On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 07:52:43PM -0500, Karen Lewellen wrote: > In terms of support, flexibility, is there really a difference? IMHO it's first of all a question of "taste": I personally like the apt-alike distributions, I also prefer the full flexibility of an O S who authorizes you to choose between editing with a tool or by hand, etc. But I'm not sure Debian had the best support; I see on this ml lots of USA people using RH/Fedora, here in Europe in many many LUGs and on mlists I met lots of people using Debian (now more and more Ubuntu). > I understand both distributions are strong on their integrated packages. > Both support hardware speech, what I will be using. That's one of the major problems when choosing Debian: if you'd like to be able to install/run it on very recent hardware, you have to choose the Testing one, if you are using older hardware / or you want 100% stability, the you will prefer the Stable one. > But is there anything else about one package over the other that should be > considered when weighing them? IMHO, people who is obsessed by recent packages will prefer distro's who provide -in some cases- much more recent versions of packages than you should meet in a (Sarge-based)/Stable Debian. Ald0 _______________________________________________ Blinux-list mailing list Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list