There are various approaches to answering this question. The broad answer is: "any of them," but that's not very helpful if you're just looking for a place to start.
The problem is, there never can be one best Linux distribution for everyone, because the needs of each user tend to be unique. Telling someone who's looking for a good introductory distribution to try Gentoo, for instance, would be a mistake because for all its positive qualities, Gentoo is decidedly not a beginner's distro.
All too often, Linux aficionados will tend to list the distributions they like as the best, which is fair, but if they are not aware of their audience, they could suggest something that does not meet that person's needs. Finding a good Linux distribution is like finding a good match in an online dating service: good looks aren't the only quality upon which to judge a Linux distro.
To help users discover the Linux distribution that's best for them, this resource will definitively list the best candidates for the various types of Linux users to try. The use-case categories will be:
- Best Desktop Distribution
- Best Laptop Distribution
- Best Enterprise Desktop
- Best Enterprise Server
- Best LiveCD
- Best Security-Enhanced Distribution
- Best Multimedia Distribution
Once you find the best Linux distribution for your needs, you can visit our Linux Migration Guides to assist you in installing and using the one you'd like to try.
Best Linux Desktop Distribution
There are a lot of Linux distributions that have the primary focus of becoming the next best desktop replacement for Windows or OS X. Of all the categories in this list, this is the most sought-after, and contentious, group of distros.
While it would be ideal to include many distributions on this list, the reality is that there really needs to be just one "best" Linux distribution. For early 2010, that distro has to be Canonical's Ubuntu.
Ubuntu edges out its closest contenders, Fedora and openSUSE, because its development team is constantly focused on the end-user experience. Canonical and the Ubuntu community have spent a lot of time and resources on bringing ease-of-use tools to this distribution, particularly in the area of installing Ubuntu and installing applications within Ubuntu.
In addition, Ubuntu's level of support for its desktop products is highly superior, which is important in this class of distributions since it is the most likely to contain users new to Linux. Both the official and unofficial Ubuntu documentation is robust and searchable, a big plus.
Best Linux Laptop Distribution
Laptop distributions almost fall into the same category as desktop users, but there are a number of key differences that make the criteria for evaluating a good laptop distribution important. Power management, docking tools, and wireless ease-of-use are critical to users on the go, as is having a distro that meets those needs.
Right now, the best laptop distribution is openSUSE, one of the lead contenders for the desktop honors. On the laptop, openSUSE shines with great connectivity tools, such as an easy-to-use networking toolset that not only handles WiFi connectivity, but also CDMA/cellular modem connections.
openSUSE also deals with docking stations for laptops very well, including dual-monitor management on the fly. Power management is very granular, which is great for detailing various power needs you might find yourself needing.
Best Linux Enterprise Desktop
This category is replete with great contenders as well, and it's difficult to highlight just one. At the end of the day, though, the nod must be given to SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop (SLED).
The reason is simple: while SLED and its primary competitor Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop are nearly identical in features and support performance, SLED has the advantage of the openSUSE Build Service, a free and open service that lets applications be built and delivered to SUSE Linux and openSUSE products (as well as Red Hat and CentOS).
This is a very important differentiator in enterprise desktop development, as it means that SLED has the current advantage of application building and deployment in the enterprise arena.
Best Linux Enterprise Server
Again, in this category it really comes down to two main contenders: Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES). Given the pick for the Enterprise Desktop category, you might expect SLES to get the "best of" label here.
But, when all factors for the enterprise server are weighed, RHEL is still the king of this particular hill.
Red Hat edges out Novell with its server product, because RHEL users get a deeply mature distribution, and Red Hat's support structure is second to none in the enterprise channels.
Best Linux LiveCD
As Linux technology improves, users can easily choose the LiveCD version of practically any of the Linux distros listed here to get the best LiveCD experience for their needs.
There is a specialized class of LiveCDs, however, that offers users utilities and tools for the specific purpose of repairing existing Linux and Windows installations. These distros are very useful to have regardless of what primary Linux distribution you like to use, because in a crisis they are invaluable to own.
In this class of distribution, KNOPPIX is hands-down the most complete and useful distro. Loaded on a CD or USB storage device, KNOPPIX will let you recover from nearly any rare Linux system crash as well as the much-less-rare Windows breakdowns.
Best Linux Security-Enhanced Distribution
Linux is inherently very secure compared to other operating systems, but there's always room for improvement.
One of the challenges for locking down Linux is if you are not careful, you can take away too much functionality. Another challenge is that the best security-oriented Linux distro, SELinux, is historically known to be difficult to configure correctly. Still, if security out of the box is your priority, this is the best place to begin.
Another approach is the white hat method: using security and forensic tools to examine your existing installation, determine the holes, then lock your system down based on what gaps you find. If you have the time and inclination, this is a great way to do it, because this will get any existing system more secure right away.
For the white hat approach, the best distribution is BackTrack Linux, a dedicated penetration testing distro that will enable you to safely try to crack any system you are caretaking. Its toolset and strong community give it the advantage in this category.
Best Linux Multimedia Distribution
General Linux distributions have come a long way in terms of multimedia performance. Rare is the audio or video file that can't be played on Linux. Music services such as Rhapsody and video sites like YouTube and Hulu are also standards-compliant and accessible to Linux users.
Still, for those users who are multimedia creators as well as consumers, there are Linux distributions that contain powerful tools for audio and video editing.
The best in this class is currently Ubuntu Studio. For audio, video, and graphic production, it contains a very complete set of tools, as well as format and codec support for a huge range of multimedia formats.
The applications contained in Ubuntu Studio are the same or similar to those used by major studios to create cutting edge work, so users are getting the best apps, coupled with the strong support ethos already found in the Ubuntu community.
In Linux there are as many opinions as there are lines of code. This represents one view of the best in Linux. What's yours?
I am a Linux and Open Source expert, having worked as a member of the Linux media as well as the Linux Foundation. My off-hour activities include Habitat for Humanity, taekwondo, and being the lucky dad of three fantastic daughters. Follow me on Twitter @LinuxScribe.
Comments (31)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comments
written by Jennifer Cloer, February 03, 2010
It's hard to narrow it down like this, but these choices are right on - especially Ubuntu Studio, imo. Great article!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Stratos Zolotas, February 03, 2010
Opensuse 11.2 rocks on the little Acer Aspire One!!!!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tom Sandholm, February 03, 2010
I have to question your choice of rhel on enterprise server support. I'm an end user (system's admin) for a finance company, and dealing with redhat support is about as fun as getting a root canal. We're running 3rd party app's on the machine, such as Veritas, and on several occasions, redhat has lead us off on a tangent, claiming the problem is Veritas, when in fact it wasn't. Their time to respond to questions is poor, typically takes days if not weeks. And their level of expertise is questionable. I suspect they have help-desk monkeys reading from a script. Novell has been and still is superior in their support organization. I doubt very much if you've got any first hand experience running a shop of over 100 rhel servers, but redhat gets a big fat F for their support.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Abris Trans, February 03, 2010
Zorin OS (http://zorin-os.webs.com) for ease of use (for people switching from Windows to Linux).
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tommy He, February 03, 2010
I think Fedora could be nominated as the best Linux workstation distribution. 
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tom Sandholm, February 03, 2010
I'm really amazed at the comments about "ease-of-use".
Obviously these people have never administrated a RHEL system, or even seen the administration features available with SuSE's (SLES) YAST2 administration.
RHEL doesn't come even close to YAST2. I hardly call rhel's system-config-* tools a comprehensive administrative interface. It's just a bunch of disparate tools, some dependent on have X up and running, to "try" and provide some kind of administration wizard. Very poorly done.
YAST2, on the other hand, works with or without X running, has a cmd-line (minimal) interface, and provides a consistent structure to systems management. Comparing rhel & suse is like comparing solaris to aix...solaris is crap compared to Aix; heck, it doesn't even have an administration interface (sorry, admintool doesn't qualify). Aix was truly built as an Enterprise product, just the SLES.
Obviously these people have never administrated a RHEL system, or even seen the administration features available with SuSE's (SLES) YAST2 administration.
RHEL doesn't come even close to YAST2. I hardly call rhel's system-config-* tools a comprehensive administrative interface. It's just a bunch of disparate tools, some dependent on have X up and running, to "try" and provide some kind of administration wizard. Very poorly done.
YAST2, on the other hand, works with or without X running, has a cmd-line (minimal) interface, and provides a consistent structure to systems management. Comparing rhel & suse is like comparing solaris to aix...solaris is crap compared to Aix; heck, it doesn't even have an administration interface (sorry, admintool doesn't qualify). Aix was truly built as an Enterprise product, just the SLES.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Gerard Braad, February 03, 2010
In the segment of Enterprise Desktop you call having OBS an advantage for SLED.
> SLED has the advantage of the openSUSE Build Service, a free and open service that lets applications be built and delivered to SUSE Linux and openSUSE products (as well as Red Hat and CentOS).
But as mentioned in the same sentence, it does this also for RHEL5 (and CentOS). So, what is the advantage? Also, most of the packages on OBS are community packages, with a few exceptions like Freeswitch, midgard and Mono, that is not the ideal source for your packages on Enterprise Desktop. You would want verified packages. With verified I also mean has good support and gets updated regularly when security issues arise.
> SLED has the advantage of the openSUSE Build Service, a free and open service that lets applications be built and delivered to SUSE Linux and openSUSE products (as well as Red Hat and CentOS).
But as mentioned in the same sentence, it does this also for RHEL5 (and CentOS). So, what is the advantage? Also, most of the packages on OBS are community packages, with a few exceptions like Freeswitch, midgard and Mono, that is not the ideal source for your packages on Enterprise Desktop. You would want verified packages. With verified I also mean has good support and gets updated regularly when security issues arise.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tommy He, February 03, 2010
First I would like to see that I have not used YAST2 or even openSUSE before.
I was just wondering If it is as great as you said, why it can only be found in openSUSE?
Was it caused by some license issue? Did it use some non-free staff?
I was just wondering If it is as great as you said, why it can only be found in openSUSE?
Was it caused by some license issue? Did it use some non-free staff?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tom Sandholm, February 03, 2010
YAST used to be. I'll agree, I don't see it on source forge. But here's a nice link that discusses running YAST on Debian:
http://yast4debian.alioth.debian.org/
What impresses me most about SuSE, is the attention to detail. In my opinion, SuSE is more Enterprise class that RedHat because of the details. For example, the YAST tool has a tab & link to post direct support calls. If you've tried that with redhat, & customer support center (which I have on numerous occasions), there's lots of cut & paste, gathering report outputs, etc. With Yast, it's just a click, and your question. The link will collect your system information for you. The other point I can make, for example. We had a sun V40Z with NIC's on the mobo & a PCI card with additional ports. In fact, we had several PCI nic's installed. We pulled a particular NIC card out, and guess what? RHEL relabeled ALL of our NIC devices. What once was eth0 now became eth3, etc. That doesn't happen on a SuSE, or even Debian/Ubuntu release. That is because they use udev (as does RedHat), but SuSE & Debian added special rules to provide for device persistence. You pull a NIC on a SuSE or Debian box, there's NO relabeling of the eth devices. That's what I consider an Enterprise release. A system where you can do the day-2-day management and configuration and NOT spend another day cleaning up the mess. SuSE did the same thing for disks. In fact SuSE uses the disk identifier as the drive label in /dev/. We've had several occasions when a multipath disk to our SAN goes away, and then the drives get relabeled, (as in their /dev/ label). It's a real pain.
Now I know you could all install webmin (the latest release isn't too shabby), and then have web-based system's administration. Webmin is available for Debian/Ubuntu, and you could install it on both rhel & SuSE. So that's another option.
I will agree, that when using SuSE studio (the software stacks), and specifying to add in YAST, the footprint becomes rather large. I'm able to create very small Xen images using Xen in around 300MB. Using SuSE studio and adding YAST, well, it gets to around a GByte or 2.
YAST used to be proprietory. The SuSE team stated they've open sourced it, but I'll admit, I haven't noticed it on freshmeat or sourceforge.
Either way, take a good hard look at SuSE before you spend your IT budget dollars on RHEL. YAST may not do everything you want, but it's a darned lot closer that you'll get with RHEL's system-config-splat.
http://yast4debian.alioth.debian.org/
What impresses me most about SuSE, is the attention to detail. In my opinion, SuSE is more Enterprise class that RedHat because of the details. For example, the YAST tool has a tab & link to post direct support calls. If you've tried that with redhat, & customer support center (which I have on numerous occasions), there's lots of cut & paste, gathering report outputs, etc. With Yast, it's just a click, and your question. The link will collect your system information for you. The other point I can make, for example. We had a sun V40Z with NIC's on the mobo & a PCI card with additional ports. In fact, we had several PCI nic's installed. We pulled a particular NIC card out, and guess what? RHEL relabeled ALL of our NIC devices. What once was eth0 now became eth3, etc. That doesn't happen on a SuSE, or even Debian/Ubuntu release. That is because they use udev (as does RedHat), but SuSE & Debian added special rules to provide for device persistence. You pull a NIC on a SuSE or Debian box, there's NO relabeling of the eth devices. That's what I consider an Enterprise release. A system where you can do the day-2-day management and configuration and NOT spend another day cleaning up the mess. SuSE did the same thing for disks. In fact SuSE uses the disk identifier as the drive label in /dev/. We've had several occasions when a multipath disk to our SAN goes away, and then the drives get relabeled, (as in their /dev/ label). It's a real pain.
Now I know you could all install webmin (the latest release isn't too shabby), and then have web-based system's administration. Webmin is available for Debian/Ubuntu, and you could install it on both rhel & SuSE. So that's another option.
I will agree, that when using SuSE studio (the software stacks), and specifying to add in YAST, the footprint becomes rather large. I'm able to create very small Xen images using Xen in around 300MB. Using SuSE studio and adding YAST, well, it gets to around a GByte or 2.
YAST used to be proprietory. The SuSE team stated they've open sourced it, but I'll admit, I haven't noticed it on freshmeat or sourceforge.
Either way, take a good hard look at SuSE before you spend your IT budget dollars on RHEL. YAST may not do everything you want, but it's a darned lot closer that you'll get with RHEL's system-config-splat.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Leonardo, February 03, 2010
No Debian, i can't belive.
Really, i used to thougt that Debian was the best Server distro.
Really, i used to thougt that Debian was the best Server distro.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Tom Sandholm, February 03, 2010
I'm using an OpenSuSE 11.1 Desktop, running a Xen kernel. I have to use paravirtual support as the AMD sempron doesn't have virtualization support. I then created a Xen paravirtual Debian Etch release that I use to master other paravirtual Xen images. I like to use Debian because of the extremely small footprint. I can create a minimal LAMP server in about 300 to 500MB using Debian. If I need administration, I install webmin. Debian is outstanding for creating servers & embedded servers. A couple of previous companies I worked at (Telco Industry) based their embedded Linux on Debian. Debian also has the largest collection of packaged opensource packages of ALL of the existing Linux distributions. If you're building very small, fast and embedded, or virtual servers, give Debian a good look. Of course I'm talking just servers, no X, no games, no openoffice, etc. Ubuntu falls into the "good" category, as it is based on Debian. Just wish that YAST2 was packaged & bundled with it! 
-
- +0
-
-
written by stlouisubntu, February 03, 2010
Actually, the best LiveCD distro is Puppy Linux since in addition to coming packed full of most any application or utility needing for performing many tasks including recovery, restoration, rescue, and virus cleaning, it runs completely in RAM (provided you are not really really short on RAM.) This causes it not only to run extremely fast, but also allows for removing the CD freeing up the CD/DVD drive to be used (such as recovering data from a failing hard drive and burning to a CD/DVD.) Parted Magic is a close second as it also runs from RAM, has a few more rescue utilities but is a bit too buggy.
Knoppix is the ORIGINAL Live CD and as such merits great honor and respect, but it is no longer the best. Any Live CD that runs only from the CD runs as slow as the CD and ties up the CD drive so it cannot be used for anything else.
-
- +1
-
-
written by 1369ic, February 03, 2010
Your writers should have an additional identifier to help readers understand the slant of their particular subjectivity. One would be "thinks Linux should be more like Windows," and another "thinks Linux should be more like OS X." Another -- the one for this article, I think -- could be "will do a word count of the number of times a distro is mentioned and equate that with what's best." I mean, Ubuntu, Suse, RHEL and Knoppix? Really? Did you go by Distrowatch hits and corporate sales? Or just google search return numbers?
Take this, for example: "Power management, docking tools, and wireless ease-of-use are critical to users on the go, as is having a distro that meets those needs." What you left out at the end is "...with a dumbed down, distro-specific gui that saves preferences in some non-standard, not-user-editable location but does save the user from thinking."
Are there users like that? Sure. Are we all like that? No. So the assumption that we are is a lack of objectivity.
Also, what about the great second-tier distros like Zenwalk, Vector, AntiX, PCLinuxOS, and so on? I distro hop quite a bit and don't find Suse or Ubuntu any easier than any of them.
I know this will kill everything I've said because of the distro I'm about to name, but here goes: I use Slackware on a Sony SZ laptop. I don't have a dock, but otherwise it does all that stuff, and it took about a half an hour to install and configure. I like that, should I hose it up doing stupid, I can launch nano and go to the obvious place, edit a text file and get on with my life. What does a Suse user do if he can't get to YAST? The same thing a Windows or OS Xuser does if he can't get to his control panels. It's a huge assumption to think people do or should like that better.
So you should change this: "To help users discover the Linux distribution that's best for them..." to "To help users who want Linux to act like Windows or OS X discover the Linux distribution that's best for them..." Then you're closer to the mark. Still obviousman, but better.
joe f.
Take this, for example: "Power management, docking tools, and wireless ease-of-use are critical to users on the go, as is having a distro that meets those needs." What you left out at the end is "...with a dumbed down, distro-specific gui that saves preferences in some non-standard, not-user-editable location but does save the user from thinking."
Are there users like that? Sure. Are we all like that? No. So the assumption that we are is a lack of objectivity.
Also, what about the great second-tier distros like Zenwalk, Vector, AntiX, PCLinuxOS, and so on? I distro hop quite a bit and don't find Suse or Ubuntu any easier than any of them.
I know this will kill everything I've said because of the distro I'm about to name, but here goes: I use Slackware on a Sony SZ laptop. I don't have a dock, but otherwise it does all that stuff, and it took about a half an hour to install and configure. I like that, should I hose it up doing stupid, I can launch nano and go to the obvious place, edit a text file and get on with my life. What does a Suse user do if he can't get to YAST? The same thing a Windows or OS Xuser does if he can't get to his control panels. It's a huge assumption to think people do or should like that better.
So you should change this: "To help users discover the Linux distribution that's best for them..." to "To help users who want Linux to act like Windows or OS X discover the Linux distribution that's best for them..." Then you're closer to the mark. Still obviousman, but better.
joe f.
-
- +0
-
-
written by V. T. Eric Layton, February 03, 2010
The ONLY "best Linux distributions" are the ones that work for the individual... whichever individual we're talking about here. My seven? Slackware, Debian, CentOS, Arch, PCLOS-Phoenix, Sidux, Zenwalk. Everyone has their own seven "best" ...and they are the best.
Linux = choice.
Ain't it great? Gotta' love it!
~Eric
Scot's Newsletter Forums - Bruno's All Things Linux Administrator
Linux = choice.
Ain't it great? Gotta' love it!
~Eric
Scot's Newsletter Forums - Bruno's All Things Linux Administrator
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jon Ban, February 04, 2010
I wish Gentoo would appear in your list. It's strong contender, especially as a server or if you want to run Linux on older hardware. Installing Gentoo (although it takes time) is a great learning experience and Portage is an excellent package manager. If you're looking for an alternative to Backtrack for penetration testing, you might want to take Pentoo for a spin, which is based on Gentoo.
When it comes to laptop, I believe Ubuntu 9.10 is way up there with OpenSuse: I was amazed to have my Huawei HSDPA modem detected and running in no time. Same goes for all my client's printers, detected and running without having to go on the manufacturer's website or searching for drivers: just plug and play.
When it comes to laptop, I believe Ubuntu 9.10 is way up there with OpenSuse: I was amazed to have my Huawei HSDPA modem detected and running in no time. Same goes for all my client's printers, detected and running without having to go on the manufacturer's website or searching for drivers: just plug and play.
-
- +1
-
-
written by rjb, February 04, 2010
Hello,
I am one who feels that for all of its good points Ubuntu in my opinion is not the best for a brand new Linux user for the following reasons. 1, their instance of forcing the Pluse audio sound service on us with no easy way to not use it. I have constant sound issues when I use Ubuntu also it seems that they are one of the most inconsistent distros out there when it comes to hardware that was working fine on one release that will no longer work on the very next upgrade. This is one thing that I cannot tolerate and I find to be very frustrating. So I give them a chance every now and then but I always very quickly uninstall it due to the aggravation level I experience with it. I personally like any of the other distros out there much better than Ubuntu, one distro who does not get much mention in recent years that I am sure is due to the fact that it is developed by one individual and that is Mepis Linux. It in my opinion is every bit as user friendly as Ubuntu and I have experienced far fewer issues with my hardware when using this distro in comparison to Ubuntu.
I also admit that trying to answer this question is very difficult as the answer is extremely subjective, to me you should have at least mentioned a couple of other distros to check out. You did not have to do a full review of them as you did with Ubuntu but you could have said here are some other very good ones to check out if for some reason you do not like Ubuntu. To me for the desktop distros the list could have also mentioned, Fedora, OpenSuse, Mepis, Debian, and Mandravia as well as Sabayon. Each has their own strong points as well as weak ones and to me the reason one likes a distro better than the next is a lot like why someone likes the color blue best while the next likes red. When ever I am asked this same question by someone I will give him or her a distro to start with but I also strongly urge them to try several different ones for a while to see what suits them best. I also try to get the person involved with their local Linux user group because they will be very helpful if and when they may run into a difficulty as well as getting involved with the user forums such as this one.
rjb
I am one who feels that for all of its good points Ubuntu in my opinion is not the best for a brand new Linux user for the following reasons. 1, their instance of forcing the Pluse audio sound service on us with no easy way to not use it. I have constant sound issues when I use Ubuntu also it seems that they are one of the most inconsistent distros out there when it comes to hardware that was working fine on one release that will no longer work on the very next upgrade. This is one thing that I cannot tolerate and I find to be very frustrating. So I give them a chance every now and then but I always very quickly uninstall it due to the aggravation level I experience with it. I personally like any of the other distros out there much better than Ubuntu, one distro who does not get much mention in recent years that I am sure is due to the fact that it is developed by one individual and that is Mepis Linux. It in my opinion is every bit as user friendly as Ubuntu and I have experienced far fewer issues with my hardware when using this distro in comparison to Ubuntu.
I also admit that trying to answer this question is very difficult as the answer is extremely subjective, to me you should have at least mentioned a couple of other distros to check out. You did not have to do a full review of them as you did with Ubuntu but you could have said here are some other very good ones to check out if for some reason you do not like Ubuntu. To me for the desktop distros the list could have also mentioned, Fedora, OpenSuse, Mepis, Debian, and Mandravia as well as Sabayon. Each has their own strong points as well as weak ones and to me the reason one likes a distro better than the next is a lot like why someone likes the color blue best while the next likes red. When ever I am asked this same question by someone I will give him or her a distro to start with but I also strongly urge them to try several different ones for a while to see what suits them best. I also try to get the person involved with their local Linux user group because they will be very helpful if and when they may run into a difficulty as well as getting involved with the user forums such as this one.
rjb
-
- +0
-
-
written by 1369ic, February 04, 2010
Eric and rjb make very good points. Mepis is an excellent choice, and the AntiX I mentioned is good only because it uses the Mepis tools. Also Mandriva. I feel a speed hit when I use it, but it is very, very polished. It does things like work with a Wacom tablet when the Ubuntu Studio did not.
-
- +1
-
-
written by DodgeFan, February 05, 2010
i disagree with your desktop selection. ubuntu isnt (IMO) focused on the end user. if they were they would not rush buggy software out the door and shove it down our throats every six months.
linuxmint which is based off ubuntu is a much more user friendly and much more eye pleasing distro. what the mint team has done with ubuntu is what ubuntu should be doing with ubuntu. the argument is even more so for mint in that some of their tools are being moved over to other distros like fedora and debian
linuxmint which is based off ubuntu is a much more user friendly and much more eye pleasing distro. what the mint team has done with ubuntu is what ubuntu should be doing with ubuntu. the argument is even more so for mint in that some of their tools are being moved over to other distros like fedora and debian
-
- +1
-
-
written by Jeff Hoogland, February 06, 2010
I have to agree with the poster above me... In addition to not forcing things such as kernel updates on working systems Mint also includes full multimedia codecs by default in addition to flash + java. Three things that can be a headache for a novice user to get setup.
Plus because Mint is based on Ubuntu almost all information that applies to Ubuntu also applies to Mint.
~Jeff
Plus because Mint is based on Ubuntu almost all information that applies to Ubuntu also applies to Mint.
~Jeff
-
- +1
-
-
written by M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, February 08, 2010
I'll have to say up front that I agree with all of your choices, but I think the best *overall* Linux distro is a tie between openSUSE and Ubuntu. Let's face it, for *servers* they're all pretty much great - it boils down to stability and security and they all track Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP, Rails, etc., as well as the virtualization (Xen and KVM). And I don't think most of us do pentesting or rescue enough for that to matter, but you can certainly do all of those with a Ubuntu or openSUSE LiveCD.
So the differentiators have to be on the desktop / laptop / netbook. I personally run openSUSE, and that would have been my pick over Ubuntu for best overall distro if it hadn't been for one issue - multimedia. There, you're absolutely right - Ubuntu has the energy, especially in audio, and openSUSE doesn't.
In addition to Ubuntu Studio, there are at least three other *major* Ubuntu-based multimedia projects. There isn't a single openSUSE-based "studio" - JAD was a contender, but they folded. And you pretty much can't do multimedia on openSUSE without the Packman and VLC repositories, which aren't openSUSE projects.
So if you aren't a multimedia producer, you're probably better off with an openSUSE desktop than a Ubuntu desktop. The 11.2 KDE is wonderful, and 11.3 looks even better. Novell's OpenOffice and Evolution enhancements are impressive, and I'll take YaST over Ubuntu's system administration tools, especially package management, any day.
So the differentiators have to be on the desktop / laptop / netbook. I personally run openSUSE, and that would have been my pick over Ubuntu for best overall distro if it hadn't been for one issue - multimedia. There, you're absolutely right - Ubuntu has the energy, especially in audio, and openSUSE doesn't.
In addition to Ubuntu Studio, there are at least three other *major* Ubuntu-based multimedia projects. There isn't a single openSUSE-based "studio" - JAD was a contender, but they folded. And you pretty much can't do multimedia on openSUSE without the Packman and VLC repositories, which aren't openSUSE projects.
So if you aren't a multimedia producer, you're probably better off with an openSUSE desktop than a Ubuntu desktop. The 11.2 KDE is wonderful, and 11.3 looks even better. Novell's OpenOffice and Evolution enhancements are impressive, and I'll take YaST over Ubuntu's system administration tools, especially package management, any day.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Eric Schultz, February 10, 2010
I don't have a top seven, I do however have a top 4.
Ubuntu- I run it on a dell 1501 Inspiron, works great, I have also installed this on a system I built for my in-laws, because I got sick of fixing Windows...every other week, and to be honest, they have managed it very well, and I have had to manage only one issue, Printer and Copying...overall a good experiance for them...and they are almost 70..think about it 70 and computers....pretty good.
CentOS - I run it on my desktop-converted server- runs reliablely well..never down.
Fedora - My wife runs this on her laptop, and again, its a point click and it works for her...who is not computer savy..but it works
and I do like Open SuSe,,however it has a hang up on the video card in my laptop, so it will load, but no matter how I have tried to tinker it won't work.
I agree with Eric, I think it is up to the individual user, and what they are looking for in a computer and experiance. I do have wish lists...like a good online Movie viewer, I tryied Myth, and I still can't watch Netflix.,
Ubuntu- I run it on a dell 1501 Inspiron, works great, I have also installed this on a system I built for my in-laws, because I got sick of fixing Windows...every other week, and to be honest, they have managed it very well, and I have had to manage only one issue, Printer and Copying...overall a good experiance for them...and they are almost 70..think about it 70 and computers....pretty good.
CentOS - I run it on my desktop-converted server- runs reliablely well..never down.
Fedora - My wife runs this on her laptop, and again, its a point click and it works for her...who is not computer savy..but it works
and I do like Open SuSe,,however it has a hang up on the video card in my laptop, so it will load, but no matter how I have tried to tinker it won't work.
I agree with Eric, I think it is up to the individual user, and what they are looking for in a computer and experiance. I do have wish lists...like a good online Movie viewer, I tryied Myth, and I still can't watch Netflix.,
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ahmad Hamadallah, February 10, 2010
I am always wondering why we have many different Linux distributions.
My opinion: We should have one Linux desktop and one for server side only. And companies compete on services and support. Having many Linux distributions is weakening the Linux community to compete against Windows/Mac.
Uniting Linux Distribution Ubunto, Redhat and SUSE to produce one Linux distribution for desktop and server will produce a solid, reliable and globalize product and ready to compete Windows. But many efforts for Linux Distributions are lost in completion between Linux distributions themselves forgetting the outside big threats.
However, this is my Opinion.
My opinion: We should have one Linux desktop and one for server side only. And companies compete on services and support. Having many Linux distributions is weakening the Linux community to compete against Windows/Mac.
Uniting Linux Distribution Ubunto, Redhat and SUSE to produce one Linux distribution for desktop and server will produce a solid, reliable and globalize product and ready to compete Windows. But many efforts for Linux Distributions are lost in completion between Linux distributions themselves forgetting the outside big threats.
However, this is my Opinion.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ed Borasky, February 10, 2010
That's actually a great idea! There are two competing packaging systems - Debian / Ubuntu .deb and Red Hat / SUSE / Mandriva RPM - but there's really no other reason why a "universal standard" Linux distro couldn't be built.
Projects like the openSUSE Build Service make this a real possibility - you can make a package in either format from the source. Perhaps what's required is for RPM-based systems to be able to install .deb packages and Debian-based systems to be able to install RPM packages? A unification of the two package name and dependency spaces?
Projects like the openSUSE Build Service make this a real possibility - you can make a package in either format from the source. Perhaps what's required is for RPM-based systems to be able to install .deb packages and Debian-based systems to be able to install RPM packages? A unification of the two package name and dependency spaces?
-
- +1
-
-
written by rjb, February 10, 2010
"Why we have many linux Distributions?!.
written by Ahmad Hamadallah, February 10, 2010
I am always wondering why we have many different Linux distributions.
My opinion: We should have one Linux desktop and one for server side only. And companies compete on services and support. Having many Linux distributions is weakening the Linux community to compete against Windows/Mac.
Uniting Linux Distribution Ubunto, Redhat and SUSE to produce one Linux distribution for desktop and server will produce a solid, reliable and globalize product and ready to compete Windows. But many efforts for Linux Distributions are lost in completion between Linux distributions themselves forgetting the outside big threats. "
Thats a good question! The reason is Because Linux is a community driven OS! I also personally love choice and am truly glad that there are so many distros of Linux, to me this is a sign of just how healthy Linux really is. Thank goodness there are only a handful of Distros that are trying to commercialize it ie, Red Hat, Suse, and Ubuntu. To me I hope that it never takes over the desk top, let windoze have all the viruses and malware. I am glad that Linux works as well as it does but I do not look on it as if it is in competition with Windows or the Mac. If anyone that discovers Linux finds it useful and chooses to use it then great. However I do not look for it to ever take over for Windows anytime soon (not in my life time) at least in the US. The only way the majority of the US will migrate over to Linux on the desktop will be after the rest of the world already has and we will then be forced to follow suit to stay current, both in business and also in gaming. And to me the only outside threats have nothing to do with any particular OS but rather are threats to all computer users and consumers of any digital media (music, and movies) regardless of what OS they run and those risks are DRM and software patents. Until the majority of computer users demand that their governments pass laws that truly protect us from the abusive practices of big business we will continue to be increasingly taken advantage of. The desire for freedom that most people share I think has been one factor that explains the increasing popularity of Linux.
written by Ahmad Hamadallah, February 10, 2010
I am always wondering why we have many different Linux distributions.
My opinion: We should have one Linux desktop and one for server side only. And companies compete on services and support. Having many Linux distributions is weakening the Linux community to compete against Windows/Mac.
Uniting Linux Distribution Ubunto, Redhat and SUSE to produce one Linux distribution for desktop and server will produce a solid, reliable and globalize product and ready to compete Windows. But many efforts for Linux Distributions are lost in completion between Linux distributions themselves forgetting the outside big threats. "
Thats a good question! The reason is Because Linux is a community driven OS! I also personally love choice and am truly glad that there are so many distros of Linux, to me this is a sign of just how healthy Linux really is. Thank goodness there are only a handful of Distros that are trying to commercialize it ie, Red Hat, Suse, and Ubuntu. To me I hope that it never takes over the desk top, let windoze have all the viruses and malware. I am glad that Linux works as well as it does but I do not look on it as if it is in competition with Windows or the Mac. If anyone that discovers Linux finds it useful and chooses to use it then great. However I do not look for it to ever take over for Windows anytime soon (not in my life time) at least in the US. The only way the majority of the US will migrate over to Linux on the desktop will be after the rest of the world already has and we will then be forced to follow suit to stay current, both in business and also in gaming. And to me the only outside threats have nothing to do with any particular OS but rather are threats to all computer users and consumers of any digital media (music, and movies) regardless of what OS they run and those risks are DRM and software patents. Until the majority of computer users demand that their governments pass laws that truly protect us from the abusive practices of big business we will continue to be increasingly taken advantage of. The desire for freedom that most people share I think has been one factor that explains the increasing popularity of Linux.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ahmad Hamadallah, February 11, 2010
Thanks for comments.
No one can deny the history of Redhat and SUSE neither the popularity of Ubuntu.
But why we have many Linux Distributions!
Redhat, SUSE, Ubuntu and others are great. But why we don't have one united Linux Distributions for everyone and companies continue competing in applications and services level only.
Why Linux Distributions competing themselves?!
Again, this is my Opinion.
No one can deny the history of Redhat and SUSE neither the popularity of Ubuntu.
But why we have many Linux Distributions!
Redhat, SUSE, Ubuntu and others are great. But why we don't have one united Linux Distributions for everyone and companies continue competing in applications and services level only.
Why Linux Distributions competing themselves?!
Again, this is my Opinion.
-
- +0
-
-
written by V. T. Eric Layton, February 11, 2010
Ahmad Hamadallah,
First of all... where are you getting this misconception that there is a competition between GNU/Linux distributions?
The ONLY real instance of competition between GNU/Linux distributions is between the COMMERCIAL GNU/Linux distributions. In other words, the for-profit/pay-to-use distributions like SuSE and RedHat. They are commercial for-profit companies. They compete for a slice of the commercial GNU/Linux market share. Even Canonical (Ubuntu) is a commercial enterprise whose main goal is to make a profit.
The VAST majority of all the other GNU/Linux distributions currently in existence and still being maintained are not-for-profit endeavors. For example, Mint Linux doesn't care how many people downloaded and installed Mepis today. All the maintainers of Mint Linux care about is improving their distribution and offering a quality distribution to anyone who wants to use it.
I believe you're confusing "competition" with "brand loyalty". Many of us have our favorite distribution. That doesn't mean there was some sort of grueling competition between distributions to whittle down to the choice that we eventually made. It just means that we use the one we like best. That's not competition. That's favoritism and brand loyalty.
If you really want ONE standard operating that everyone can use with the only differences being the application software and other miscellaneous customizations, might I recommend Microsoft Windows to you.
The rest of us like freedom of choice and non-standardization.
And that, as you say, is just my opinion.
Regards,
First of all... where are you getting this misconception that there is a competition between GNU/Linux distributions?
The ONLY real instance of competition between GNU/Linux distributions is between the COMMERCIAL GNU/Linux distributions. In other words, the for-profit/pay-to-use distributions like SuSE and RedHat. They are commercial for-profit companies. They compete for a slice of the commercial GNU/Linux market share. Even Canonical (Ubuntu) is a commercial enterprise whose main goal is to make a profit.
The VAST majority of all the other GNU/Linux distributions currently in existence and still being maintained are not-for-profit endeavors. For example, Mint Linux doesn't care how many people downloaded and installed Mepis today. All the maintainers of Mint Linux care about is improving their distribution and offering a quality distribution to anyone who wants to use it.
I believe you're confusing "competition" with "brand loyalty". Many of us have our favorite distribution. That doesn't mean there was some sort of grueling competition between distributions to whittle down to the choice that we eventually made. It just means that we use the one we like best. That's not competition. That's favoritism and brand loyalty.
If you really want ONE standard operating that everyone can use with the only differences being the application software and other miscellaneous customizations, might I recommend Microsoft Windows to you.
The rest of us like freedom of choice and non-standardization.
And that, as you say, is just my opinion.
Regards,
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ed Borasky, February 11, 2010
Freedom of choice - sure. But non-standardization? I'm not so sure about that. When you separate out the binary package format and naming issue, the rest of the community and enterprise distros have a lot of commonality. I personally prefer openSUSE, but if Novell suddenly decided they weren't going to support it any more and devoted their full resources to SLED/SLES, I'd simply go with another community distro without a hideously large learning curve.
The places where there *isn't* standardization - packaging, desktops, audio, wifi - are the very places where Linux is harder to use than Windows or Macs. There's too much choice - some projects *should* die! I'm pretty sure I could live without XFCE, Enlightenment, WindowMaker, IceWM and maybe even LXDE. A year from now I'll probably be able to live without Gnome. ;-) I wouldn't cry a single tear if reiserfs, jfs and xfs vanished from the kernel. And I most certainly wouldn't miss all of the broken, half-finished audio tools and subsystems that litter the "Linux Audio Workstation" space.
Distros? Do there really need to be dozens of Debian derivatives? What the bleep is wrong with Debian? It's a beautiful, solid distro and IIRC still the largest single integrated collection of open source software that for the most part works together seamlessly. Do there need to be Red Hat Enterprise, four or five RHEL-binary-compatible distros *and* Fedora? I'm not even convinced there needs to be a SUSE Enterprise - everything I've seen of openSUSE looks enterprise-quality to me.
The places where there *isn't* standardization - packaging, desktops, audio, wifi - are the very places where Linux is harder to use than Windows or Macs. There's too much choice - some projects *should* die! I'm pretty sure I could live without XFCE, Enlightenment, WindowMaker, IceWM and maybe even LXDE. A year from now I'll probably be able to live without Gnome. ;-) I wouldn't cry a single tear if reiserfs, jfs and xfs vanished from the kernel. And I most certainly wouldn't miss all of the broken, half-finished audio tools and subsystems that litter the "Linux Audio Workstation" space.
Distros? Do there really need to be dozens of Debian derivatives? What the bleep is wrong with Debian? It's a beautiful, solid distro and IIRC still the largest single integrated collection of open source software that for the most part works together seamlessly. Do there need to be Red Hat Enterprise, four or five RHEL-binary-compatible distros *and* Fedora? I'm not even convinced there needs to be a SUSE Enterprise - everything I've seen of openSUSE looks enterprise-quality to me.
-
- +0
-
-
written by rjb, February 11, 2010
All you guys bitching about all the choice that is presented in Linux and all the various distros of it obviously are too dense to get it. Hey guys Linux is all about freedom, and choice. If you like to be spoon fed everything and have no choices to make, ie being satisfied to remaining uneducated then stay away from Linux and instead stick with Microsuck! The majority of posts here complaining about all the choice presented with Linux just do not get it! If it annoys you that much PLEASE go away and bitch where someone will actually give a crap about your little petty complaints. Please go back to Windows and leave the rest of us alone who do get what Linux is all about! All the distros that exist along with all the different desktops exist for a reason and they all have their place and obviously there is enough interest in all of them that they are still around. And all the half finished projects that are around ie all the audio tools that you complain about along with the many other bits and pieces of half finished software that you will encounter in your travels in the FOSS landscape are if the truth be know were probably started by someone for a senior year computer science project that they needed to do and they chose to create a tool that perhaps they wanted and that did what they wanted it to do. That doesn't mean that anyone else would find it useful but is out there in the wild just due to the fact that it is GPL software. Much of the so called unfinished software out there obviously did not generate enough of an interest to attract other developers and so they remain in your opinion unfinished. If you do not like them there is no one that is making you even take a look at it. Just about all software in the GPL space started out its life as an interesting project to the original developer that was pursued for his or her own reasons and who were kind enough to share their labors with the rest of us just in case that there might be someone else that would find it useful. Most of these projects do not attract a following but every now and then a killer app comes along, to name a few, Linux (this OS runs the majority of the internet that most of us now take for granted, did you know that Google uses Linux on their servers?), The Gimp (a very viable substitute for Adobe PhotoShop that costs 699 US, PHP (one of the most important back end scripting languages that a lot of websites use on the server side) Then there is Python, Pearl, Ruby and Ruby on rails, Inkscape (quickly becoming a very viable substitute for Adobe's and Corel's drawing packages that cost hundreds of dollars each) Scribus (that can and is being used by some companies as a replacement for Adobe's Indesign and Pagemaker and Quark express both which will cost you a few hundred bills as well) Then there is Open Office that to me is every bit as capable as Microsoft Office, Blender (that can be used as a substitute as 3D Studio Max, and Maya that will set you back thousands of dollars to use them commercially). All of the packages I have mentioned can be freely downloaded and used freely for what ever purpose the end user chooses to use them for with no licensing fees what so ever. You can even make copies of all of it and give them to anyone you choose to. Does this mean that there aren't some holes in the tools available on Linux? No there are still some tools missing that a professional would need that do not exist yet mainly in the higher end CAD CAM, Video production, and Audio production tools, however in this area there is far more available that many professional music content creators choose to use than video tools.
With all this said ALL of these different pieces of software ARE FREE!!! No one is making anyone use them and many many people, average joes like myself but also professionals find them to be good enough even if there may be a feature or two missing here or there and have discovered that they are very useful. On the other hand if your experience has been different and you do not find all the free stuff to be useful and valuable then you have the freedom to move on and not use any of it. But please please give the rest of us freedom from all the BITCHING.
With all this said ALL of these different pieces of software ARE FREE!!! No one is making anyone use them and many many people, average joes like myself but also professionals find them to be good enough even if there may be a feature or two missing here or there and have discovered that they are very useful. On the other hand if your experience has been different and you do not find all the free stuff to be useful and valuable then you have the freedom to move on and not use any of it. But please please give the rest of us freedom from all the BITCHING.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Desmond Wilson, May 19, 2010
rjb, I totally agree with you and I'm a relatively new seasoned novice!
Once the uninitiated have been educated, then there will be more appreciation for generous distro contributions from "Linuxian" philanthropists.
Once the uninitiated have been educated, then there will be more appreciation for generous distro contributions from "Linuxian" philanthropists.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Matt Jones, June 08, 2010
As far as I am aware Ubuntu is the only distro allows me to use my company work email via the Microsoft Exchange plugin in Evolution.
Exchange compatibility is a huge plus for those wanting to use Linux in a Windows dominated work place.
Exchange compatibility is a huge plus for those wanting to use Linux in a Windows dominated work place.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
Show/hide comment formYou must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
