this enormous flexibility achieve?

The reality is, sadly, nothing. You cannot say that noobs have to jump straight into Slackware or Gentoo just to get into good habits because the distro is so hard to learn that they wouldn't learn any habits at all. Of course, I wouldn't recommend that they jump into something like Linspire either, but something that lets noobs start with a basic desktop system that gives them a rough idea of what Linux is all about and then lets them move on to tweaking their system in the command line is perfect, something along the lines of SuSE, Redhat or Mandrake.

What, honestly, do you get from Slackware?

Time gains? Well, given that Slackware installations can take from half a day upwards (I took 3 days on mine!) then no. Then there's the constant tweaking and problems with dependencies.

Speed gains? Perhaps before, but the speed gains on modern systems between a precompiled distro and one compiled on the host machine are minimal at best.

A fully-customisable system? Indeed, but how customisable do you want it? If you're working from KDE or Gnome, then the desktop can be adjusted any way more or less any way you see fit. Power users can take it apart and put it together again. There's only so many ways you can customise a command line.

So, ultimately, the amount of effort required just to get Slackware to do anything is so disproportional to what you get out of it in productivity terms that for most people, it simply isn't worth it. Which regulates the distro to the status of a toy, an object of interest, and nothing more. I'd never recommend it to anyone as a solo distro, rather something alongside a standard desktop-based distro.

I find it quite offensive to read that. Just because someone doesn't know how to use an Operating System called linux enough to compile kernels and insert modules, doesn't make him or her an idiot. Please take care with your choice of words.

My apologies. I was implying that Linspire was more suited to someone who barely knew how to switch the computer on, and the expression came from "idiot-proof" - an expression, but not intended to be taken literally.

My apologies. I was implying that Linspire was more suited to someone who barely knew how to switch the computer on, and the expression came from "idiot-proof" - an expression, but not intended to be taken literally.

To me, it's relatively clear why Slack is not popular.

- Almost no marketing, more of an insider tip among advanced and expert Linux users
- no GUI installer, no GUI admin tools
- customization of a Slack installation via CLI can hardly be avoided
- no support of exotic hardware out of the box
- customization requires a lot of Linux knowledge. Beginners will be lost if they are not willing
to take a steep learning curve.

I think it is fine like that. That's why I use and love Slackware. I'm glad Slackware is not like SUSE, Mandrake or all the other polished GUI Linux distros that do alright when installed out of the box but are a nightmare if you want to have things your own way.

Please never let Slackware become like SUSE, Mandrake, Fedora & Co.

I love Slack the way it is.

Slackware is, well, Slackware. If it became one of the desktop-based distros it just wouldn't be Slack. Like I said, it's an alternative to those who have the taste for it, but it's difficult to see it being used for anything more than a toy. Mind you, it's good for servers and the such like, although unless you're absolutely certain of what you're doing, the security could be an issue.

i´ve tried mandrake, fedora, slackware and debian. i found debian to be best for my use. slack was slower to configure & keep up-to-date for me. some may find it faster, it depends on skill level & stuff you do. apt-get works so nicely that you don´t have to think anything while updating or reconfiguring stuff. but i have nothing against slack, it is a very nice and personal distro.