On 16/11/06, Chong Yu Meng <chongym@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Actually, I find all discussions concerning the relative merits of each distro a bit misleading. I have not yet installed a Linux distribution that did not require a lot of tweaking, and I've tried a lot of them -- Slackware, TurboLinux, SpectraLinux, Suse and Caldera (before it went over to the Dark Side). Not one worked the way I wanted it to, on first boot, after installation. I remember way back in 1996, when I tried Slackware for the first time, and it took me 3 months to get it setup just the way I wanted it. Of course, now it takes me a much shorter time to get Linux to a "productive" state, but there is still a ton of tweaking -- that hasn't changed. You only have to look at Stanton Finley's guide to installing Fedora to see that this is not restricted to my experience.
It occurred to me just after posting that what Ubuntu does really well (especially for new people who don't know what to expect and don't have anything they know they want to set up) is a painless installation. That's actually what that table tells you: 1 CD Most packages to get stuff going available on that CD. Easy access to extra repos after install, rather than manually adding them at the command line. Friendlier and more responsive (vs my FC5 experience) GUI for getting new packages. Yes there's tweaking involved, especially patented multimedia related tweaking. No, it's not massively more accessible, it's just that little bit more accessible that it comes into reach. (and they have a cooler logo) -- imalone
