Debian vs RedHat vs Slackware

Debian vs RedHat vs Slackware


What is your opinion of Debian vs RedHat vs
Slackware? Debian is one of the oldest Linux versions. I know it is very stable, but that’s because
it adds new features at a snail’s pace. And while they put out their own drivers for
devices, OS like Ubuntu have more drivers and supportability in general with all types
of devices. That’s one of the big strengths of Red Hat
Linux. And its price strong-arms a lot of would be
users. You’re talking about $1500 a year for an
enterprise server, the level of a big business. A small server, what they call entry level,
is $350. That rivals Windows for a user. For a generic user, yes. For an enterprise
server to support lots of websites and users, it is really cheap. While I’d love to make a living as a Unix
admin, I don’t need a server license. Don’t they have versions for PCs? Sure, and the self-support subscription is
$50 a year. If you want a work station support subscription, with lots of hand-holding and
fast turnaround on support tickets, you pay $300. Now it costs as much as Windows. But you get tech support that speaks English
and, unlike Microsoft, can actually help you beyond advising a reboot. What’s your opinion of Slackware? It is not a slacker in terms of design. It’s a simple design. Windows adds all kinds of features, and look
how many errors and updates that generates. Slackware was designed to be simple and stable. That’s not bad in concept. Slackware is now the longest running Linux
distribution. It is so good that it is the basis of the SUSE Linux. At least their developers didn’t slack off.
Why isn’t it more common then? Slackware doesn’t have formal bug reporting
or tech support. It gets new releases when the creator puts them out, and it has no formal
developers except the creator. It is one guy’s computer science project
turned into an internet phenomena. And it likely disappears when he does.