About RedHat and Suse

[arios2mx]

Hi!

As I previously mentioned I bought RedHat 9 Personal Edition.

I was using Suse 8.0 Professional and previous versions for almost 3 years

Why did I change? Because I wanted to try BlueCurve and RedHat stuff.

RedHat is slower than Suse
Redhat works worst than Suse
RedHat is expensive
Suse is cheaper
Redhat is better organized than Suse on GUI



IMHO I thing Suse is BETTER than RedHat

What do you think?

Thanks
Alex

 

[littlejohnny]

I agree!

 

[Headmaster]

I'm using SuSE, tried Redhat a few years ago. Price was the issue, but I also like YAST. I didn't have much time to look in Redhat, but didn't see a tool that was as user friendly in command line mode.

I have noticed that the install is easier in SuSE...

 

[sleipnir214]

I can only dispute two of your claims.

I don't see how if both distributions are freely available, one can be more expensive than the other.

Want the best answers? Ask the best questions:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

TANSTAAFL!

 

[danielhozac]

SuSE is not really free, as you can not make your own distribution CDs. You can only install via NFS or FTP.

//Daniel

 

[bwilliam13]

I think Suse costs money. I'm SURE Redhat is free. The only reason to buy Redhat is because your internet connection is too slow and it's faster.

Redhat is the defacto standard for Linux distros as far as I'm concerned. It can be used for Servers as well as desktop workstations with little-to-no changes of your install base.

Also, what do you call slow? To me, a x-window coming up a few milliseconds slower on a Redhat machine isn't an issue. Bluecurve does take up more memory, but you do have a choice of running it or just running Nautilus with whatever Redhat was using previously...or running any one of the other dozen or so Window managers.

Everyone seems to think that one is better than the other. It's basically your preference for the package managers and the updating programs...because other than that, there's no difference in what they run. Suse has a different interface for starting up server processes and the such than Redhat. It's package manager is different. Other than that, the guts of the OS are the same. I prefer Redhat just because I've been using it since version 1.0 and I know the installation procedures. However, if you like Suse, knock yourself out. However, if you're a U.S. citizen, you're probably going to find more support for Redhat in the long run.

 

[arios2mx]

Sleipnir214:

Hi!

As far as I know you can not download Suse from Internet!

Even having an ADSL connection How much time are you going to spend downloading ISO files?

I really like to have the DVD version of Suse.

In my opinion just because you are using a free operating system doesn't mean that you are going to obtain everything free.

Redhat & Linux is an ENTERPRISE effort to give you an operable operating system.
If you are specting to obtain it free How much time do you thing Enterprises like Redhat or Suse are going to exist?

I am concerned about the cost of Redhat it is really expensive, The redhat personal edition cost is almost the same you are going to pay for Suse Professional Edition.

I have been able to do and learn a lot of things with Linux with almost $100.00USD How much do you thing I could be able to do with Microsoft Software?
I am not an expert using linux or even programming so If I cannot contribute with software development at least I could buy distros!

Thanks!
Alex

 

[ChicagoJim]

It's been years since I've run Red Hat. So, I can't directly compair it's functionality with SuSE's. However, I can tell you that it's impossible to find decent books on the particulars of SuSE. If your new to Linux, the ample selection of books for Red Hat give it the advantage IMO.

All that said, I use SuSE for an internal SQL server because it's threading support was reported to work better with MySQL than Red Hat's.

I don't think one is necessarily hands down better than the other. You have to match the distributions strenghts and weaknesses with the intended purpose of the installation. For instance, I only use openBSD for public hosting because of its' security advantages.