| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 90085 | 2008-05-22 12:24:00 | Recommend a Distro, which can - | Murray P (44) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 671681 | 2008-05-22 12:24:00 | Handle RAID; and, has good hardware detection and/or recognises modern-ish video cards (8800GTS) and wide screen LCDs, The usual apps, but isn't weighed down, fast is nice, A reasonably busy life cycle, but I'm not sure I like the hold the bug fixes then chuck it out and start again cycle Ubuntu uses, Preferably uses Grub, Perhaps has a live CD option, 64 bit would be nice. So what's out there, what are the pros & cons, what do you use your fav distro for, is it stable or a bit flakey ? Fan boys and girls are welcome, but please try not to gush too much over the thread. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 671682 | 2008-05-22 21:41:00 | I'm not sure if Ubuntu supports 64-bit or RAID, but otherwise it would be a good option. It has a live CD, good hardware detection (if the device is supported in the community), has a nice GUI and is quite fast. What do you mean by A reasonably busy life cycle, but I'm not sure I like the hold the bug fixes then chuck it out and start again cycle Ubuntu uses, |
jwil1 (65) | ||
| 671683 | 2008-05-22 23:31:00 | I'm not sure if it's still valid, but there has been criticism of Ubuntu's regular but fixed cycle/upgrade path that ignores changes in the interim, some of them vital. I downloaded Ubuntu last noght for another look. Will do Fedora today or tonight. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 671684 | 2008-05-22 23:49:00 | Another vote for Ubuntu, especially 8.04, so much faster even on my EeePC than 7.10! 64-bit is quite good compared with some of the others Ive done too |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 671685 | 2008-05-22 23:58:00 | Handle RAID; and,That would be almost all modern distros, although the installer may not always be capable of setting it up - if you're using something with a crap installer, you may need to bootstrap the system rather than using the installer. has good hardware detection and/or recognises modern-ish video cards (8800GTS) and wide screen LCDs,Do you mean out of the box? Ubuntu does pretty well at this. Most other distros will work perfectly once the binary nvidia drivers are installed. The usual apps, but isn't weighed down, fast is nice,Define usual. And what kind of DE are you looking for? I'd usually recommend KDE 3.5.x. Stay well away from KDE 4, it's nowhere near ready yet. A reasonably busy life cycle, but I'm not sure I like the hold the bug fixes then chuck it out and start again cycle Ubuntu uses, Sounds like you need Debian or Fedora. Preferably uses Grub,Almost all of them do. Perhaps has a live CD option,How important is this to you? If you plan to install to HDD, why do you need it? 64 bit would be nice.Most major distros have had a 64bit version for ages. So what's out there, what are the pros & cons, what do you use your fav distro for, is it stable or a bit flakey ?I would strongly recommend Debian Testing/Lenny (this is *not* the same thing as Debian Unstable/Sid!). It's usually extremely stable, but is constantly updated with new packages. All packages go through extensive testing and bugfixing in the unstable branch before they are introduced to testing. It fits the bill for every requirement you have posted in this thread except having a live cd version. Fan boys and girls are welcome, but please try not to gush too much over the thread.I definitely have an opinion that may qualify me in this category (Debian), and I have a ton of facts to support this. Let me know if I'm allowed to have a rant about it, otherwise I'll hold my tongue as requested. One other thing I will say is avoid Ubuntu, unless you are very new to Linux. It's brilliant for new users, but in my opinion it has far too many problems and limitations once you get beyond the basics. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 671686 | 2008-05-23 00:26:00 | Sorry Bletch, but I'm going to give Ubuntu a crack this weekend, probably Fedora too. There just ain't no helping some people eh! Rant away too, I like a good rant. Just one prerequisite, make it entertaining. Deb ain't exactly got a lively life cycle, a thorough one yes, an active one if you count sid and testing, but hardly lively. Not a bad thing in many respects. Re the RAID, Mepis, my fav distro to this point, just will not do RAID on certain chipsets and/or/with certain implementations of RAID (JBOD [sic] for one) grrrrr. I find that sort of behaviour from an otherwise reasonably up to date distro unacceptable in todays hardware market. The reason I like the idea of a live CD is I can have a wee look before I do any damage. They are also useful as repair CDs for the less able amongst us. Me. Be that as it may, it's not a must have. Chill, the drawbacks on using 64 bit as apposed to 32 bit are what, basically the same for any other consumer 64 bit OS, i.e. scarcity of apps that run natively and drivers? Great stuff so far. Keep it up. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 671687 | 2008-05-23 04:48:00 | Sorry Bletch, but I'm going to give Ubuntu a crack this weekend, probably Fedora too. There just ain't no helping some people eh!:D Fedora is good - just ask Jen. Deb ain't exactly got a lively life cycle, a thorough one yes, an active one if you count sid and testing, but hardly lively. Not a bad thing in many respects.Huh? That makes no sense.... Debian has a more lively cycle than most - care to qualify your argument? Chill, the drawbacks on using 64 bit as apposed to 32 bit are what, basically the same for any other consumer 64 bit OS, i.e. scarcity of apps that run natively and drivers?Remember that this is opensource stuff - almost everything you can get in a 32bit version also comes in a 64bit one. Pretty much the only thing you'll miss is Sun Java. Flash is also 32bit-only, but nspluginwrapper does a wonderful job of shoehorning it into a 64bit browser :D. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 671688 | 2008-05-23 05:29:00 | Huh? That makes no sense.... Debian has a more lively cycle than most - care to qualify your argument? Deb is thoroughly tested at each phase before release to the stable version, right. So, unless you're willing to delve into the testing and unstable repositories, you're not exactly going to be dealing with an up to the minute distro are you. You will, however, have more chance of having a stable, bug free, distro. Correct? |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 671689 | 2008-05-23 05:48:00 | Deb is thoroughly tested at each phase before release to the stable version, right. So, unless you're willing to delve into the testing and unstable repositories, you're not exactly going to be dealing with an up to the minute distro are you. You will, however, have more chance of having a stable, bug free, distro. Correct? Aaaah.... the most common misconception about Debian. You don't need to run the stable distro - the 'testing' branch is the one generally recommended for desktop use. When things are first added to Debian, they go into the unstable branch. There they stay until all major bugs have been resolved, and things are reasonably stable. At this point they are moved into the 'testing' branch. The result is a very stable system, but still with very up-to-date packages. The whole testing branch is kind of a 'rolling' release. Testing is the branch I would usually recommend to someone running Debian on a desktop (as opposed to a server). Contrast this with Ubuntu. Ubuntu forks Debian unstable every 6 months, patches the hell out of it, then releases it, usually with more bugs than you'd find in the testing branch of Debian. The point I'm trying to get at here is that the stable branch is seriously, rediculously stable - far more so than the average user needs. Testing is usually easily on a par with everybody else's 'final' releases (the exception being RHEL/CentOS, that's Redhat's equivalent of Debian stable). |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 671690 | 2008-05-23 05:59:00 | I like Kubuntu myself - because KDE feels more like windows than Gnome! :) | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||