They call it zenwalk SLACKWARE, so, what is the diffrence between the two?

The biggest difference is Slackware defaults with KDE, Zenwalk with XFCE. Zenwalk also has its own package manager. Zenwalk also comes standard with a 2.6.xx kernel as well.

I would probably say the difference is in use. Zenwalk can be used as a server but it makes on hell of a desktop. Slackware can be used as a desktop but makes on hell of a server. And as pointed out the use of kernels. Zenwalk uses 2.6.17.11 while Slackware 11 will use the kernel 2.4.33.3 I think.

So your recomending Aenwalk as a desktop?


But any preformance diffrence? Like speed, and such.

could you be more specific. difference in speed as compared to what? I made comparision between Zenwalk and Slackware. If that is what you are referening to then I really don't think there is much of a speed difference between the two. That is because Zenwalk is based off of Slackware. Yes I am recommending Zenwalk as a Desktop. I would choose it over Slackware which I have already done.

Forgot to mention That the use of netpkg to keep me updated is a plus.

I have used Slackware for several years. I loved it. However, I felt that Slackware was somewhat "bloated". As my wife stated, "Why is there so many programs to do the same thing. I just need one program that does it best".

For the most part, that is Zenwalk's philosophy. One program to do the job. One can argue that OpenOffice Writer is better than Abiword (Zenwalk standard), OpenOffice Calc is better than Gnumeric (Zenwalk standard), or that Mplayer is better than Gzine (Zenwalk standard). If you are more comfortable with your favorite program, install it. (If most of my documents hadn't been saved in OpenOffice's format, I probably would have been happy with Abiword and Gnumeric.)

I felt, as jstephens84 noted above, that Slackware is an awesome server distribution. Zenwalk is an awesome desktop distribution.

To me, I don't think that I will go back to Slackware. I am very happy with Zenwalk.

1 members found this post helpful.

I have never seen it called "Zenwalk SLACKWARE"! True Zenwalk is derived from slackware but then so is SUSE. Zenwalk was originally called 'Minislack' which probably summed up exactly what it was then. However, it has evolved into far more than a stripped down version of Slackware suitable for old hardware.

To answer your question I would say Zenwalk is easier to install, easier to use and more suited to the average desktop user.

1 members found this post helpful.

The same task can be done more effectively by a different software. eg: In the audio line Amarok is differnt from xmms / noatun. Having more than one application for the same task, gives different users different choices. While a good number of people use Firefox for browsing , some use Opera. Not everybody is comfortable with Evolution but they find Thunderbird easy and flexible.

It all depends on the user and his/her choice and liking.

Hence Zenwalk lets you add/remove software.

There is also a difference in each project's philosophy.

Slackware is known as a stable and secure distribution. A new version is released when Patrick Volkerding (must I present him ???) deems it good enough. His choices tend to be conservative. Hence the default 2.4.33.3 kernel in Slack 11.0 even if he's starting supporting the 2.6 kernel series.

Zenwalk has a faster development pace with a new release every 3 months (on average) and it includes more cutting edge versions of software. For example, XFCE window manager is 4.4 Release Candidate 1.

SUSE hasn't been based on Slackware since like.. 1994 or something.. goof ball.

Weee!

Here's to randomly rewriting old comments!

Zenwalk if you like package managers to help cut time on configuration and setup of application prefrences.

Slackware if you have the time to tinker.

Either way it's great fun

Every distro does that !
Then why should one suffer a lot with just one application for one task, when one can get a choice by default in other distros ?

Again we have to depend on the Zen developers' whims and fancies as we rely on Pat in Slackware.

varaahan, I don't think you get it.

How does Zenwalk hinder you? It is given to you leightwieght, but it does not stop you from making it bloated if you want. The repositories for Slackware are massive (I don't know how large Zenwalk's are), and if you do a complete install of Slackware, you'll get enough choices to make you sick in some cases. If you don't like relying on Pat or the Zenwalk team, then you'll only be relying on SUSE team, or the Ubuntu team, or the Puppy team, etc.

Besides if you want it that bad, you can always compile from source.