PDA

View Full Version : What is the difference between Suse and Ubuntu?



mrgoodfox
December 17th, 2011, 07:54 PM
I installed Ubuntu a month ago (first time linux user). Today I was browsing my school's (free) available software list and SUSE Linux Enterprise was listed there.

Is SUSE essentially a competitor of Ubuntu? What are the main differences between the two?

Thehumorouscheese
December 17th, 2011, 08:22 PM
I installed Ubuntu a month ago (first time linux user). Today I was browsing my school's (free) available software list and SUSE Linux Enterprise was listed there.

Is SUSE essentially a competitor of Ubuntu? What are the main differences between the two?


i think SUSE is a server system (don't quote me if i'm wrong as i'm a newbie too)

EDIT: after reading a little more, i also think that you have to pay for the service, so i'm not sure why it's on a free software list :confused:

it wouldn't really be a competitor either if it's not free and open source, like ubuntu.

9072997
December 17th, 2011, 08:24 PM
suse is RPM and RedHat based, ubuntu is Debian and DEB based. yes they are competitors, and both have a desktop and server edition.

Lars Noodén
December 17th, 2011, 08:25 PM
If you're going to try a RPM based distro, it would be much better to try Fedora or Red Hat. Suse is on the decline.

mrgoodfox
December 17th, 2011, 08:30 PM
If you're going to try a RPM based distro, it would be much better to try Fedora or Red Hat. Suse is on the decline.

What are the advantages/disadvantages of RPM vs. Distro?

mlentink
December 17th, 2011, 08:37 PM
A distro is short for 'Distribution', which is a specific assembly of the Linux kernel with other software.
The RedHat based distributions use a package manager called RPM, Debian and its derivatives (amongst which Ubuntu) use DEB, which is reported to handle dependencies etc. better than RPM.

Lars Noodén
December 17th, 2011, 08:39 PM
The comparison would be RPM vs APT. The distros Debian and Ubuntu use APT. The distros Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Fedora use RPM (http://rpm.org/). From a user perspective both are easy to use packaging systems. Pretty much the same packages are available for both. Both have tools that automatically resolve dependencies and track versions. So from an end-user perspective there is negligible difference.

Paqman
December 17th, 2011, 08:40 PM
What are the advantages/disadvantages of RPM vs. Distro?

No real advantage or disadvantage, they're just different. Generally speaking the Linux world is split into two camps, distros based on Red Hat and distros based on Debian. Ubuntu is Debian-based, but that doesn't make it better or worse than distros that use RPM.

spcwingo
December 18th, 2011, 03:30 AM
No real advantage or disadvantage, they're just different. Generally speaking the Linux world is split into two camps, distros based on Red Hat and distros based on Debian. Ubuntu is Debian-based, but that doesn't make it better or worse than distros that use RPM.

What about Slackware and Slackware-based. :(

3Miro
December 18th, 2011, 03:44 AM
There are hundreds of Linux distribution, although most of them are minor variations. The main difference usually is in the general philosophy. For example, Ubuntu does not assume that people have any Linux or even computer skills, while Red Hat is aimed at businesses.

The two largest "camps" are the Debian/Ubuntu/Mint camp and Red Hat/Fedora camp. Slackware is smaller by comparison, although it is definitely has enough developers and it is a very well supported distribution.

There is internal competition between the distribution, but since they package more or less the same software, the competition is in support mostly. People usually pick a distribution based on the support of the community and philosophy of the project.

Check: distrowatch.com

dFlyer
December 18th, 2011, 03:56 AM
I used SuSE many years back. The only difference is that SuSE is RPM based and Ubuntu is deb based. They both offer a desktop and server version. Since SuSE sold out to Novell, it does cost money to use the enterprise version. There is a fork with the OpenSuSE which is free. They are both Linux in the that they are open source. I myself find deb base software easier to use and keep up to date vice rpm system. If you decide to use SuSE be prepared to face some config issues, unless things have improved over the years. But again that can apply to any open source software.

BertN45
December 18th, 2011, 04:17 AM
I prefer Ubuntu, because:
- it is 720 MB CD size, while OpenSuse is 4.5 GB DVD size.
- Ubuntu has far more users reporting more bugs, thus creating a more robust system.
- Ubuntu has more flavors and some (Lubuntu and Xubuntu) work on very modest hardware.

Both are good distros of almost professional quality and both have their own supporters.

shuttleworthwannabe
December 18th, 2011, 07:45 AM
for the noobie like myself it boils down to
(1) Ubuntu is simpler
(2) has more community supporters, gazillion websites that are dedicated to trouble shooting Ubuntu/or its derivatives
(3) Is way better looking--just compare font rendering
(4) It just works type of linux distro (and thrid pary apps like Ubuntu tweak make life even easier)

But, SuSe is also great, but you will need time to sort yourself out--translated to loss of productivity time.

Hope this helps,

PS: I try almost all new Distro's--but, keep coming back to Ubuntu.

tears of the river
December 18th, 2011, 07:57 AM
i would recommend you to go to
http://www.distrowatch.com/
it can tell you in detail what is the difference between various linux's and can tell you about the advantages and disadvantages of each.

mastablasta
December 18th, 2011, 08:22 AM
I prefer Ubuntu, because:
- it is 720 MB CD size, while OpenSuse is 4.5 GB DVD size.

next one will be DVD size distribution (750MB i believe) with most DVD left unused now that is strange.



- Ubuntu has far more users reporting more bugs, thus creating a more robust system.

they are not solved for the most part so not really something that would make me choose Ubuntu.


- Ubuntu has more flavors and some (Lubuntu and Xubuntu) work on very modest hardware.
These are just different desktop environments (XFCE and LXDE) you can install those to Opensuse as well.


They both offer a desktop and server version. Since SuSE sold out to Novell, it does cost money to use the enterprise version.

True. However, if you check some of the tools Ubuntu has that are aimed at enterprises you will see you also need to pay for them. Red Hat is specifically aimed at businesses (Ubuntu also tries to be). That is why they use a bit older more stable packages. you need to pay for Redhat or you can always compile it yourself (or use CentOS or Scientific Linux). but the point is that when you pay for Redhat or SUSE Enterprise you get support (which you can also do with Ubuntu) where you can call them and complain that something doesn't work and they will try to fix it. :D


as it was said they are both good distributions. OpenSUSE (don't know about SUSE Enterprise linux) though has the reputation of KDE distribution done right. As it's main version is based on KDE, while Ubuntu is Gnome based. But of course as said before you can always install a different DE onto it.

MartijnNL
December 19th, 2011, 10:47 AM
EDIT: after reading a little more, i also think that you have to pay for the service, so i'm not sure why it's on a free software list :confused:


He's not talking about a 'free software' list. He's talking about a list of freely available software at his school. So I guess in this case, it is probably free. (The school probably has a bulk license or something like that).

mrgoodfox
December 19th, 2011, 11:19 PM
Yes, its only free because its through our school deal with them not because the software is free outside.

Thehumorouscheese
December 19th, 2011, 11:24 PM
I used SuSE many years back. The only difference is that SuSE is RPM based and Ubuntu is deb based. They both offer a desktop and server version. Since SuSE sold out to Novell, it does cost money to use the enterprise version. There is a fork with the OpenSuSE which is free. They are both Linux in the that they are open source. I myself find deb base software easier to use and keep up to date vice rpm system. If you decide to use SuSE be prepared to face some config issues, unless things have improved over the years. But again that can apply to any open source software.


sorry - i'm a beginner with linux too.

define "deb based" and "rpm based" please.

thanks.

EDIT:// didn't read the previous comments properly - sorry :(

CharlesA
December 19th, 2011, 11:31 PM
sorry - i'm a beginner with linux too.

define "deb based" and "rpm based" please.

thanks.
They are both a form of package management.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPM_Package_Manager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deb_%28file_format%29

VeeDubb
December 19th, 2011, 11:38 PM
sorry - i'm a beginner with linux too.

define "deb based" and "rpm based" please.

thanks.


deb based or more properly "APT based" or "Debian based" means that the default system for installing software, managing updates, etc is based on a package system commonly referred to as APT. APT used packages with the .deb extension, and originated with a distribution called debian.

rpm based means that the default system for software management is based on RedHat Package Manager, which originated with a distribution called RedHat. It uses packages with the .rpm extension.

Each of those packaging systems has more or less the same features, with small technical advantages and disadvantages that super-geeks debate eternally.

Also, most deb systems are based heavily on the debian distribution, while most rpm systems are based heavily on RedHat.

There's a sort of family tree to the linux community, where a distribution is created, and then a group will split off and build a new distro (distribution) that is based on the parent.

it's a little outdated, but here's a great visual http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Linux_Distro_Timeline.png

The big red line at the top is Debian, and the big red line at the bottom is Red Hat. As you can see, the majority of major distributions are based on one of those two.

hhh
December 20th, 2011, 12:37 AM
Suse is on the decline.
Where do you get that information from? AFAIK, openSUSE is alive and thriving, and openSUSE 12.1 was released just 1 month ago...
http://www.opensuse.org/en/

BrokenKingpin
December 20th, 2011, 12:42 AM
If you're going to try a RPM based distro, it would be much better to try Fedora or Red Hat. Suse is on the decline.
This has to be the most ignorant statement I have read on here in a long time (and that is saying a lot). If anything I openSUSE is gaining in popularity.

I personally prefer openSUSE over Fedora, much more user friendly from my experience.

CharlesA
December 20th, 2011, 01:18 AM
Doesn't SUSE have wizards for things like SELinux and whatnot?

szymon_g
December 20th, 2011, 03:25 AM
suse is RPM and RedHat based

suse is based on slackware and on redhat.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 03:46 AM
Doesn't SUSE have wizards for things like SELinux and whatnot?

i haven't seen any, had on my systems for years.

the difference, well, it's an rpm system, it has yast with crap loads of configuration options via GUI.

another difference, it has a configured firewall, built in virtualization tools, also a patterns tab "loaded" with juicy stuff.

another interesting difference, all your repos are in yast> sources.. you can enable the ones you need on the fly.

terminal commands for package management is zypper, example of features.

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Zypper_features

their is a huge difference no one can deny.

ease of use, it can be with a slight learning curve.

bsniadajewski
December 20th, 2011, 03:57 AM
Suse was originally based on Slackware when it first started back in 1994 (it was only a German translation of SW), but around 1997 Suse started taking on features and aspects of Red Hat Linux, including the RPM PM.

Buntumatic
December 20th, 2011, 04:09 AM
Personal preferences of course. That's the great thing about GNU/Linux - choice. You pick what suits you.
My very personal experience is as follows. RH-5. Tried it, didn't like it. Debian. After many years of using it I found that supercow apt-get is restricting me. Went to Gentoo about seven years ago. Never looked back. Last Windows died in 2003. Found FreeBSD. I use it as I use Gentoo, though. Meaning I build it from source. Never had better fun in computing.

N00b-un-2
December 20th, 2011, 04:12 AM
SuSE is a very well put together linux distro. They do a lot of things right, and releases usually have a lot of work put into them in terms of visual polish and as such, every SuSE distro I've tried has been more resource intensive than its contemporary Debian derived counterpart, however only slightly.
Personally, I dislike YAST which is like a graphical frontend for all things system administration but is primarily the SuSE analog for Synaptic (Debian's GUI package manager). Trying to accomplish tasks like adding repositories and searching for particular packages can be confusing at times. That being said though, the openSuSE web based software search with the "one-click-install" http://software.opensuse.orgfeature takes a lot of the frustration out of getting new software, and is an ingenious way to help Windows converts adopt Linux. I know that whenever I needed a new program on Windows the first thing I'd do is look on-line for it.
In the end though, I much prefer Debian based distros such as Ubuntu simply because I prefer the APT package management system. I find that it's a lot easier to hunt down missing dependencies and such. And let's be honest; Ubuntu has the largest selection of the most robust software repos available to any linux distro.

Buntumatic
December 20th, 2011, 04:20 AM
Never tried SuSe. Can you stay CLI only with SuSe? If not then it really is not much use as a server. Considering Debian/Ubuntu in out here offering flexibility with convenience.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 04:27 AM
Never tried SuSe. Can you stay CLI only with SuSe?

yes, i have hung in there often, even tinkered with ncurses, i thought that was amazing.

N00b-un-2
December 20th, 2011, 04:28 AM
of course you can stay CLI only. it >>is<< a linux distro after all. You simply don't install xorg when you install the system. This is where I would run into a lot of issues though. I find administering package management on an RPM distro to be more difficult than a DEB system. Maybe I just don't know enough about zypper. apt is just so easy to use.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 04:31 AM
cli and ncurses ui;)

grahammechanical
December 20th, 2011, 05:04 AM
If we are going to do comparisons then should we not compare like with like? So, compare Redhat with Suse but do not include Ubuntu. Instead compare Ubuntu, Opensuse and Fedora against one another.

For example, I can download ubuntu for free. Can I do that for Redhat? No, but I can with Fedora. Can I download Suse for free? No, but I can with Opensuse.

As far as I am concerned Ubuntu beats Redhat and Suse everytime on cost alone.

Regards.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 05:37 AM
As far as I am concerned Ubuntu beats Redhat and Suse everytime on cost alone.
Regards.

As far as I am concerned OpenSuSe beats Redhat and Suse everytime on cost alone. ;)

lykwydchykyn
December 20th, 2011, 05:48 AM
I use SLES at work on a few workloads that don't support Debian or Ubuntu, or were installed before my time.

IMHO the biggest difference is YAST. Yast is a one-stop shop for configuring just about everything on the system, and it's how you get stuff done in Suse.

Personally I don't like Yast, I've had bad/frustrating experiences with it. Yast is fine until you need to do something that Yast won't do, and you either hand-hack it or find another tool to configure things; then you find that Yast has no qualms about making a mess of your new configuration should you accidentally use it to make changes. But I digress...

The other major difference is the release cycle, and the fact that SLES (as opposed to OpenSuse) doesn't really have good repositories. I have a lot of problems doing updates with Yast too, I find it confusing and nonsensical sometimes.

If you can't tell, I'd rather not be using SLES at work, and I'm sure the Suse fans are going to pick apart my post, but that's my experience. Take it or leave it.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 06:00 AM
Yast is fine until you need to do something that Yast won't do, and you either hand-hack it or find another tool to configure things

using kubuntu 11.10, one of my favs:KS

i won't pick apart your post lykwydchykyn, i'll be honest, it's not my first rodeo, but would like to know what yast didn't do :D

lykwydchykyn
December 20th, 2011, 06:55 AM
using kubuntu 11.10, one of my favs:KS

i won't pick apart your post lykwydchykyn, i'll be honest, it's not my first rodeo, but would like to know what yast didn't do :D

Keeping in mind this was SLES10, and I don't know what improvements have been made in 11; the biggest thing that comes to mind was the firewall. Basically it allows you to open ports, and not much else. I needed some fancier stuff, the simplest of which was just allowing anything from a given IP. Couldn't do it, so I had to use something else, and every time another admin would go into Yast and mess with the firewall my changes got trashed.

Seems like I remember other issues early on with my network configuration, but it's hazy now.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 07:32 AM
hanging out in yast> security and users> firewall> allowed services you are able to see stuff, even in masquerading...

in fact, i created some awesome networking tutorials, one of my favs was internet connection sharing the easy way.

i don't really understand what problems you had sir, but it's looking like masquerading?:D

N00b-un-2
December 20th, 2011, 07:48 AM
I assumed that what the OP meant by "SuSE" is OpenSuSE. I've never actually used SLES/SLED, nor have I ever used Red Hat. I can't imagine that apart from their commercial counterparts being slightly behind the free distros in software versions that they are particularly different. Linux is Linux.
Basically, OpenSuSE is somewhat heavier than Ubuntu, and love it or hate it OpenSuSE has YAST for package management and system configuration.
Also, it may just be my experience but it seems as though downloading updates on OpenSuSE is painfully slow compared to Ubuntu.

szymon_g
December 20th, 2011, 11:31 AM
Never tried SuSe. Can you stay CLI only with SuSe? If not then it really is not much use as a server.

why the hell it is impossible to use gui on server? it doesn't use much resources.
not to mention: that yast works fine in ncurses :)

satanselbow
December 20th, 2011, 11:59 AM
From experience just the other day - I can tell you that one difference is that OpenSuse' bootloader installation is very aggressive and does not play nice when setting up a dualboot :(

Hurrah for liveCD and chroot :popcorn:

pmx
December 20th, 2011, 04:20 PM
Hi,

I have been a Ubuntu user always and I always love linux, however, I have recently converted to Linux from Windows. Can one please tell me the difference between the openSUSE (like they say 11.4 openSUSE) and our distribution (that is Ubuntu LTS 10.04).

I understand that these are Ubuntu forums. But my purpose is know honestly the bad and the good, so I want to know that part. Like people say openSUSE works more smoothly, is it a myth?

Apart from, I really don't need any more anything but asking for information point of view, so if one can really elaborate, thanks in advance.

lykwydchykyn
December 20th, 2011, 04:22 PM
hanging out in yast> security and users> firewall> allowed services you are able to see stuff, even in masquerading...

in fact, i created some awesome networking tutorials, one of my favs was internet connection sharing the easy way.

i don't really understand what problems you had sir, but it's looking like masquerading?:D

I needed a rule that said "allow all traffic from 192.168.150.25" (for example). Could not find a way to do that in SLES10's firewall tool.

I also could not set up in SSH where one person could use a password and everyone else had to use keys.

Couldn't find a module for an FTP server with virtual users.

Anyway, my point is not just that you cannot do *everything* you need to do in YAST, because that's true of pretty much any other GUI; my point is that it's important that a front-end like YAST respect changes from other sources. IME Yast isn't so good with this.

BC59
December 20th, 2011, 04:25 PM
It's a parallel thread here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1896690).

CharlesA
December 20th, 2011, 04:57 PM
i haven't seen any, had on my systems for years.

the difference, well, it's an rpm system, it has yast with crap loads of configuration options via GUI.

another difference, it has a configured firewall, built in virtualization tools, also a patterns tab "loaded" with juicy stuff.

another interesting difference, all your repos are in yast> sources.. you can enable the ones you need on the fly.

terminal commands for package management is zypper, example of features.

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Zypper_features

their is a huge difference no one can deny.

ease of use, it can be with a slight learning curve.

Thanks. I must be thinking or something else then. *shrug*



For example, I can download ubuntu for free. Can I do that for Redhat? No, but I can with Fedora. Can I download Suse for free? No, but I can with Opensuse.

You can always try CentOS. :)

pmx
December 20th, 2011, 05:10 PM
I came to know that while updating the system, Ubuntu downloads the whole of the package again while openSUSE downloads only the update part (whatever or something....is called in Linux, I just forgetting the name....).. And I read somewhere (a few min. back) that it is your choice to use Yast or not, means configuration could be done using CLI too and Yast would be there, would remain there, just don't touch it.

But that part doesn't count that openSUSE being better than Ubuntu. People comment that openSUSE is more smooth than Ubuntu, that I can tell after trying the Live CD. Can one say about it?

Apart from it, Ubuntu has a very big community while openSUSE community is 5% of Ubuntu community, which again is a guess....So I guess, if it is true or false to say that openSUSE is much better than Ubuntu....!

pmx
December 20th, 2011, 05:12 PM
It's a parallel thread here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1896690).

I came to know but your link doesn't show any page.

CharlesA
December 20th, 2011, 05:46 PM
I came to know but your link doesn't show any page.
Fixed the link but in any case, the threads were merged.

pmx
December 20th, 2011, 05:59 PM
Fixed the link but in any case, the threads were merged.

Oh I see. Thanks. I hope to know more about the same query.

wolfen69
December 20th, 2011, 08:49 PM
I prefer Ubuntu, because:
- it is 720 MB CD size, while OpenSuse is 4.5 GB DVD size.


Ubuntu has always been under 700mb. Ubuntu also has a DVD version. OpenSuse has a sub-700mb version and DVD. Most major distros offer both.

CharlesA
December 20th, 2011, 09:00 PM
Ubuntu has always been under 700mb. Ubuntu also has a DVD version. OpenSuse has a sub-700mb version and DVD. Most major distros offer both.
As of 12.04, they are passing the limit of a 700MB CD.

inobe
December 20th, 2011, 09:27 PM
As of 12.04, they are passing the limit of a 700MB CD.

didn't know that :o

CharlesA
December 20th, 2011, 09:44 PM
didn't know that :o
I saw it talked about with a link to:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/11/ubuntu-12-04-disc-size-to-be-750mb/

Take it with a grain of salt tho. :)

N00b-un-2
December 21st, 2011, 07:33 AM
Many admins don't have physical access to their servers in a lot of cases. trying to administer a system remotely using vnc SUCKS. It's laggy and unstable. SSH is the way to go. If you can't administer a Linux server remotely using SSH, you have no business using a Linux server IMHO. You might be better off running a Windows Server.

pmx
December 21st, 2011, 08:13 AM
Many admins don't have physical access to their servers in a lot of cases. trying to administer a system remotely using vnc SUCKS. It's laggy and unstable. SSH is the way to go. If you can't administer a Linux server remotely using SSH, you have no business using a Linux server IMHO. You might be better off running a Windows Server.

But what is its relation with openSUSE or Ubuntu since both have SSH facilities!

szymon_g
December 21st, 2011, 11:22 AM
Many admins don't have physical access to their servers in a lot of cases. trying to administer a system remotely using vnc SUCKS. It's laggy and unstable. SSH is the way to go. If you can't administer a Linux server remotely using SSH, you have no business using a Linux server IMHO. You might be better off running a Windows Server.

as pmx wrote before me: you can use ssh on every linux distribution
not to mention, that you can use graphical applications passed through ssh - and yast2 is really useful in that situation (of course, you can just use yast on console if you wish)
same with Windows Server- you don't have to vnc to it do administrate it: you can configure it from apps being run on different machines

pmx
December 21st, 2011, 01:08 PM
The biggest happiness for me to use Ubuntu is that it has a great community and openSUSE community is about 5% of this, which I guess and this alone is a sufficient reason to abandon the other and use this (Ubuntu) and definitely any other point can be now neglected. From my experience, I came to know how big is the Ubuntu Community, that's a real success in my eyes.

N00b-un-2
December 22nd, 2011, 04:32 PM
I've used both Ubuntu and OpenSuSE for many years. I would tend to agree that the community here on the Ubuntu forums is much more apt (no pun intended) to help people out. Over on OpenSuSE forums, you ask a question and you're likely to get a canned "rtfm" response, or have one of the mods randomly delete your thread for no apparent reason. It's a shame because OpenSuSE is a very nice OS, but can be very frustrating for a new convert to Linux. To a certain extent, even the Debian forums are like that too, rife with responses like "Why would you want to use Flash/Java/MP3/Avi/Wmv/etc...? Our software that is crippled by our hard line FOSS licensing scheme isn't good enough for you?"
I think that the excellent community support here on the Ubuntu boards is why Linux users from many other OSes lurk around here.

inobe
December 22nd, 2011, 11:18 PM
i would disagree fellas, the howto articles are plentiful and spot on.

the forums, in my opinion aren't even needed!

if anyone needs an example, i would be proud to demonstrate some things :p

satanselbow
December 22nd, 2011, 11:44 PM
the forums, in my opinion aren't even needed!


We'll shut 'em down and let the distro die on it's ***e then :rolleyes:


Your opinion will put you in a very small minority, in my opinion ;)

The ubuntu forums and support provided (here, official and elsewhere) are priceless and add enormous added value to the distro - value that many others struggle to emulate. In my opinion.

inobe
December 23rd, 2011, 02:32 AM
We'll shut 'em down and let the distro die on it's ***e then :rolleyes:


Your opinion will put you in a very small minority, in my opinion ;)

The ubuntu forums and support provided (here, official and elsewhere) are priceless and add enormous added value to the distro - value that many others struggle to emulate. In my opinion.

whether folks like it or not, the first step on getting help is reading the howto articles, includes all distributions, folks are more likely to solve problems faster.

but it's unfortunate some howto's are so dated, folks end up at forums because they followed outdated advice (that's another topic) or the articles take them around the universe when there are easier ways of accomplishing the same task.

to say i'm in the minority, well, i believe you are wrong.

this is one of the things similar about both distributions, tons of documentation and helpful howto articles.

VeeDubb
December 23rd, 2011, 03:10 AM
...but it's unfortunate some howto's are so dated, folks end up at forums because they followed outdated advice (that's another topic) or the articles take them around the universe when there are easier ways of accomplishing the same task...

...and that's why the forum are not only incredibly valuable, but in many way, MORE valuable than the how-to articles.

I can hardly count the times I've had trouble or tried to help others with trouble that was caused because someone followed a how-to that was out of date and caused more problems. Often times there is a simple solution that takes a matter of minutes, but after following outdated how-to's, it can sometimes take hours or days to get back to where a person started, just so they can do what they would have done to begin with if they hadn't followed some archaic how-to.

pbpersson
December 23rd, 2011, 03:26 AM
it's a little outdated, but here's a great visual http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Linux_Distro_Timeline.png

The big red line at the top is Debian, and the big red line at the bottom is Red Hat. As you can see, the majority of major distributions are based on one of those two.

Why is there a dotted red line between RedHat and Ark Linux? :confused:

pmx
December 23rd, 2011, 07:46 AM
i would disagree fellas, the howto articles are plentiful and spot on.

the forums, in my opinion aren't even needed!

if anyone needs an example, i would be proud to demonstrate some things :p

I agree that one must read first how tos, but that doesn't mean that Forums or mailing lists are not needed, in fact the later is a better way to get in touch, what's if there is some bug in the articles or some where some command is having some errors? So mailing lists and forums do provide that sort of things which help recover bugs too and not only that, a better touch and correspondence, IMHO. How Tos are for both - Ubuntu and openSUSE and in great quantity. But another thing is that, Ubuntu is widely used, major examples are French Parliament, Supreme Courts in India, and other such great places, I have not so far heard of openSUSE being used any where like this. So that also matters a lot, they might have used it thinking of a bigger community else they might have gone with some other distro too, IMO.

pmx
December 23rd, 2011, 07:47 AM
...and that's why the forum are not only incredibly valuable, but in many way, more valuable than the how-to articles.

+1

And I cannot say that How Tos are not required, IMO both are needed for a bigger success like that of Ubuntu.

VeeDubb
December 24th, 2011, 09:23 AM
Why is there a dotted red line between RedHat and Ark Linux? :confused:

Honestly, I have no idea. It's the only distro on that branch of the tree. If I had to take a wild guess without taking the time to google Ark linux, I would guess that it uses RPM but is otherwise separate from Red Hat.