[NTLUG:Discuss] What is the Best Linux & Why? -- nothing wrong with Windows

[Bryan J. Smith]

Ralph Miller wrote:   
> I hear a lot of Red Hat put down,

It's commonplace to pick on #1 commercial entity, no matter what the
industry.

I even defend Microsoft at times, when people have their facts messed
up.  Sometimes Microsoft actually makes good choices (typically when
their developers make them, and the management doesn't trump them).

E.g., .NET's development model is a good change.  So good that Miguel
right started the Mono project.  Now even Microsoft is not going to
ship the .NET model in Longhorn for anything but web services**.  So,
ironically, it will be GNOME 3 that will be the most advanced .NET
environment on the desktop in 2006!

> Still, with the changes at Red Hat, I wonder what to do next, if
> anything.

Nothing's changed at Red Hat except the lack of hardware/software
certification for Red Hat Linux (RHL), now known as Fedora Core (FC).
The introduction of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) forced that change,
and it's actually for the better IMHO.  Now both the commercial users
used to 5+ years of support like in Windows and commercial UNIX are
happy, as well as the community developers and packagers who wanted a
more friendly, less commercial-centric avenue in Fedora.

> I am not sure how Debian or Suse or others would work and
> appear on my screen compared with RH9.

Fedora's model is based on Debian, with some obvious differences.
Debian is a great benchmark for Fedora in many respects.  I have
no issue with people who choose Debian, it's a great, community-based
distro.  But Red Hat is still very much clearly behind Fedora.

If you want more of a commercial distro that is Debian-based, Xandros
is the best AFAIK.  It bundles Codeweavers Crossover Office and Plugin
and NTFS resizing right in the installer out-of-the-box.  They also
favor KDE, so I recommend it over Mandrake -- especially since Mandrake
doesn't really have a "good base" (let alone a well integration-tested
one IMHO), whereas Xandros is Debian "Sarge" based.

I wonder if they will update Xandros for the new Codeweavers unified
Office product?

> Would I have months of learning another version? 

If RHL9 works for you, stick with it.  Fedora Legacy has updates planned
for a good year or two.  By then, Fedora Core (FC) 3 will be out, and
you can upgrade to it if you wish.

> It seems I have spent years beginning to use Linux, so go back to Win98,
> or now WinXP, to do things that must be done.  Surely I am not the only
> one like this.  That beginning hurdle never seems to go away.

Well, maybe Linux isn't right for you then?

You _can_ stick with Windows and run Freedomware/Standardware like
Mozilla/Firebird, OpenOffice.org/StarOffice, etc...  There's nothing
wrong with doing so.  It's all about your data, not some idealology --
at least that's how I view it.  Avoid Hostageware and you'll be okay.

[ See my weblog here:  
http://www.smithdot.net/display.php?category=freedom&article=hostageware.txt
]


Burton M. Strauss III wrote:  
> There is NO RIGHT ANSWER.  Just one that's right FOR YOU!
> The 'right' answer may even be two or three.  I run Gentoo on my
> firewall because I want to know what's running on it to a high degree.
> I run RH9 on my Development box because (at least until recently) that
> mapped to most of my users.

Right!  Gentoo makes a great base for custom, application-specific boxes.
I sure wish the IPCop team would have gone with Gentoo instead of
Linux From Scratch (LFS) for the next version, as I feel Gentoo is basically
LFS without the headache of tracking down software (saves time).

For more on IPCop, see the Feburary 2004 article in Sys Admin mag:  
  http://www.samag.com/documents/sam0402a/  

[ The original submission was 2x as long, and went more into intrusion
detection and why you need more than just a "deny all" firewall.  But
they butchered it, as usual. ;-]


Cameron, Thomas wrote;
> Obviously, I use Red Hat in my business and I enjoy it tremendously.
> However, I started on Slackware and I absolutely love it for its
> simplicity.  I think Slackware is easier to learn as the initialization
> scripts are more linear than Red Hat and its derivatives.  

- Yggdrasil user '93, Slackware '94+

I started on Yggdrasil in late '93, early '94.  Then I switched to Slack
(yes, I know about SLS, but I liked Yggdrasil's X-based installer at the
time).  When Red Hat first came out in '95, I never changed again (although
I still ran Slack too for a few more years).  I tried Caldera and Mandrake
here and there, but Caldera was based on RHL anyway, and Mandrake's
installer (not even DrakX) could never take my funky hardware configs.

- Commercial deployments of Slackware in '94, RHL after '95

My first corporate deployments of Slackware were in late '94 and '95.  I
was _the_sole_ hostmaster for the largest consulting engineering firm
in the SE US.  I was running Linux exclusively on my workstations for good
reason -- NCSA and early Netscape browser releases.  I did, however, like
running the Caldera Network Desktop (CND) for its Netware management
features, although that was short-lived.

- First Linux supercomputing clusters in '98+

I then left and moved on to various contract jobs in '96.  I moved more
into my field (less IT) in late '96 at an aerospace firm.  But it wasn't
long before I got stuck doing IT, introducing some of the first Linux
clusters in the aerospace industry in late '98 through mid-'99.  I have
an open invite from Cray, but I don't want to live in Seattle.

- First 100% Linux job '99

In mid-'99 I got my first 100% Linux job at a semiconductor startup.  We
were Linux servers and Solaris/Linux workstations.  Not only was the IT
a snap, but I was right in my engineering discipline (computer architecture).
Unfortunately, market conditions caused layoffs in '01, and I've bounced
from contract to contract since.  But it's been largely Linux, and I even
worked on a major Linux subsystem project in '02 to '03, supporting a lot
of Debian (including being a maintainer) for our additional kernel package.

- 100% Linux Home Use '98+

I basically switched at home to 100% Linux in '98.  The main reason was I
got upgraded from Office 98 to Office 97 at work, and did it at home too.
I lost 90% of my MS Word template formats at work.  After taking 15 hours
to recreate my template, I said enough was enough.  That's when I started
looking for an alternative.  One engineer mentioned LaTeX and I quickly
found out about LyX, a WYSIWYM front-end.  Then I found a wealth of
templates, styles and other things for it from the American Mathematical
Society (AMS) and Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(IEEE).

Since '98, _all_ of my documentation has been done in LyX.  I can read
_all_ of my work _verbatim_ for the past 6+ years without issue.  I
can render _native_ PDF documents, including auto-generation of book-
marks and other references, that take _hours_ to do with MS Word.  And
I can in-line complex mathematics and other equations in 1/10th the time
of MS Word's embedded objects.

- SchoolTeacher '04+

Today I am a school teacher.  LyX allows me to crank out math worksheets
in 1/10th the time as MS Office.  It is also great for writing articles
for magazines and other publications.

> If you are a true-blue Free Software person, the Debian project is
> built from 100% Free Software.  Debian makes keeping your software up
> to date incredibly easy using apt (although Fedora can use apt as
> well).

Either Apt or Yam (from Yellow Dog Linux, a RHL-like version for
PowerPC).

Fedora also offers a similar repository structure as Debian.  Not quite
the same, and they don't have the same, anal Debian Free Software
Guidelines (DFSG), but Debian _is_ now taking the same approach as
Red Hat on the "non-free" packages -- leave them to 3rd parties.

Fedora Core (FC) still includes the "kitchen sick" like RHL before it.
Debian's requirements state only bash or Perl may be used for scripting
dependencies.  But at least the various Fedora repositories are
addressing some of that.

> I am afraid I am ignorant of SUSE - I have never had the opportunity to
> use it.  I know several die-hard SUSE fans and the thing I hear most about
> it is that it is a stereotypical "German engineered product."  In other
> words, it is solid as a rock and well designed and implemented.

SuSE was a non-GPL centric commercial distribution.  But now that Novell
owns them, SuSE's "IP" is no longer considered "valuable" in comparison
to what Novell offers.  So they are GPL'ing a _lot_.  So SuSE is now
becoming a very _excellent_ distro.  If Novell is smart, they will
introduce a true "GPL-centric" version of its UnitedLinux base, maybe
steer UnitedLinux towards something like Fedora, to reduce the development
load on themselves.

> Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE, MCT

-- Bryan J. Smith, Engineer, Technologist, School Teacher
<Cert_Whore_Orgy=17_Months>
A+ CCA CCDA CCDP CCNA CCNP CIWA CIWP CIWSA CNA iNET+ MasCIWA Linux+ LPIC-1
LPIC-2 MCSA2K MCSE2K MCSA2K:Sec MCSE2K:Sec Net+ SCNA8 SCSA8 SCSecA9 Sec+
</Cert_Whore_Orgy>

**LONGHORN NOTE:

Microsoft is pulling a _lot_ of things from Longhorn (NT 6.0) so
they will make a 2006 release date.  This _includes_ WinFS -- which
is going to be reduced to NTFS with SQL "slapped on."  It's also 100%
Win32 compatible, right down to viruses.  The only "sandboxing" is
going to be web services, the _only_ place the .NET model is being
used.  Then the desktop will use something akin to the old "Active
Desktop" where MSIE controls it, so it has some .NET capability, 
but it's still 100% Win32 underneath.  I'm sure their new security
chief, the one who admited "no version of Windows was ever designed
for the Internet," is pulling his hair out.

All the so-called, promised "Longhorn technologies" will now be pushed
into "Blackcomb" (NT 7.0).  Hmmm, deja vu?  *COUGH*Cairo*COUGH*

Yeah, I adopted NT very early, 1993, as I worked for a company who was
the largest installation of the first native NT 3.1 application,
Bentley Systems Microstation.  At the same time, I started messing with
Linux.  12 years later, I'm sure of only 1 thing.  Microsoft makes roadmaps
they can't hit.  Linux doesn't make a roadmap, but hits more technologies
at 2x the speed than Microsoft.  Rather sad since Microsoft always
complains that Linux doesn't have a "good roadmap."  Seems Microsoft
knows all about that itself!  ;-ppp


-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. -- Engineer, Technologist, School Teacher
b.j.smith at ieee.org