Your Distro Sucks!

Ok here is the deal. You may have been noticing that I have been mentioning Lindows a lot right? The truth is, I wonder why people say something sucks when they have the slightest idea what they are talking about. I could be wrong but I get the interpretation that most people say it sucks simply because they are trying to get in where they do not fit in.

Anywhere else it is very common place to say that sucks and have no relative factual points to provide as to why it indeed sucks. Yes indeed anywhere else I would expect such a blanket statement. However, in Linux section you make yourself look like a complete idiot.

The rules are as follows:

• Do not come in this thread and say Linux sucks.
  
• Only provide factual info or real-life experiences as to why a particular distro/distros suck.
  
• Intelligent trolling only. No direct insults unless they are directed to another person's distro and even then you must provide a valid reason why.
  
• Do not say a distro sucks simply because based on your level of expertise you can not get it to install, function, etc. That is more less a personal problem.
  
• You may not say a distro sucks because it can not do what your distro does.
  EG: "My distro can fly and yours can't." is not a relative point.

There are other very good threads on this board that provide info and pros and cons for several distros. However, I consider them to be candy-coated. If you have a desire to try a distro and you want to know the real pros and cons based on people that have used it or people that can provide factual input as to why it sucks then you should come here first and see for yourself.

One more note and Warning: If you have feelings that are easily hurt, then this thread is not for you. To prevent, I suggest you change your distro or find flaws regarding a another distro as to why it sucks as well.


To conclude this and also make pretty interesting non-trolling thread I will start off by saying Slackware Sucks for the following reasons:

• It has no package management system. Every other Linux
  distribution does.
  
• There is no easy upgrade path between versions.
  
• It isn't using System V-style boot scripts. If you are
  wondering why you should care, first of all, it is easier to maintain.
  Second, it allows you to easily do runlevels properly. Third, the
  rest of the unix world is moving that way, so why fight the standard.
  Besides, when Linux does things the same way as the rest of the unix
  world, that makes it more valuable as a learning tool.
  
• It doesn't follow the Linux Filesystem Standard like it is suppose to.
  
• Slackware is early 1994 Linux technology. It is an outdated toy. It
  was fun then, but it is time to move on.

shn

This thread sucks

(Come on, try telling me you never expected some idiot to come in and say that)?

When I said Lindows sucks I was just joking, i've never used it, and it could be a good distro.

That's about all I have to say here, since I really don't have enough linux experience to say one distro is better than another.

a whole post wasted because someone jokingly said linows sucks <_<

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LSA@5 April 2004 - 18:22
When I said Lindows sucks I was just joking, i&#39;ve never used it, and it could be a good distro.

That&#39;s about all I have to say here, since I really don&#39;t have enough linux experience to say one distro is better than another.

---

You are missing the point.

Lindows does suck. The question is, can you provide valid and factual reasons why without jumping on the bandwagon just because other people say it sucks.

The same thing is true with M&#036; bashers but that is another thread.

And I had this idea for this thread for some time now. I think it has great potential if you look at it from an intelligent point of view..................minus the topic title. Did that for fun. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn@5 April 2004 - 23:26
The same thing is true with M&#036; bashers but that is another thread.

---

I sense a little hypocrisy here...you yourself are one for m&#036; bashing without providing facts/reasons

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 4th gen+5 April 2004 - 18:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 5 April 2004 - 18:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-shn@5 April 2004 - 23:26
The same thing is true with M&#036; bashers but that is another thread.

---

I sense a little hypocrisy here...you yourself are one for m&#036; bashing without providing facts/reasons [/b][/quote]
Well 4th gen I respect your opinion but with all do respect this is for Linux Distros I&#39;m sure you have tried a few distros yourself and you can give your opinions as to why you do not like them?

Please do not clutter this thread with M&#036; directed thoughts. If you are not intelligent enough to follow the point of the initial thread then so be it. Post all you like but I will ignore you. :P

And here is something for you to ponder while you take all that in.
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html

Btw, Gentoo is next. This thread rocks&#33; :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn
The question is, can you provide valid and factual reasons why without jumping on the bandwagon just because other people say it sucks.

---

No, I can&#39;t because i&#39;ve never used it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LSA+5 April 2004 - 18:45--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LSA &#064; 5 April 2004 - 18:45)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-shn
The question is, can you provide valid and factual reasons why without jumping on the bandwagon just because other people say it sucks.

---

No, I can&#39;t because i&#39;ve never used it.[/b][/quote]
What about RedHat. I remember you saying you had problems with it.

That must have sucked right?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn@5 April 2004 - 23:42
I&#39;m sure you have tried a few distros yourself and you can give your opinions as to why you do not like them?

---

There&#39;s a "funny" story behind that actually...

I was given a Linux distro a while ago (Mandrake I believe) by a friend, but I didn&#39;t want to go through the partitoning to install it, so I left the CDs sitting on my desk. Then I downloaded one of the live CDs a while ago (Slax). I went to burn it in NERO, but I couldn&#39;t burn it right ( :"> ), so I never installed it. I&#39;ve still yet to use Linux, but I&#39;ve seen a couple of distros, one of my lecturers was using RedHat (he was actually using RedHat to emulate Windows XP :lol: ), and Liam has been using Knoppix lately. I can&#39;t give any opinion though, I&#39;ve never tried any Linux distro myself.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn@5 April 2004 - 18:47
What about RedHat.&nbsp; I remember you saying you had problems with it.

That must have sucked right?

---

I almost always got make errors or dependicies, try to get the deps and still wouldn&#39;t work&#33; I RTFM too :unsure:

I tried to upgrade pygtk and it said it was installed and none programs would detect it....:frusty:

Plus, RPM&#39;s are used by so many distros it&#39;s hard to find one made for your distro :frusty:

Slackware Myths

Also, your reasons were from 1998

http://www.luci.org/luci-discuss/msg00071.html

HA HA WHEN I WANT TO MAKE A POINT I COPY OTHER PEOPLES WORK&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

first thing I did was google a excerpt and got that page
http://www.luci.org/luci-discuss/msg00071.html

Quote:

---

Originally posted by muchspl2@6 April 2004 - 10:56
HA HA WHEN I WANT TO MAKE A POINT I COPY OTHER PEOPLES WORK&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

first thing I did was google a excerpt and got that page
http://www.luci.org/luci-discuss/msg00071.html

---

Yep I sure did. And for every distro that sucks. I&#39;m googling and posting what I find. Read the rules. Does&#39;nt say you can&#39;t do it. :)

Gentoo sucks

RedHat sucks

Debian does not


Opps you won&#39;t find anything about why Debian Sucks through google, because it simply does not. And just to let you know. I can do that, because I have tried just about every distro. I&#39;m sure I&#39;ve posted enough screenshots from all thoose distro&#39;s to confirm that..

RedHat 9
Slackware, and Gentoo with no gui during the install process on the forum and in a virtual console&#33;

RedHat Enterprise Workstation - no gui
Fedora, and Debian

Much more to come kiddies :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LSA@6 April 2004 - 10:44
Slackware Myths

Also, your reasons were from 1998

http://www.luci.org/luci-discuss/msg00071.html

---

Which proves the initial point. Wether it was from 1998 or 1898 it does not matter.

Speaking of copycat, to this day Slackware still uses a similar "BSD" style setup. If you don&#39;t believe that then try installing VMware under slackware and see if it compiles your vm modules with the default setup. The answer is............it will not.

Quote:

---

In a nutshell... the VMware installation script assumes &#39;System V&#39; style startup directories, scripts, etc... and Slackware just doesn&#39;t come setup that way since it has adopted something closer to a BSD scenario.

---

Source

Slackware packages are plain ol tarballs and they do not handle dependency issues. For an experienced user that would be just fine since it gives a bit more control. However, for someone with just basic Linux knowledge it can be a dreadful nightmare.

And I do not need to explain why it does not follow Linux Filesystem standards because the fact that it uses a similar BSD style setup pretty much makes that self explanatory.

One other note. The slackware advocacy site is relatively old. Slackware is up to version 9.1 currently and I do not see any mention of any version higher than 7.0 on that site. :)

:lol: It&#39;s very easy to hate on Mentuos when it comes without Konqueror. :D

And I hate distros that come with Gnome by default because it makes the download huge&#33; :angry:

Not that I have anything against Gnome... :lol: I just use KDE. :D

KDE rocks&#33;&#33;&#33;

But try this on for size. :)

:huh: Besides being "bleeding-edge" and "badass," what is it? :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by haxor41789@7 April 2004 - 01:43
:huh: Besides being "bleeding-edge" and "badass," what is it? :lol:

---

You can&#39;t be serious. :P

shn u like this topic yea,or ami bein slightly para as usual

wha u doin n where

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ck&#045;uk@7 April 2004 - 01:55
shn u like this topic yea,or ami bein slightly para as usual

wha u doin n where

---

http://laclefdespas.free.fr/img/speak%20english.jpg

Maybe some day chickenscratch will become an official language. Until then even google can&#39;t translate that shit&#33; :)

just curious abt u shn thats all

n if i was bein paraniod or not,

cu

mark :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ck&#045;uk@7 April 2004 - 02:06
just curious abt u shn thats all

n if i was bein paraniod or not,

cu

mark :)

---

No you were not being paranoid.

Btw, all your pm&#39;s were deleted since I&#39;m a bitch IYO. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn+6 April 2004 - 16:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn &#064; 6 April 2004 - 16:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-LSA@6 April 2004 - 10:44
Slackware Myths

Also, your reasons were from 1998

http://www.luci.org/luci-discuss/msg00071.html

---

Which proves the initial point. Wether it was from 1998 or 1898 it does not matter.

Speaking of copycat, to this day Slackware still uses a similar "BSD" style setup. If you don&#39;t believe that then try installing VMware under slackware and see if it compiles your vm modules with the default setup. The answer is............it will not.

Quote:

---

In a nutshell... the VMware installation script assumes &#39;System V&#39; style startup directories, scripts, etc... and Slackware just doesn&#39;t come setup that way since it has adopted something closer to a BSD scenario.

---

Source

Slackware packages are plain ol tarballs and they do not handle dependency issues. For an experienced user that would be just fine since it gives a bit more control. However, for someone with just basic Linux knowledge it can be a dreadful nightmare.

And I do not need to explain why it does not follow Linux Filesystem standards because the fact that it uses a similar BSD style setup pretty much makes that self explanatory.

One other note. The slackware advocacy site is relatively old. Slackware is up to version 9.1 currently and I do not see any mention of any version higher than 7.0 on that site. :)[/b][/quote]
I&#39;m using Slackware right now, and i&#39;m running swaret, it&#39;s installing mplayer and resolving deps.

About the init scripts, I can&#39;t really say much about that. After seeing BSD style init scripts, I have to say I like SysV better, but i&#39;ve only been using it for about 3 days so my mind may change. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LSA@14 April 2004 - 19:00
I&#39;m using Slackware right now, and i&#39;m running swaret, it&#39;s installing mplayer and resolving deps.

---

swaret looks like a neat tool. However, I think it&#39;s best to compile mplayer from source. There are a lot of options you can pass to configure that a pre-built package won&#39;t. That tunes the program to better run on your system. If you rely on pre-built binaries and packages or a tool that resolves all your dependencies for you then you will never learn anything. :)

I haven&#39;t used swaret too much. I used it for mplayer because when I tried to install it on RH/Fedora it gave me all sorts of errors, so I just used swaret.

I usually compile things and use checkinstall (:wub:) now. :w00t:

I can&#39;t think of a reason why Linux sux&#33; :o :D :01:

This thread sucks. :angry: :D :D :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by shn@7 May 2004 - 22:06
This thread sucks. :angry: :D :D :lol:

---

I agree who started it :rolleyes:

and mplayer is an obsolute bitch to install took me ages but lives and learns,dont ya.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 4play+7 May 2004 - 16:57--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4play &#064; 7 May 2004 - 16:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-shn@7 May 2004 - 22:06
This thread sucks. :angry:&nbsp; :D&nbsp; :D&nbsp; :lol:

---

I agree who started it :rolleyes:

and mplayer is an obsolute bitch to install took me ages but lives and learns,dont ya.[/b][/quote]
The one and only I. :)


Mplayer is a must have. Which is why I never have a problem compiling it from source if pre-built binaries won&#39;t install for your so-called distro.