| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Jul 16, 2008 - 11:18 AM
|
|
Joined: May 02, 2008
Posts: 61
Status: Offline
|
|
Well said, Caesar, and I don't disagree with any of that. I take issue with the review and in particular the title of the review, which the author doesn't really support or even explain (other than she tried kubuntu, and now is trying sidux).
I began using linux with ubuntu 7.04 and I currently have kubuntu gutsy installed, along with fedora 8, sidux, and most recently, Mandriva 2008.1. I also ran opensuse 10.3 for a while, and tried the 11 beta until I ran into upgrade problems (well, it was a beta). I've got zenwalk 5.2 on another, really old pc where it runs like a champ. Haven't been able to bring it up to the level of functionality of Windows 98 yet, so it its still unsuitable for my wife. Incidentally I also run xp, 2k and OS X 10.4. Only recently left NT4 behind. I used vista for a few months at a job (no choice), and hated every minute of it.
I've also tried several other distros as virtual machines (two of my favorites are slitaz and antix).
Most linux distros are compilations of 'the usual suspects': a more-or-less recent kernel, a desktop environment (gnome or kde, more rarely xfce), boot loader (grub), web browser (firefox), office suite, media player, yada yadda.
About the only distinguishing feature is the software/update manager. Those can be very different from distro to distro. Having tried the rest, apt is the best, hands down. But some of the others are beginning to catch up.
At the end of the day, one is hard-pressed to notice a hell of a lot of difference in the user experience among all these distros.
I do like sidux, so far. It is noticeably faster than my other installed systems, especially for boot and shutdown. How much credit is due to the sidux team, beyond the fact they put it together, and how much is attributable to a more recent kernel, and xfce, I can't say. I don't mind using the cli, and sidux has forced me to use it like never before.
I'm very confident in saying that Joe/Jill Average computer user, who just wants to read email, browse sears.com, and edit a resume in *.doc format, and is barely even aware of the OS (until it breaks), is definitely going to like ubuntu a heck of a lot more. I would consider it the height of irresponsibility to foist something like sidux on such a user, and I sure wouldn't want to have to support them.
If someone wants to try it on their own, as a sort of hobby project, more power to them. I just won't steer them to it. Quite the opposite.
edits: speling and grimmer |
Last edited by dsmithhfx on Jul 16, 2008 - 01:53 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: sidux, an alternative to ubuntu
Posted: Jul 16, 2008 - 01:09 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 08, 2008
Posts: 17
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
|
|
Thank you CaeseTjalbo for putting this thread back on track.
There are very definite differences between sidux and ubuntu when installing. The ubuntu install requires more active and informed participation than the sidux install, in my experience, and it takes longer.
Windows installs are even more obscure until you've done one or two and take substantially more time than the ubuntu install |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: sidux, an alternative to ubuntu
Posted: Jul 17, 2008 - 09:04 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 18, 2008
Posts: 23
Status: Offline
|
|
| There's no comparison. sidux 2008-02 installs here in less that 3 minutes. |
_________________
A man needs only to be turned around once with his eyes shut in this world to be lost ~ Thoreau
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
