George Bonser said: //http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/features/opensource/390823.html // //zdnet did a review of Debian. Included are such comments as: // //Debian GNU/Linux 2.0 ($38.95 direct) ... //...Windows users should steer clear of Debian. // //...The company says it will include a new application installer in Debian //GNU/Linux 2.1. // //Uhm, which "company" would this be? // //...Debian is distributed by Linux Press... // //Yeah, and a whole bunch of other people. Basicly the article's slant is //be afraid of Debian, be very afraid. -------
Oh, and consider the page before it, on Caldera: http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/features/opensource/390822.html "One of Caldera's greatest strengths is KDE (Kool Desktop Environment), a graphical desktop environment that essentially makes Linux look and act like Windows." Sure, KDE is a pretty good (I've used it also). But, the whole purpose in choosing Linux is because you would rather not use MS Windows. Aside from that, the quoted statement above just *sounds* like, "This is as 'good' as Windows 95, so we like it." As far as comparisons go, for the distributions listed there, I've used RedHat. Debian, to me, has been 400% easier to manage than RedHat. The difference between RPM and Debian's package system is insane; RPMs made a total mess of my system. Also, things like the PPP setup on Debian was much easier. "Red Hat is known for its package manager (RPM), an open-source program that is used in many other distributions as well. RPM lets you safely install and uninstall applications, avoid conflicts between programs, and even upgrade the kernel itself without having to reinstall your system software or files." That's crazy, and it's certainly not true. "If you're trying Linux for the first time, Red Hat is the best choice." If I had to choose for the first time again, there is no doubt in my mind that I would go with Debian. Period. b.
