Redhat vs. Mandrake

[jammer42777]

What are the pros and cons of each?

[bdg1983]

Not one of these again... :rolleyes:

Why list jot down your hardware you are planning to install Linux on and whatever software or what exactly you will use Linux for and visit both of their websites.

That way you can check their Hardware Compatability Lists against your hardware and see what software is included and other features.

Someone may suggest Mandrake as it installs and runs just fine on their pc, but may not work on yours. The same goes for Redhat. Do a bit of research and you may save yourself a lot of problems.

I would also suggest you go through the other threads here in General on the daily distro wars.

[bdg1983]

Come on everyone, pile in... :D

[tamur]

I've been using RH for a while now and it's okay. Their new update agent is slick, but limited to bug fixes, errata, etc. for that release. As far as I know you can't use it to update to the next release.

I also use kde as a window manager. New releases of kde are handled poorly at best by RH.

Another complaint I have with Redhat is that their releases are woefully behind the most current stable kernel.

Finally, although I have never used Mandrake, I have found the MandrakeUsers site to be really helpful.

All of the above is only opinion. If I were not using linux for work, I probably would use debian.

(Remember -- Whatever you install, get the release with the latest stable kernel and the latest release of Xfree86...that should take care of most of your hardware problems.)

[ 12 September 2001: Message edited by: tamur ]

[Taizong]

My Linux evolution:

First box ever: Slack 6 ; ran great, tough to use and configure for a newb, but I had to learn

Second box: OpenBSD ; ran great, but again, for a novice it took too much sweat time (ended up as the web server in the end)

Third box: RedHat 5.2 ; hated it, truthfully

Fourth box: Mandrake 7 ; Didn't really like this too much either, but it was tolerable. Also, by about this time, I started to get an actual grasp of Linux and was able to fix my hardware and networking problems and recompile the kernel with ease.

This box: Mandrake 8 ; I like it a whole lot. I had issues with OpenGL and the default running of kdm, as well as some Voodoo 5 issues (but all distros have that issue). Even though, had em fixed in less then an hour.

[nagchampa]

Mandrake is based on RH....

they are pretty damn close to eachother. I am using red hat on my laptop because it was the best one that detected and worked with all my HD.. Mandrake didn't...

Mandrake is slick so is RH.. you really wanna learn *nix... get slack 8

[Okie]

i have a 2 year old Gateway with a 400 MHz celeron, 192 megs RAM, 2 harddrives, one CDRW, 3dfx 3 3000 Voodoo...

i have tryed both Redhat 7.1 & Mandrake 8.0 on it, and i have better performance from Redhat, it detects all my hardware and configures it perfictly and seems to perform much better than Mandrake...

i am not saying Mandrake is a bad distro, it is just that Mandrake ran a little bit top-heavy on this computer, i dont know why as i am a newbie Linux user that refuese to continue to shovel buckets of money to M$FT for another bug infested OS, especially with the product activation (that is such a ripoff to consumers) and a slap in the face to paying customers, so not i am learning Linux, i do like Linux very much, even though it is a free & opensource OS i will still spend money on retail boxed sets just to show my support of Opensource & the GNU\GPL...

i only wish more Windoze users would have the courage to learn Linux, it is not really any harder than Windoze it is just very different under the hood and that is where the learning curve is is figuring out how to tune and tweak the Linux system to run just the way you want it & trouble shooting problems, i turned my back on M$FT and havent looked back...


GO Linux!!!