On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Philip Webb wrote:
060101 Chris White wrote:
On Saturday 31 December 2005 22:35, C. Beamer wrote:
Fedora: 3.45
*Gentoo: 3.75*
Mandriva: 3.70
Suse: 3.40
Ubuntu: 3.90
Word of advice, things like this are generally flawed.
Quite true, but I believe CB's point was simply
that Gentoo is up there with the other well-known distros for usability.
The best distro for your needs is the one
that best suits what you expect your system to do.
Again, people out there should know that Gentoo may well be that distro.
Gentoo is not difficult, but requires on-going attention & input from users:
in return, you get a system which you can tune to do just what you want.
My own recent experience trying to update the OS in my back-up machine was
that Mandriva 2006 wouldn't install, Kubuntu could not be configured,
as it refused to recognise the password (it uses the same for user & root),
while Suse required downloading & writing 5 ISO's;
Ubuntu, of course, is only for those who are willing to use Gnome.
Finally, I got Mandriva 2005 installed & working well enough,
but only with a lot of time & effort (the machine too slow for Gentoo).
OTOH I've been using Gentoo in my main box without problems since 031005
& have a fully upto-date environment which does just what I want it to do.
Gentoo is probably suitable for a lot more users than realise it.
How slow is too slow for Gentoo? I'm using Gentoo on a 233MHz laptop.
It's not fast, but it's perfectly adequate. Install did take over a
week, I'll admit.
I'm curious because I seem to do a lot of squeezing the most out of
underpowered computers, and Gentoo has been my friend in these projects.
I would like to know what conditions are not well suited to Gentoo.
Michael
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
