I find this to be an interesting discussion. The "media" tends to label Red
Hat as a "serious" and "corporate" linux; while mandrake is dubbed the
"baby" linux. I guess I should know better than to trust what I hear on TV
and the like, but since trying both myself, I know this is a bit exagerated.
I find mandrake every bit as customizable and functional as red hat. i am,
however, heavily biased towards mandrake since I tried Red Hat 7 first, on
which I could get not a damn thing (zip, printer, mounting other partitions)
to work, even when following the instructions in the official book. Or the
fact that half the power tools won't run under 7 (i've heard this is a
problem with a broken glibc). I know that it's fixable, but is that my job.
but every mandrake install i do, everything is detected and effortless.
not to mention that I've found their tech support to be impatient with
non-enormus-corporate-server problems. just my exp.
