I’ve been reading Yet Another Linux Blog for some time now as the writer (’Devnet’) has been submitting various distributions of Linux to a test. He’s used his wife (who has no Linux experience) as a judge to find out which distribution is the best distribution for a brand-new user to work with.

Devnet had his wife try out the following distributions (from having to install them to having to remove them - the whole experience):

• Mandrake 10.1 Community
• SimplyMEPIS 3.3
• PCLinuxOS .81a
• Fedora Core 4
• Ubuntu 5.04 “Hoary”

I won’t mention how each of them performed individually except to say that there were two very big surprises. When Devnet tested Ubuntu it was found to be rather difficult for a newcomer to start off with. This generated a lot of (undeserved) negative feedback toward the project and the people involved from a rather excited Ubuntu community.

And the huge surprise was the success of the little-known PCLinuxOS. I’d never used it until it appeared in this project and was found to be the most new-user- friendly Linux distro. Granted, PCLinuxOS will not meet the needs of every Linux user - but that wasn’t the point of the experiment. According to Mrs. Devnet: “I need to do simple AND it’s easy on the eyes. It serves my purpose, bottom line.”

A big thanks from Distro Jockey to Yet Another Linux Blog for running this test. Linux is steadily approaching desktop-readiness for the real world - this will help the Linux community to know exactly what needs to be worked on to get us all the way.

From heise online:
Microsoft funded a report looking into the relative securities of Linux and Windows Server. They chose criteria that had little to do with real performance - mostly having to do with time periods between bugs reported and bug fixed.

Doubts regarding the reliability of the conclusions of the study begin to emerge, however, when one looks more closely at this MySQL example; thus the researches write:

For example, CAN-2004-0957 discusses a bug in MySQL’s mysql_real_connect() function. This was entered into the MySQL bug database on 4th June 2004, and fixed in the source tree 17th June 2004. However, Red Hat only packaged this fix in RHSA-2004:611, issued on the 27th of November.

It’s no surprise that the results were ‘massaged’ a little considering the funding came entirely from Microsoft. For details on the study, see the complete story.

The Fedora Core Linux Blog reports that the cd-images of Fedora Core will not contain some popular applications on the next release. Even some small and powerful programs (like Abiword and Gnumeric) aren’t going to make the cut.

Some controversy has been stirred up by this move. Couldn’t some packages (such as a selection of large desktop backgrounds) be removed instead of these popular packages? Sure, packages must be removed to keep the download size down, but what to remove? Lots of people use Gnumeric and Abiword, don’t they?

With all the discussion of software value and the open source community’s attempt to applaud all good software, this is the true test of what is useful. In the end, a decision must be made about what packages will be on the download CD. Do we need KOffice as well as OpenOffice.org?
Ultimately something needs to be cut for a distro to provide only the best software to its users.

Clete Blackwell writes at The Linux Blog:

Linux has progressed greatly in the years since its beginning, but so has Windows. There is a constant battle for the desktop. Microsoft plans to release its new operating system, Longhorn, in the coming years, but by then, KDE will have QT4 released along with a whole new version. KDE 3.4 has great improvements as well. Is Linux (or should I say KDE) friendly enough? Almost. Is Windows friendly enough? Yes.

He measures and compares various parts of Windows and Linux (KDE mostly) for ease of use from the perspective of a new Linux user. This will be a handy read for those who are attempting to choose a distribution or are contemplating whether it’s worthwhile to switch to Linux.

With all the choices for Linux distributions it’s common to jump around between them, always trying a new thing. Here’s a story of a man who finally settled with one he loves:
Ubuntu - My Final Distro>

Ubuntu utilizes the Debian packaging system, and I love it. It’s fast and stable. I can’t count how many times yum on Fedora Core 3 stalled randomly. Not to mention I find RPMs slow and annoying. Urpmi and the like just loved to spend time rebuilding indexes. Apt-get is nice and fast. Synaptic is a wonderful tool as well.

I’ve heard many stories of Linux users becoming faithful to a certain distribution, but never have I heard it so clearly argued and supported. I personally won’t be using Ubuntu because the aesthetics of KDE (Ubuntu lacks KDE) are important to me. Still, if it were for that one difference I’d switch immediately.

Bless his heart, Brian Jones writes about different distributions of Linux or, more accurately, how each one sucks. From Which Distro Do You Recommend?

That’s right: every distribution of Linux sucks in its own special way. Some just suck less. However, eventually, no matter what distribution you use, something about it will drive you insane, and you’ll try another distro to see if it’s any better. What you’ll then realize is that, while it may handle what drove you crazy before much better, it handles something else in a way that drives you even more crazy.

He goes on to slam portage, YaST, URPMI, apt-get for their unweildliness. In conclusion, Brian suggests that you simply find one that fits the way your brain works and stick with that.

I would totally agree with his suggestion. Suse right now is my weapon of choice but I plan to move back to Mandrake when 10.2 comes out. I’m familiar with it and RPMDrake is actually pretty cool. If you have a favorite distro that’s really working for you, please mention it in the comment section.

Neil Lucock tested Ubuntu (an increasingly popular Linux distribution) and commented on it’s value to a relatively new Linux user. I considered Ubuntu recently and I came to several of the same conclusions as Neil.

Neil tests the installation, networking, look and feel, and hardware support of Ubuntu on OSNews.com

The installer is visually unattractive but it works. It detected everything except my internet connection. I usually judge a distribution by how long it takes me to get on-line. Most detect the DHCP server on the modem and just work. If you can’t easily get on-line, how will you download fixes and upgrades? Once up and running, the connection was easy to configure and far easier than setting up Win XP.

Ultimately, Ubuntu lacks KDE (the most appealing window manager to new users) but has the Debian package system and therefore comes out as a moderate distribuion, but not ideal for new users.

I have heard about Gentoo a few times, but I always wrote it off as an unnecessary distribution until today. Thanks to reading the Gentoo ‘about’ page (Gentoo Linux — About Gentoo Linux) I’m beginning to realize that Gentoo Linux might be my next distribution to try. In fact, maybe sometime next week I might switch over. If I do I’ll keep y’all posted on how that works. Here’s one of the things that really hooked me from the Gentoo site:

Thanks to a technology called Portage, Gentoo Linux can become an ideal secure server, development workstation, professional desktop, gaming system, embedded solution or something else — whatever you need it to be. Because of its near-unlimited adaptability, we call Gentoo Linux a metadistribution.

I’ve found an article that puts in in clear terms that Linux is hard, Windows is easy but this guys also sorta misses the bigger picture. He says that Linux is mostly just good for large companies because you have to write your own software to take full advantage of the open-source concept.

I admin that writing your own code is a great way to participate in this technological revolution, but open-source is the doorway to opportunity for many people, not just for the elite coders and those who employ them.
It’s true that small companies would be more likely to lack some of the programming skill of larger companies, but the licensing fees on software that are pocket change to the big guys can really impact others. A small business can put in a Gentoo disk and start using Linux immediately. They can have full access to all the necessary accounting, office, and communication software that they could possibly need.

So yes, it helps to be able to write your own software, but open-source is good for the beginners too.
(Case in point: this article was written on a Suse box with Mozilla Firefox and served off of a RedHat server using PHP, Apache, and Mysql.)

Today I came across an old article on OreillyNet written by Kevin Bedel about how we should all migrate to linux. It was written during the MSBlaster outbreak a while back and talked about how, all in all, it would be easier for many people to switch over to linux rather than having to battle worms and apply patches and such.
I don’t fault the intent of the article, I believe we’d all be better off using linux. In fact, I’m writing this on a 2.6.4 kernel laptop right now. However, the agony of reading the article is that it was titled “Linux Made Easy.” There’s something we need to get straight right away: Linux is hard. Period. There’s a lot you can do with it, it’s a better operating system than any other, it stable and productive, but it’s hard - and it’s not going to change.

Why is linux so hard?
The power of linux comes from it’s unique approach to computing. It has a philosophy behind it that is different from the old Mac days and Microsoft Windows at any time. Here are a few of the core philosophies behind linux:

• durable code
  If you’ve followed the releases of linux distributions you’ll notice how slowly they come out. It’s not that there aren’t enough people (though many are volunteers and cannot be held to a schedule) but most linux software creators do not distribute software that is imperfect without specifically warning people about it’s drawbacks. Almost all software used on GNU/Linux (the official name for most linux operating systems) is released under something called the GPL. It’s basically a legal document outlining that everyone has the right to use and modify the software. (for more info: the GNU project) This is unlike most windows software which is closed-source and consistently full of holes.
• one program - one use
  If you ever get your hands on Linux and start playing around, you may be struck by how many little programs come with it. If you’re running it right now you can go to a terminal and hit the ‘tab’ key twice. The system should then tell you how many possible programs you can run. On my system I have 3065 programs that do everything from emulating Microsoft Word to calculating free hard drive space. The reason for the large number of programs is that there’s an old Unix axiom that required every program have precisely one function. That way in lieu of writing several programs that were each a grab-bag of mediocrity programmers could hone individual pieces of code to perfection.
• command-line interface
  And now we discuss the real reason that Linux is hard - the command line. Almost all of these thousands of programs written for Linux require that a person type the program name and then some options for the program at a command prompt. There are GUIs (lookup on Google) for a few programs that allow you to interact with the mouse, but mostly you have to access them through typing.
  The command-line interface is one of the greatest strengths of Linux because you can run programs from other programs easily - but it’s also the primary reason that Linux is just plain hard. Linux will one day take over the desktop market, but not in it’s current form. Not until people can do everything with their mouse.

So to Kevin Bedel (Editor in Chief of LinuxWorld Magazine) I say quit with the deception. Linux is wonderful, Linux is powerful, Linux is the future, but Linux is hard.