May be a dumb a question...

[Gimpy13]

God, please don't let me sound too much like a newb while asking this, but I'm tryin to do all the research I can into Linux before I just jump in head first and dislike it, as I've already found most of the answers I'm looking for when it comes to this, and frankly, I can't wait to download and install.

my question is: what is the main difference between Ubuntu & OpenSuse? Both can be run KDE or GNOME, and pretty much any kernel works for any LinuxOS, and with both Ubuntu & OpenSuse being able to run on PS3 as well, what is the major differences between these too, because from going through this whole forum just reading, googling these two OS's, checking screenshots, and even checking out each OS, I just can't see the difference, so I'm hoping someone who's experienced or built programs for both, can they share some knowledge?

Thanks in advance!
Gimpy13

[bryansmith]

I'm sure people will elaborate on this but here I go.

Both Ubuntu and openSUSE are at the core, the same. Both use the Linux kernel (albeit different versions) with open source on top. Both are different with respects to some of the inner workings - Ubuntu uses a package format called dpkg while openSUSE uses rpm. Package formats are the formats in which executables are delivered (think of them as glorified zip files). openSUSE comes with a tool called Yast to handle configuration of the system while Ubuntu uses a variety of tools and depends, IMHO, more of manual configuration. A lot of skills you learn in one though are transferable.

Truthfully, Linux distributions are like cars. Test drive a few to get a feel and decide which one you like best. Why are their so many different types of cars? Because people have different tastes in how they feel/drive. The same goes for Linux distributions.

I hope that sort of answers your question. Feel free to ask some more.

Bryan

[oz]

Welcome to the forums!

The biggest difference is going to be their respective package managers. Other than that, their colors, backgrounds, packages included in default install, etc.

You really should try both since they are free for the download and then decide which you like.

Have fun with Linux!

EDIT: guess Bryan was faster at typing than I am today!

[Gimpy13]

Well, thanks guys, the help is very much appreciated. I had tried Mandriva once before several years ago and it sent me running back to windows, but that was before Wine, God bless that kernel. I'll be sure to give both a try.

[Manchunian]

Someone on this forum (can't remember who) has a signature that goes something like "You can't tell an OS by its GUI". This is very true, especially with Linux. On the whole, if you have a screenshot of any linux distribution, you don't know which one it is (apart from a couple of subtle differences in some cases.) This is because what you're actually seeing is, in reality, the Windows environment/manager (ie Gnome, Kde or whatever). However, despite the kernel being the same, there are differences between them, as suggested above (ie, how you download software) and also how the kernel is acually configured. Now, as an example, you ask the difference between Ubuntu and Suse. Having used both these distros I can tell you that for me I found Suse to be sleak, pretty and easy to configure. However, I also found it very slow and had a tendancy to crash. Ubuntu, on the other hand, I found to be much faster, especially when installing software, more reliable but not so well presented. In the end, after trying many distros, I settled on Debian. Functional and fast, that's what Debian is, and rock solid reliable. However, it's not so beginner friendly, and there are others that a beginner should avoid (like Slackware and Gentoo, for example.)

[Gorgeous George]

Get Ubuntu and spread the love, I made the switch a few years ago and never even considered using anything else. It just gets better and better with every release, which they achieve at 6 months intervals

[Freston]

Someone on this forum (can't remember who) has a signature that goes something like "You can't tell an OS by its GUI".

And I thought you loved me

[Gimpy13]

well thanks soo much guys, I'll have to check out Debian as well. I tend to pick up on things really quickly, and thats why i was interested in starting off with one of the better ones to get a feel for it, before moving on to Debian. I was researching that one slightly, and it seemed to be more of an office type, where as I'm more wanting to eventually do all my regular activities (too many to mention) that I'd normally do, which I've manage to figure out.

Really guys, this has been a great help, and I hope this wasn't a dumb question to ask before jumping in head first. I guess all I gotta do now is delete the 2nd partition on my hard drive, and let Linux make a native one. I'll just have to make it smaller than what it is now (150 GB), and leave about 80 GB as Raw to partition again as NTFS for storage.

One again, Thanks Everyone!

ps. How's Nero Linux 3?

[bryansmith]

I have never tried out Nero for Linux but I can tell you that are many great free (OSS) alternatives that will get the job done. Some that come to mind are Brasero (GNOME) and K3B (KDE).

Debian, like any distribution, can be tailored any specific way. It has roughly the same package set available to it that Ubuntu does.

Remember, there are no dumb questions. We've all been there.

Bryan

[Manchunian]

I have tried Nero for Linux, and really it's not worth it. It doesn't really do anything that Kd3 doesn't.

And I thought you loved me

I do, I do, really I do!