I, too, have been exploring alternatives since Rh's announcement. I had been using Mandrake before I switched to RH about a year ago (first 8.2 and then 9.0 - which I'm now using). I've been very pleased with RH from the start and kept current with all the updates in kernel and apps as they came along. A piece of cake to maintain. As a trial I ordered the Debian CDs (Woody, not Sarge) and gave the installation a try. Major pains followed. After the third attempt to install Debian (not as a dual-boot but all by itself on a Pentium II 300 MHz 80 Gig Dell machine I'd been running the RH on), I finally gave up after messy failures. I reinstalled the RH 9.0 from original CDs, updated everything with apt-get and was back in operation in just over an hour. It's possible that I received bad CDs from the online source for my Debian OS and I may yet give it another try with isos I download myself but I did notice this difference between the RH and Debian installs: My one semi-correct install of Debian was incomplete in that the Network did not install (I could not get the system to recognize the NIC) and in RH that was never a problem). I've read the RH docs on installing Fedora and with this history of Debian problems, I'd sure appreciate any "heads-up" warnings that are not mentioned in those docs from those on this list who have installed Fedora from the isos. Thanks in advance. Karl L On Wednesday 31 December 2003 10:38, Krikket wrote: > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Haney wrote: > > Okay, kind of a stupid and maybe useless question, but as I"ve been > > really tinkering with (gasp!) SUSE, I'm kind of wondering how stable FC1 > > really is? I mean I realize there are issues, otherwise this list > > wouldn't be very useful, but how well does it work as a Workstation (not > > server) as compared with any other distros especially RH9? > > I can't compare to RH9, but I *can* compare it to SuSE 9.0 > > Don't switch to SuSE. Trust me on this one. Baaad juju. After seing > what was available, I decided to go with SuSE for my first real exposure > to Linux in 6+ years. (And I had no experience with a Linux GUI at that > point.) > > If you needs are met 100% by what's available on the distro CDs, then SuSE > could work for you. But adding anything else? Damn near impossible. > There are some things I *couldn't* get installed under SuSE, that were a > breeze with Fedora. I'm not the only one wih those problems either. > > On the positive side, there are more GUI controls for things. So if > that's what you're looking for, then maybe it's for you. > > Also you can *forget* right now about editing files by hand and expecting > them to stay that way, and work correctly. The SuSE likes to rewrite > stuff on you without warning. > > In short, the problems I had with SuSE 9.0 were great enough that I > abandoned it, even though I paid the $80 for the Professional version. > > Using Fedora, I've had a *lot* fewer problems. > > Krikket > > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
