Ubuntu: best linux desktop for business

[matthew]

From Slashdot.org: http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/11/24/1826220.shtml?tid=163&tid=106

ZDNet has been testing Linux for business, trying to work out what the best distro is for small businesses. After testing Mandriva Linux 2006, Novell Linux Desktop 9, Red Hat Desktop 4, SUSE Linux 10 and Ubuntu Linux 5.1. After installing them all from scratch to simulate a new business set up, and extensive testing involving Gaim, Evolution, OpenOffice.org -- as well as actually writing each review on each distro -- Ubuntu came out as the winner. They summed it up saying 'Ubuntu is a well integrated, practical and absolutely free' and dismissed worries about support. SuSE came a close second.

[23meg]

Cool, that's good publicity.

[oskude]

i doubt that they compared service/support... (or does ubuntu have hotline?)
i mean if something doesnt work (in a firma!), you dont just post here on forums and hope (and WAIT) for competent help...

but then again, very good advertising for ubuntu \\:D/

[newbie2]

http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=03068#0
:cool:

[Gustav]

i doubt that they compared service/support... (or does ubuntu have hotline?)
i mean if something doesnt work (in a firma!), you dont just post here on forums and hope (and WAIT) for competent help...

but then again, very good advertising for ubuntu \\:D/
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/support/supportoptions/paidsupport/

[oskude]

http://www.ubuntulinux.org/support/supportoptions/paidsupport/
doh, i take my comment back :oops: :-#

so, it seems ubuntu really deserve place 1 =D>

[sapo]

I knew since warty :)

[mjkelly]

I read the slashdot article yesterday and liked two posts so i figured i'd post em here for ppl that dont want to read through all the comments.

Heres the first, from someone thats obviously pretty experienced with linux:

Re:One little additional remark
(Score:5, Interesting)
by hungrygrue (872970) on Thursday November 24, @04:51PM (#14109382)
(http://127.0.0.1/)
That is one thing that has amazed me about Ubuntu, actually. I have run *MANY* distros over the last 10+ years, and have not run Windows since version 3.1 in 1995. I am used to having to do some work to get my X configuration correct, to get sound working at all, etc. I am now running Ubuntu, and have not had to touch a single configuration file. This is on a laptop, an eMachines M6805. The wide screen display (1280x800) was correctly configured - I had naturally expected it to choose 1024x768 and have to edit the xorg.conf to fix it. Sound works. It detected the wireless and built in ethernet, allowed me to select the wireless and enter my WEP key during installation, even the media keys (volume, mail, etc.) were properly configured. Later, I had to install Windows XP in order to load maps onto my GPS - since this machine is designed to run Windows, I didn't expect to have any compatibility issues, but *surprise*! The screen resolution was wrong, the wireless card was not detected at all, sound does not work. I don't know if it configured the media keys correctly or not as I have only had to run Windows twice, once to load maps and later to setup my DSL which unfortunately could only be done by running the Windows coaster which SBC sent me. I assume that all that doesn't work under Windows could be fixed by hunting around for drivers, but the simple fact that no such work was needed under Ubuntu whereas Windows is unable to make use of all of this Windows hardware was quite a surprise.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]


Heres the second, i particularly like how he mentioned Automatix.

Re:One little additional remark
(Score:4, Informative)
by Frogbert (589961) on Thursday November 24, @05:41PM (#14109614)
Another little remark:

I've used Ubuntu since Hoary and I was always impressed at its quality over previous linux distros I had tried, FC4 most notably. I reciently installed it on a relitivily modern laptop and realised once I had done setting it up it had actually been easier to install and get up to date then Windows.

With Windows XP I have to install it, then find my SP2 cd and install that, download a heap of updates. Then I have to download drivers to get everything to work and so on. Now Ubuntu isn't much different its just the process takes a lot less time and is easier to do. As soon as you are done installing the base system there is a pop up that tells you you need to update. So you click that wait a while for it to download and your done, you do need to restart once because there is a new kernal out but that is understandable and is still much better then the 5 or probably more times Windows XP needs. And with Automatix [ubuntuforums.org] the rest of your setup is easier still.

I could not be more happy with my ubuntu laptop. There are even ATI video card driver packages available making for a very slick install.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]