Why do you use more than one distro?

[abyssius]

Although I have now settled on Ubuntu, I've previously tried Saboyan, Fedora, openSUSE, Simply Mepis, Mandriva, Belenix, ZenWalk, Symphony, Knoppix, Pardus, Slax and Blag. From a general user's standpoint, the differences weren't huge, mostly noticable in the user interface (e.g Gnome vs. KDE). Under the skin I did notice some differences in CLI syntax, file names, locations, directories, etc. But, from the desktop user perspective, the UI and apps are pretty much the same. I'm curious as to the reasons (other than research) why you would choose to use more than one distro.

[davec64]

I use Ubuntu as my main OS.
I've still got XP for Dreamweaver (I know I'm lazy and ought to learn soemthing so I could use Ubuntu all the time!)
And I've got Teenpup on a USB Pen Drive for when I'm out and about.

I do also run other distro's from time to time in Virtualbox just to see whats around, but I keep coming back to Ubuntu!

[shadylookin]

distros can have a different specialty or general design philosophy. DSL/puppy linux for really old machines, gnusense if you want a completely free operating system, ubuntu for general purpose, redhat for the commercial support, debian for it's stability, backtracking for forensics, etc etc etc.

sure at the end of the day linux is linux and you can make any of those distros into any other but that's an unnecessary hassle

[abyssius]

I use Ubuntu as my main OS.
I've still got XP for Dreamweaver (I know I'm lazy and ought to learn soemthing so I could use Ubuntu all the time!)
And I've got Teenpup on a USB Pen Drive for when I'm out and about.

I do also run other distro's from time to time in Virtualbox just to see whats around, but I keep coming back to Ubuntu!

I also keep a separate XP computer for Dreamweaver + Video Editing. Linux hasn't caught up with Windows there as yet. So you use another distro, because it can be booted from a USB Pen Drive. That's a good reason.

[abyssius]

distros can have a different specialty or general design philosophy. DSL/puppy linux for really old machines, gnusense if you want a completely free operating system, ubuntu for general purpose, redhat for the commercial support, debian for it's stability, backtracking for forensics, etc etc etc.

sure at the end of the day linux is linux and you can make any of those distros into any other but that's an unnecessary hassle

More good reasons! Linux distributions specialized for particular tasks. Distros designed to work on older or low-powered machines. Okay.

Here's a dumb question, You say Debian for its stability. If Ubuntu is based on Debian, doesn't it inherit the stability? Is there an advantage to using Debian over Ubuntu for GP tasks?

[Fenris_rising]

Ubuntu 8.04 on my PC. But on my eee pc I have Ubuntu 8.04.1 on the HDD also cruncheee on an SDHC card as a persistent OS and fluxflux on a mem stick. My reasons.......because I can? :D I can play with the latest flavours and in the event of a problem on mine or anyone else's machine I can get into them if required.

regards

Fenris

[gnomeuser]

Some distros have different areas of application, I run Fedora on my desktop currently and I am wanting to build a server which is more likely to run CentOS. CentOS is perfect for plopping in the corner and just letting it run for years and years with little if any maintance needed. Fedora is more recent, has more neat desktop features and comes with the latest packages making it a better choice of my desktop.

There is also the approach that people might like playing with other distros to see what can be learned, or if you are in a situation where you need to support multiple distros you need access to and knowledge about all of them.

[crimesaucer]

I have a dual boot for a few reasons.

The first and main reason is that my iRivier T30 (using UMS) will not work with Linux. I almost had it working on xubuntu a couple of years back, and on Arch it doesn't even show when I plug it in to the usb..... (I know I could figure it out and mount it manually once I find the correct command, but even then I'm pretty sure that it will just load all of my mp3's in the wrong order like it did with xubuntu)


So I keep Vista for my old mp3 player.


I also have had no luck with my webcam. Using uvcvideo I am able to get a streaming picture but the microphone won't work and the record feature won't record in normal time (it records and plays back muted, and in fast-forward).


So (even though I never use my webcam) I keep Vista around in case I ever need to use the webcam/microphone for something.


I also keep Vista around because it came installed on my computer..... so in my cheapness I feel funny erasing it, even if my mp3 player and webcam had worked perfectly.....


What I do is I minimize the Vista partition to a size that will allow enough space for my Archlinux, and then I have all of my music/videos stored on Vista and I access them with ntfs-3g. I also keep a backup folder of my most important Linux directories, gtk-2.0 themes, icons, wallpapers, and special config files on my Vista partition..... that way it only takes me and hour to re-install with FTP and I can just drag and drop all of my important stuff back into the old places.....

[K.Mandla]

Different distros handle things differently. I need different styles and different approaches for different computers.

[abyssius]

Different distros handle things differently. I need different styles and different approaches for different computers.

Do you mean that the ideal distro for a computer is governed by the computer's specific hardware? That would be interesting...

[benny bronx]

I dual boot with PClinuxOS for no other reason than I have enough disk space to do it. I can go with either as my only OS as they both run flawlessly on my computer. The one benefit that I did not consider when I first installed is that the dual boot setup makes for a good backup strategy. Although I have yet to experience any downtime with either distro.

[Simian Man]

It does depend on the hardware. For example, even though Fedora is easily my favorite distro, I run Ubuntu on my laptop since I wanted it to be a bit more stable and have easy restricted drivers.

[abyssius]

Ubuntu 8.04 on my PC. But on my eee pc I have Ubuntu 8.04.1 on the HDD also cruncheee on an SDHC card as a persistent OS and fluxflux on a mem stick. My reasons.......because I can? :D I can play with the latest flavours and in the event of a problem on mine or anyone else's machine I can get into them if required.

regards

Fenris

This makes perfect sense for a researcher that doesn't mind providing support to other users. You provide a crucial service for the Linux community. It has been said that one of the reasons that Linux isn't spreading as it should is because there are so many different flavors available. Do you think that someone who is switching to Linux simply to adopt an alternate OS to Windows or OS-X, should stick with one flavor, or should they take the "Jack of all trades, Master of none.." approach? I tried this initially, but decided that it would be best for a single distribution to emerge as the "default" distro for the average computer user. This is why I decided to stick with Ubuntu. It seemed like the easiest Distro for a novice user.

[abyssius]

It does depend on the hardware. For example, even though Fedora is easily my favorite distro, I run Ubuntu on my laptop since I wanted it to be a bit more stable and have easy restricted drivers.

You infer that Ubuntu is "a bit more stable" and supports "restricted drivers". What is Fedora's edge that makes it your favorite distro?

[kk0sse54]

Because I don't prefer Ubuntu, I do not enjoy using Windows, and despite how much I like NetBSD there are still a few things that are missing (ie flash)

[Crafty Kisses]

I like Gentoo because it's highly configurable.

[dragos240]

Some linux's arre better for other things, and can support different packages, like red hat based systems can support rpm, debian based system can support deb, and other linux's will have to compile from source. Some are made for the adverage user (ubuntu), some are made for servers (debian) and some are for cusomization (slackware). Thats why people will use other distros, becuase some are made diferently than the others.

[Noblacktie]

I run two distributions in case an update breaks an installation while I need my computer for work. Therefore, I would just leave the repairs aside until I have time to go about fixing it.

Plus, I like having Fedora around. It gives me a good peek into what might be coming into the mainstream in 6 months time.

[BwackNinja]

I use Arch Linux just because its much easier to have a minimal install. Its kind of nice being able to build something from the ground up, though its not something everyone has fun with. Its nice to compile things too when they were never there before, especially for testing stuff not meant to work yet :P.

[FuturePilot]

I only use one distro, Ubuntu. However I like to play around with other distros to see what they're up to.

[cariboo]

I use different distributions to keep older hardware going instead of throwing it out. I've got puppy running on a P75 and AntiX on a 350Mhz Compaq. The Compaq now runs quite acceptably now that I use Opera instead of Firefox. I usually only use it while I'm waiting for a Windows installation to finish in my shop.

Jim

[SunnyRabbiera]

I am admitted distro hopper, but thats because I like to experiment.
There are features in other distros that I like, Mandriva has its control center, Mint has neat tools for beginners, Mepis has a great install wizard, Debian has its stability and ubuntu has its community.
Take all of these you have a perfect distro in my opinion but because I am not a programmer I really dont want to create a new distro...
Too much time and energy so thats why I hop, lot less effort :D

[abyssius]

I am admitted distro hopper, but thats because I like to experiment.
There are features in other distros that I like, Mandriva has its control center, Mint has neat tools for beginners, Mepis has a great install wizard, Debian has its stability and ubuntu has its community.
Take all of these you have a perfect distro in my opinion but because I am not a programmer I really dont want to create a new distro...
Too much time and energy so thats why I hop, lot less effort :D

I can understand the tendency to test various distros. I went through this for a while. I probably don't know enough to fully appreciate the differences, except that I prefer the simplicity of Gnome to the gaudiness of KDE.

I do wonder sometimes if everyone is simply experimenting with Linux, or are they actually being productive with it. I'm committed to sticking with Ubuntu, but I admit I still can't completely shun my Win XP "security blanket". I know everyone likes to dis Windows, but for me, Windows just works, through the constant virus updates, scheduled updates, service packs, etc. etc. Every time a new Ubuntu update comes out I still wonder if something is going to break.

[Noblacktie]

I do wonder sometimes if everyone is simply experimenting with Linux, or are they actually being productive with it.

I admit that I probably spend more time playing around with GNU/Linux than I rightly ought to, but I can't help it... it's just so interesting.


Why, God, why did you have to make me a nerd??!?!!

[handy]

I haven't read the thread, so it has probably already been stated multiple times, that different distro's have different strengths & weaknesses. So some of us use more than one distro for that reason.

Some of us also like to checkout different distro's, which isn't necessarily the same as using them though.

[K.Mandla]

Do you mean that the ideal distro for a computer is governed by the computer's specific hardware? That would be interesting...
It is true for me, but I live at the shallow end of the pond (http://kmandla.wordpress.com/hardware/). My fastest machine is 1Ghz, and I don't plan on getting anything faster any time soon. I don't need it.

But slower and slower hardware requires more and more customization, in my experience. For that reason, the fatter, more generic distros don't perform on some of the low-end hardware. It doesn't mean they don't work, it just means they don't work as well. In my humble opinion, of course. ;)

[gnomeuser]

Do you mean that the ideal distro for a computer is governed by the computer's specific hardware? That would be interesting...

That, and the devices usecases. Having a full GNOME desktop plus a bulky distro install on a netbook might not be ideal. You might want special spins and interfaces for different device, increasingly so.

Look at what Linpus does with Moblin/Fedora for the Asus or Xandros does for the EEEpc. Those interfaces are very well suited for the deployments they are intended to.

so yes, sometimes specific hardware does dictate ideals.

[Bölvaður]

Ubuntu + OpenSUSE, Im not too keen on OpenSUSE any more :(

[Mason Whitaker]

Lately I only have three operating systems running on my computers.

Ubuntu
OpenSUSE
OpenSolaris

I like Distro hopping and well...OS hopping mainly because each operating system has something special to offer that some other one doesn't have or is terrible at. But, I keep coming back to Linux because of its stability and its sheer flexibility.

[snowpine]

I love testing out different distros! Can't even keep track of how many I've tried. I will sometimes "break" a perfectly good installation so I can try installing something different. :) Since I discovered VirtualBox, it's become my preferred method for exploring new Linux distros.


Here's a dumb question, You say Debian for its stability. If Ubuntu is based on Debian, doesn't it inherit the stability? Is there an advantage to using Debian over Ubuntu for GP tasks?

Ubuntu is derived from Debian's Sid, or "unstable," branch. In order for a Debian release to be promoted to stable, it must have zero critical bugs. They are not on a 6-month release schedule like Ubuntu; they release when it's good and ready. The current Debian stable, Etch, is in my opinion much more stable than any current Ubuntu release. But, it also uses very old packages--roughly equivalent to Ubuntu 7.04 Feisty. There is also Debian Lenny, the current testing release, which I consider roughly equivalent to Ubuntu Hardy Heron. It is an interesting topic; sorry if I'm hijacking the thread here. :) But it does bring up the point that, sometimes, choosing a particular distro is more than just the distro itself--you are also choosing a development process and release cycle, if you plan to keep using that distro over time.