On 5/9/05, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu <m3freak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > There's a lot of talk around the Linux camp about Ubuntu: why? I've read > some reviews about it and a few snippets here and there of users > opinions on it, but I still don't get it. > > Short of installing Ubuntu myself, can anyone give me a quick run down > on why Ubuntu is apparently rising like a rocket? Any big differences > between Ubuntu and Fedora, besides the fact that Ubuntu is based on > bleeding-edge Debian? > I've been using RH since RPM was a perl script. When I was finally exposed to the power of apt, I haven't looked back. I still do RH for systems that need the application support, but for my personal systems it's all Debian. Ubuntu is Debian based, but they update more quickly. There's pros and cons to this. If you are doing pure development work, you probably don't want your platform changing all the time. Ubuntu concentrates on i386 systems, which allows them to update more quickly. Debian doesn't stablize until all platforms that it supports are working. Debian's biggest fault was their installer, which I think is no longer an issue. The Woody installer was unuseable. But, the new Sarge is very good, especially the netinst/businesscard CD. I think Ubuntu has its own installer. Yum comes close, but apt and the rich Debian repositories is worth the switch. -- Jiann-Ming Su "I have to decide between two equally frightening options. If I wanted to do that, I'd vote." --Duckman
