[ale] opening distro war arch vs ubuntu

[Collin Pruitt]

Ubuntu is good for absolute beginners to Linux to get started on since it's
the least different from Windows. Hence why I help work on Ubuntu.

I personally prefer to use Arch for my desktop, and Debian or CentOS (god
awful hair pulling RHEL's little brother) for my servers. But, I can (kind
of) understand the appeal of Ubuntu to newer users. It's easy to use from
the start, even if it does it in the most unclean methods underneath the
cover.

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:43 PM, James Sumners <james.sumners at gmail.com>wrote:

> You said "dev team." I would not be using Arch on a set of systems
> that need to be concurrent. Arch updates often, and sometimes with
> breakage (read the news on the website!).
>
> I am a massive fan of Arch -- when used on the right system. Desktop
> OS? Yes. DVR OS? Definitely. Server? Hell no. For that, I go Debian
> (when I'm not forced to use the god awful hair pulling RHEL).
>
> Ubuntu? Hate it. I have Xubuntu installed on one system -- my
> Grandfather's old machine, now my Grandmother's. I had to update that
> damn thing from Jaunty to Oneiric this week. It was a long,
> convoluted, process. How they screwed up "apt-get dist-upgrade" with
> some wackadoo "do-release-upgrade" is beyond me (before you say
> "they're the same", the do-release-upgrade script expects X to be
> running).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20111230/b2317924/attachment.html