What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
32 Comments
- DigitalJester, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22omfg whats a .zip??? End uses don't want to deal w/ that crap...
Asswipe.
Come back when you have a clue wtf you're talking about. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The author seems surprised that it is suitable for desktop environments, but quite a few people do this. People still tend to think [Red Hat = Server].
- bluechips23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I have used both RedHat 9.0 and Centos and I gotta say that Centos made things a lot easier for me. I like Centos.
- Klowner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Uh oh, don't tell Jerry "Tuttle" Taylor
- cronot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@digitaljester: Amen.
However, his behavior is exactly what you'd expect from average users. It's not that the concept is hard to understand, it's that they DON'T WANT to.
That's one of the things that holds back adoption of alternative OSes - lazyness (either with Linux or OSX - the grandparent fails to realize that OSX, while well polished, is right there with Linux in terms of market share). People just don't want to take the time to learn something new. - Gryffydd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've tried CentOS as a desktop OS, and it didn't go so well. The hardware recognition wasn't great, and it would have required me to do a lot of fiddling to get everything working. (1920x1200 monitor, extra mouse buttons, sound, etc.) It just wasn't worth my time messing with it. Back to Fedora and Ubuntu I went. (although 1920x1200 on my Samsung 244t is still giving me headaches on Ubuntu)
- cronot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@NX910a: Wooooooosssh!
Obviously OSX's market share is bigger than Linux'. Now compare OSX's market share with the sum of all variants of Windows. Then read my post again, it will make more sense.
Unless you're just another iFanboy. - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This version of RH/Cent is particularly good at it though. I wouldn't suggest it to any Ubuntu users because it doesn't yet have Ubuntu standard automagic but it is a very solid and powerful workstation OS.
- dbalaski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Centos 4 & Centos 5 both make great desktops -- I am running two machines at home with Complete server installs.
The package updater is a piece of cake, so I am not sure what the author was talking about 210 MB software/package update -- I get similar update issues when I install/use XP OS-X , Solaris, etc.
And I have to install the extra for browsers on those machines too (Flash, etc)
Even my 5 year old daughter has figured CENTOS 5 Desktop out enough to launch a browser into PlayhouseDisney for her games (she can also do this on a XP & OS-X) ...
It is very stable, the footprint isn't that big -- sure you can tweak things and get some more out of it ... It is very easy to tweak services in CENTOS/RHE.
I don't recommend Fedora or Ubuntu -- too bleeding edge .. too many things that could go wrong for the average user..
If your a power OS user, and don't mind it possible bugs, sure -- go those distros
I like CENTOS/RHE because that is what businesses are using a lot -- there are a ton of RPMs available, and easy to use. - AlmostEvil, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6You do realise Centos is essentially RHEL without Redhat logos etc? Right?
That's it, there are a few minor things but for the most part it's Redhat Enterprise Linux.
When you were talking about Redhat did you mean Fedora? Which is always their experimental Linux, in essence it's in a permanent state of beta.
Just as a note, Centos is pretty damn sweet. Although I did have to roll out my own kernel from kernel.org for some hardware support which isn't in the Centos 4.4 kernel (I think that's based on the 2.6.9 kernel with lots of backported stuff. BTW, It's for a server) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5The author of TFA: Programmer, journalist. Creator of the CMS, Linux and PHP libraries. Arch Linux user. Creator of a GNU/Linux distribution based on Gentoo: Plusiaczek Live CD.
The author of the article is not an "average Joe" so it is not a fair assessment. - Chandon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You can use lots of things as a desktop system. There may even be cases, primarily in a corporate environment with a nice support contract and Red Hat trained techs, where having a desktop 100% compatible with RHEL is a good idea.
But, I'm pretty sure that for a normal desktop most people would be better off with a more desktop/end user targeted distro like Ubuntu or Mandriva. - ts8lemonade, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@NX910a
There's loads of Linux distributions that are ready and work great on the desktop. Currently I am using SUSE on both my desktop and laptop, but have tried out many others including Debian, KateOS, Fedora Core, and Ubuntu. Most of them worked great right out of the box. If you have even the slightest bit of knowledge it's incredibly easy to get flash, java, beryl, drivers, and anything else you could possibly need installed. Just because people are lazy and don't want to spend the time to learn or set up Linux does not mean it isn't ready. - generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The widescreen res problem should be fixed by Xorg 7.3. So wait for Gutsy Gibbon
- penno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"the graphical installer needs at least 512 MB [of RAM]"
Jesus. The *installer*. Isn't that a little high for a linux OS? I've always thought of linux as the opposite of "resource hungry". - superflyscb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1well i have centOS i tryed my ass off to get ubuntu to work but no go and im ok with that its seems ok
- elipabst, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I just installed CentOS this morning on a box with 384Mb and it ran absolutely fine. I'm sure you could get away with less.
- michuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1BTW, If you would like to edit the CentOS data so that it is included in the PolishLinux.org distro comparison, feel free to edit the wiki at: http://wiki.polishlinux.org/centos
- darkchild, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The installer does not need that much memory. Fedora Core (and hence RHEL and CentOS) requires a minimum of 192MB for a graphic installation with 256MB being the recommended. For a text based install, you only need 64MB.
- nOOBert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just installed CentOS on a dev box... The install took less time to install then windows xp... with the majority of the apps like openOffice and gcc installed. =P And it had to install off 6 disks (dont have a dvd drive)
- funkytaco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I work in a data center. CentOS is our distro of choice, but we are sticking with 4.4 until 5.1 comes out.
- quick1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Centos 4.4 is my desktop at work. I use it because its a good mirror of our production servers which run Redhat, without the license fees. Just one more possible source of errors (dev/production environments being different) that I don't have to worry about. The only down side is I've had to rewrite a few .bat files, as all the other developers run windows.
- JeffS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2RedHat 9 is pretty outdated which is why CentOS seems easier for you. CentOS is just Red Hat Enterprise Linux repackaged without the RedHat branding. I run CentOS 4.4 at home because I run Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Update 4 at work. It is a great way for me to have essentially the same environment for testing and development work without having to fork our hundreds of dollars a year in subscriptions for Red Hat.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Horses for courses. If you just want a desktop then Ubuntu is probably the best option but things like SELinux and Xen make CentOS interesting as a Workstation OS.
- plembo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've been a big CentOS fan since 3.x, when I used it to do test installs of software that was going on the RHEL 3 systems in my company's data center. I now run CentOS 4.4 on my desktops at work and home. My wife's laptop is currently running 5.0, and she's happy with it. I actually own a personal subscription to Red Hat Desktop 5. All that said, I don't think ANY current Linux distro is a serious contender for a general purpose desktop. For techies like me, or Internet browsers like my wife, it does what it's supposed to do -- and does it better than Windows. But for my kids, who have to own a fortune in PC games now, Linux isn't even in the running. Finally, big corporations love Microsoft's Office. Especially PowerPoint (the Mind Killer [TM]). They also love Project and Visio. With at least a decade of legacy data, they're not going to switch to Star/Sun/Open Office or (are there any REAL alternatives to Project or Visio?) whatever any time soon. That's why Red Hat stays focused on server sales. Without a sea change in how people use desktop computers (show a secretary how much faster she can type up a really long document -- say more than 100 pages -- in a pure text editor than in MS Word and you'll see what i mean), this is a reality that isn't going to change. What's more likely to happen is that for many purposes the browser will become the desktop, and web-based AJAX apps will replace fat client programs. Then it won't matter what O/S you're running and desktop Linux will be able to compete for the real money.
- dholbert, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Not to mention that Red Hat 9.0 is a pretty outdated distro, released 4 years ago (according to Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Red-Hat-Linux-9-0-Personal/dp/B00008QODZ)
Does anyone actually still use it? (aside from on servers that people are paranoid about upgrading?) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Dumbest reviewer ever!
- DigitalJester, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3errr...Use Fedora?
- walfredo26, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1yawn
- NX910a, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4No distribution of Linux is suitable for the average user's desktop yet; this is clear enough. When Dell launches systems with preinstalled Linux on them, they had better be very successful in boasting consumer confidence in it --- otherwise I don't see a bright future for mainstream Linux use.
- NX910a, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1"the grandparent fails to realize that OSX, while well polished, is right there with Linux in terms of market share"
OS X desktop market share is much, much higher then Linux. Actually, I have never seen anyone use Linux (besides myself and my dad) in real life before. - steffinb, on 10/12/2007, -27/+1You know what "fit's on the average Joe’s desktop"?
Windows XP or OSX
I mean seriously, WTF is a tar.gz??? End users don't wanna deal w/ that crap...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is