Question:
What is the best operating system in Linux?
dozz55
2009-10-26 01:06:29 UTC
out of Debian & Ubuntu 9.10 Ive tried Mint , Mandriva, Gentoo ,open suse, Fedora, Im down to Debian or Ubuntu What do u think is the better,,,,?????
Eleven answers:
Linux Mint 11
2009-10-27 13:22:46 UTC
Ubuntu 9.10 comes with the ext4 filesystem as default which I thoroughly recommend

http://releases.ubuntu.com/releases/9.10/?rc



Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala) User Guide

http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Karmic



Also well worth a look



Ubuntu 9.04

http://releases.ubuntu.com/9.04/



Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty Jackalope) User Guide

http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Jaunty





LUg.
2009-10-29 01:42:34 UTC
You will find that out of all the available distributions out there they are based on Debain, Ubuntu, Slackware, Red Hat and Mandriva. The best is simply a matter of choice. The commercial Linux have support and normally for a fee, The open source Linux, you get support from their web sites or those who use that version of Linux. Open Solaris has a Unix based operating system, enhanced by other systems to make it user and GUI friendly, similar to MAC operating system, but MAC writes their own software and the software only is what makes it a MAC.



Most Linux distributions, basically have the same files and programs available, and share a common operating system as stated, the Kernel itself. Windows runs off a Kernel also.



Mint Linux is Ubuntu based.

PCLinuxos is Mandriva based.

Fedora is Red Hat based.



It's not possible to determine which Linux Distribution is the best.
Goodash@92
2009-10-26 01:21:28 UTC
For Desktop Uses:

ubuntu is the ultimate, debian is excellent.



For Server Purpose:

debian is the ultimate, ubuntu is excellent.



For Beginners:

Prefer Ubuntu because:

1. It's fully customizable.

2. You can run it off a CD.

3. Downloadable Wallpapers, themes, Desktop Environments (DEs), and loaded with cool Screensavers.

4. So secure it dosn't even need a FireWall.

5. Very cool eyecandy visual effects.

6. Comes with FireFox There's probably hundreds of cool features that I'm too lazy to list.

BUT if you want to run a only 90 meg machine off ur USB drive, Damn Small Linux (DSL) is your choice!
snow_skimmer
2009-10-26 01:18:37 UTC
it really depends on what you want to do and how good you are at setting up and maintaining linux.



these are my personal observations

ubuntu is the easiest to setup

knoppix has the best hardware detection

opensuse has the most flexible autodetect and plug and play system

i usually work with businesses that run redhat on their servers

i run either mandriva or gentoo on the servers i work on

and i'm using mandriva right now on my home pc and laptop



i started learning on dragonlinux and slackware then moved to redhat and mandriva so i'm partial to any system with a good package manager and multimedia support
2009-10-26 01:17:21 UTC
Some time back, I wanted to be using a free OS. So I turned to Linux. I tried my hand at Debian and Ubuntu.



It was nightmare while I had to connect a new printer, camera or any new device. I spent many days figuring out how to do things.



At the end I shelled out USD 70 and bought the much hated Windows XP. In 40 minutes I have everything in place.



Let us not make OS or Programming languages into religions...
Maniraj
2009-10-26 01:19:30 UTC
Always RED HAT is the best than the others for a professional



the others can be used for home ,personal and the other use but for administration and maintaining a network and internet RED HAT is the only best OS in the world

than the windows products
Rahul
2009-10-26 01:18:25 UTC
no doubt it's Fedora & ubuntu

both has it's on roles use linux to save your computer from viruses vireses won't work in them.

to download fedora for free go to this site www.fedoraproject.com

to download or request a free cd 0f ubunt go to www.canonial.com
TBRMInsanity
2009-10-26 12:42:54 UTC
The greatest strength about Linux is choice. There isn't a best distro out there, just the best distro for you and how your going to use it. I strongly recommend you fill out the following quiz ( http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php?firsttime=true ) to find out the best distro for you and what you need it to do.
2009-10-26 01:12:20 UTC
I think Ubuntu is better.
baby girl
2009-10-26 01:16:54 UTC
Its Puppy Linux what is wrong with that?!? Woof Woof!!!
Nobody
2009-10-27 11:56:32 UTC
Your question really doesn't make much sense. "Linux" is not an operating system (before giving me a thumbs down actually take the 30 seconds to google it), it is a KERNEL. That said, if I am interpreting this question correct, as "What is the best operating system that uses the linux kernel", I would have to respond by saying that there is no correct answer to the question. Each linux disto has it's advantages and downfalls. Unless you need something really specific, such as, update repositories that update their software with cutting/bleeding edge packages, pre-compiled binaries (CERTAIN ONES), you write software for a carrer, or a really good community to go to for help, it comes down to personal preference.



Most linux distro websites usually have a type of "who this linux distro" is for page/forum sticky to help you decide if their distro is for you. For example, my favorate distro (archlinux) lists this on it's wiki.







" Arch vs LFS



LFS, or Linux From Scratch, is just that; the minimal base package set for a functional GNU/Linux system, manually compiled and configured from scratch. LFS is as minimal as it gets, and offers an excellent and educational process of building a base system. Arch provides these very same packages, plus a BSD-style init, a few extra tools and the powerful pacman package manager as its base system, already compiled for i686/x86-64. LFS provides no online repositories; sources are manually obtained, compiled and installed with make. (Several manual methods of package management exist, and are mentioned in LFS Hints) Along with the minimal Arch base system, the Arch community and devs provide and maintain many thousands of binary packages installable via pacman as well as PKGBUILD build scripts for use with ABS- the Arch (source) Build System. Arch also includes the makepkg tool for expediently building or customizing .pkg.tar.gz packages, readily installable by pacman. Judd Vinet built Arch from scratch, and then wrote pacman in C. Historically, Arch was sometimes, therefore, humorously described simply as "Linux, with a nice package manager."

Arch vs CRUX



* Q: Is Arch Based on CRUX?

* A: No. Arch is independently developed, was built from scratch and is not based on any other GNU/Linux distribution.



Before creating Arch, Judd Vinet admired and used CRUX, a minimalist distro created by Per Lidén. Originally inspired by ideas in common with CRUX, Arch was built from scratch, and pacman was then coded in C. The 2 share some guiding principles; for instance, both are architecture optimized, minimalist and K.I.S.S. Both ship with ports-like systems, use *BSD-style init systems and, like *BSD, both provide a minimal base environment to build upon. Arch features pacman, which handles binary system package management and works seamlessly with ABS, the Arch ports-like system. CRUX uses a community contributed system called prt-get, which, in combination with its own ports system, handles dependency resolution, but builds all packages from source, (though the CRUX base installation is i686 binary). Arch officially supports x86-64 and i686, whereas CRUX is i686 only. Arch is a rolling release and features a large array of binary package repositories as well as the AUR. CRUX provides a more slimmed-down officially supported ports system in addition to a modest community repo.

Arch vs Slackware



The mighty Slackware and Arch are quite similar in that both are simple distributions focused on elegance and minimalism. Slackware is famous for its lack of branding and completely vanilla packages, from the kernel up. Arch typically applies patching only to avoid severe breakage and preserve functionality, if absolutely necessary. Both use BSD-style init scripts. Arch supplies a package management system in pacman which, unlike Slackware's standard tools, offers automatic dependency resolution and allows for more automated system upgrades. Slackware users typically prefer their method of manual dependency resolution, citing the level of system control it grants them. Arch is a rolling-release system. Slackware is seen as more conservative in its release cycle, preferring proven stable packages. Arch is more 'bleeding edge' in this respect. Arch offers ABS, an actual ports-like system. The (unofficial) Slackbuild system is very similar to Arch's AUR concept. Slack users will generally be quite comfortable with most aspects of Arch. "


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...