Comparing SuSE and Slackware

[Lend273]

I am by no means a seasoned Linux veteran, but I did install both SuSe 7.0 and Slackware
7.0.
I got Suse running with no problems at all, and all of my harware configured properly.
I ran out of patience with Slackware. It did not pick up my harware right out of the box like SuSe did.
Now based on what others have said, I'm sure Slackware is a fine distro, but for a newbie
SuSe worked better for me.
Call me lazy, but I kinda like having things work right from the get-go. It didnt make sense to me to have to put countless hours into setup on Slack.
Maybe more knowledgable Slack users could shed some light on things that Slackware does much better than SuSe.
By the way, I now use Storm and much prefer
a Debian distro. Libranet is great also.

Just my 2 cents.

Len

[aph3x]

im thinking about giving Slack a try. has anyone out there used SuSE and Slack that can compare the two for me? thanks :D

[twofoolish2b]

Well I have tried both SuSe and Slackware, and I must say that Slackware is the winner. It may take a little longer to setup and it's hard at first but when Slackware is put on a system with good hardware there is no other O/S that even compares.

[aph3x]

Originally posted by twofoolish2b:
Well I have tried both SuSe and Slackware, and I must say that Slackware is the winner. It may take a little longer to setup and it's hard at first but when Slackware is put on a system with good hardware there is no other O/S that even compares.

why do you say Slackware is better though? :)

[twofoolish2b]

Well I think it's as close to true Unix as you can get, but don't take my word for it read the "About Slackware" on the front page of http://www.linuxmafia.org/ and find out why.

[Big_daddy]

If you want "real" unix, go to FreeBSD

[element-x]

ok, as many others, I'm not an expert with linux...though I have used both SuSE and Slackware.

I prefer slackware for a couple of reasons:
I like the packaging system(some would disagree, but i think it's better than YaST(2) or RPM)
I like the fact that if you install something by source, then a package, it won't complain about dependancies and all this other garbage.
I also like the init...just because :D

Oh yea, I've played around with Slack since 4.x and oddly even if my hardware wasn't 'auto-detected' when I was installing it, the time to get the un-(auto)detected hardware setup was next to nothing.

Mainly that is my reasoning, but as I would normally say, try them both out, see what YOU, like.

:cool: Slackware :cool:

[aph3x]

Originally posted by Big_daddy:
If you want "real" unix, go to FreeBSD

i am already running fbsd, and i must say, i like it... :) so Slackware is more Unix-ish eh? hmm, maybe ill give it a whirl...

edit: btw, has anyone heard of Rock Linux? i heard on another board that it was a pretty hardcore OS; more hacker-ish i think was how it was described.
http://www.rocklinux.org

thanks for all your replies :D

[ 09 February 2001: Message edited by: aph3x ]