Talk:Comparison of Linux distributions/Archive 2

message: Why no mention of Red Hat Enterprise Linux? Quite a significant distro. Massysett 04:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: ...so add it. ¦ Reisio 13:16, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Provided of course that it wasn't purposefully removed by somebody.  I was wondering the same thing.  It should most definately be there.  Might want to check through the edit history.—Kbolino 07:03, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RHEL? 

message: This article needs to be cleaned up.  It lacks information of the encyclopedic importance of the data presented; just as an example, why is it important whether Kurumin uses KDE or Gnome by default, and what does it mean for a distribution to be "LSB compatible"?  Why is country of origin at all important?  —donhalcon╤ 21:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The default desktop environment seems like a notable point of comparison--it is a common and noticeable point of difference.  The LSB compatible column has a link to LSB, which states that it dictates "standard libraries, a number of commands and utilities that extend the POSIX standard, the layout of the file system hierarchy, run levels, and several extensions to the X Window System."  I think this is clear enough, but feel free to add a footnote if you think people won't click on LSB to see what it means.  I agree that the country of origin can probably be omitted. --Karnesky 23:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree this article could use some cleanup also.  I think we need to trash the table approach with this one.  netkid91 03:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup needed

message: It desperately needs cleanup/corrections
=== General ===
* The "Target Audience" listed for Fedora Core is "Workstation, Server, Enthusiast"
* The "Target Audience" listed for Ubuntu/Kubuntu etc. is "Beginner, Desktop, Workstation, Enthusiast, Server
Having used both distros (I was running Ubuntu/Kubuntu 6.06 as I wrote this) I can honestly say that Fedora Core should show the same "target market" as Ubuntu.  Granted it's a 5 CD/1 DVD Default installation process, but the Anaconda GUI is very user friendly (much more so than the console-baaed Debian Installer that K/X/E/Ubuntu uses). And why wouldn't Fedora Core target "Desktop" users as well?  They've have always had a very polished Desktop and this is especially true of Fedora Core 5.  If they went to all that trouble to make it nice looking and easy to use, then I'd say it's also targeted at the "Desktop Market"
-----
Mandriva's "Target Audience" is shown as "Desktop, Workstation, Server".
For years, Mandrake (Mandriva's Predecessor) was known as a "newbie friendly" distro.  I last used it in 1999. From what I remember the installer was friendlier than either Fedora or Ubuntu is today.
So Mandriva is missing "beginner"  (Unless their installer has gone to pot in recent years).
Mepis: again, "Desktop, Workstation, Server"?  It's another newbie friendly distro. Not only that it's installed from a LiveCD. How much simpler can you get?  I've used it myself.
PCLinuxOS.  Same as Mepis, if not more so. I've used it.
Xandros.  "Workstation, Server"  WTF?  Another "user friendly" distro. Heck the commercial version mimics the functionality of Windows as much as possible (almost as much as Linspire does).  They only recently got into the server market.
=== Technical ===
Mandriva - Package Manger listed is "Rpmdrake".  Nothing else.  What do you suppose "RPMdrake" is a front-end for?
=== Features ===
Ubuntu - Default Office suite:  "OpenOffice.org & Gnome Office"
Ubuntu goes out of it's way to only give you one piece of software per use in it's default install.  In the case of an Office Suite, that would be OpenOffice.org.  Gnome Office is NOT part of the default installation.
Is the "Default GUI Styling" really necessary?  Oh wait, somebody asked the same question already....
Why not default icons too? ;-)
Somebody correctly pointed out (quite some time ago  - see above) that if you do a "desktop" installation with Debian, you will get GNOME (and only GNOME).  Therefore "none" is incorrect.
If that doesn't change soon, I may take the liberty to do so myself (and possibly a few other changes that I've mentioned as well).
I'm sure there are plenty of items that I've missed.  These are just the ones that I'm personally aware of...
There. I feel better now. ;-)
--angrykeyboarder 05:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's amazing, isn't it, how a little rant can make you feel better, even though you haven't contributed anything. Be bold! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I have removed the disputed tag from the article. You talk about small errors and possible changes to the articles at several places but don't show that the factual accuracy of this article is disputed. Yes, there might be mistakes in the article, but you can correct them. The only things that might be disputed are things like whether the default GUI should be listed (IMHO it should), but this is not about factual accuracy. Deleteme42 10:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is an absolute mess 

message: Ubuntu - Default Office suite:  "OpenOffice.org & Gnome Office"
Ubuntu goes out of it's way to only give you one piece of software per use in it's default install.  In the case of an Office Suite, that would be OpenOffice.org.  Gnome Office is NOT part of the default installation.
Is the "Default GUI Styling" really necessary?  Oh wait, somebody asked the same question already....
Why not default icons too? ;-)
Somebody correctly pointed out (quite some time ago  - see above) that if you do a "desktop" installation with Debian, you will get GNOME (and only GNOME).  Therefore "none" is incorrect.
If that doesn't change soon, I may take the liberty to do so myself (and possibly a few other changes that I've mentioned as well).
I'm sure there are plenty of items that I've missed.  These are just the ones that I'm personally aware of...
There. I feel better now. ;-)
--angrykeyboarder 05:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's amazing, isn't it, how a little rant can make you feel better, even though you haven't contributed anything. Be bold! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I have removed the disputed tag from the article. You talk about small errors and possible changes to the articles at several places but don't show that the factual accuracy of this article is disputed. Yes, there might be mistakes in the article, but you can correct them. The only things that might be disputed are things like whether the default GUI should be listed (IMHO it should), but this is not about factual accuracy. Deleteme42 10:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features 

message: Since the same set of CDs is used for PPC and PPC64, I would reason that they are really PPC compiled versions that by grace of the architecture will run on PPC64 machines, too. Compare with Mac OS X#Mac OS X v10.4 (Tiger). Can anyone comment? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 18:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's exactly what I'm saying. However, Fedora etc. are reported in the table as being available as a ppc64 port, which I'm arguing is technically incorrect, as those are not REAL ppc64 ports. It just happens that the 32 bit port will also run on 64. A footnote would suffice to point this out. Can we agree on this? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 20:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've just seen you already made those changes. Thanks! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 20:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PPC support of Fedora Core, Ubuntu etc. 

message: Is there really any need for the Architecture support section, since that info is already in the Technical section? (And the two don't agree, BTW -- see, for example, Gentoo.) - dcljr (talk) 19:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architecture support 

message: I think there should be a section "Proprietary software included" in the Features comparison. This is often the difference between a distro aimed toward general users and those aimed more at people familiar with Linux. Theshibboleth 08:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, we should. This is the most important criterion for me. -- mms 01:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proprietary software 

message: Shouldn't most of these be listed with UnionFS as their primary filesystem? --Jonnty (talk) 14:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Live CD distros 

message: I think that system requirement is one of the important info to be added to the comparaison so one can select the distribution that fit his/her needs and the computer ability.
I think that could be done in the target audience column.Mike92591 17:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  System requirements 

message: It seems like its only making the article more cluttered.Mike92591 17:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we delete Default office suite? 

message: Why do some of the items in the chart have a "*"? This should be labelled for readers to understand. 70.111.224.252 14:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure, but I think it has something to do with it being included in the desktop environment.Mike92591 15:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisks 

message: Support for different languages should be noted since the developing world needs computers, Linux could really gain market share from those developing countries, since it's free and in their own language. --70.111.218.254 22:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages 

message: There is one area on the page at the end where the Nautilus link takes you to the fish-crustacean Nautilus instead of the file manager. Someone edit it - i am too lazy to find it.
--169.237.165.111 19:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hehe, you're right. I'll sort it. --Jonnty (talk) 18:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing 

message: How should we organize it? Originally I just used this but think that may not be a good way. Mike92591 22:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going moving this part to talk (below) for now.  We shouldn't have tables in the article that are completely blank.  Either only put the rows where we have info (and gradually expand), or fill it somewhere else (like on talk) then move it on.  Also, Mike, please use edit summaries, besides just the section name. Superm401 - Talk 01:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, as for design, we should just use all the languages included in any distro.  This might entail adding columns occasionally, but that's okay. Superm401 - Talk 01:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On second thought (looking at http://packages.ubuntulinux.org/edgy/translations/) that will get pretty ridiculous fast.  Let's stick with the most widely spoken ones for now. Superm401 - Talk 01:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, I'll try to remember to put summaries when I do a lot of stuff. Also, your last post gave me an idea: lets give the links to the specific destro's full list in another column so we don't have to list every obscure language supported but still provide the info. Mike92591 20:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  We should have either <ref> tags or a separate link column, but not both. I think your ways better, so I'll remove the refs unless you say otherwise. Superm401 - Talk 06:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language support