Linux examined: OpenSUSE 11.0

This latest edition has some updates and improvements, but is not for the faint-of-heart

(I'm also not a big fan of the default partitioning scheme, which has separate root and home partitions; I much prefer a single unified root partition. However, that's more a matter of taste than a real knock against OpenSUSE.)

The other complaint I have is that OpenSUSE is a massive install. You need to download two multigigabyte DVDs or five CDs for a standard install.

On the other hand, OpenSUSE tries to be extremely desktop-agnostic. Novell's site makes two LiveCD versions available, one with GNOME and one with two versions of KDE. This means that OpenSUSE has a wealth of packages available on install, without requiring additional uploads. The only tricky part is finding where to choose them. You need to click on the Software link on the confirmation page in order to change what gets installed.

A solid distro

Once up, OpenSUSE looks pretty much like any other GNOME/KDE-based Linux distro. There are a few notable differences, however. Although OpenSUSE is based on RPM package installs like Red Hat's Fedora, OpenSUSE uses its own system administration and package management tool, called Yast2. Yast2 isn't particularly better or worse than competing geek-oriented system management tools, but it's different, and one more thing to learn if you're running a heterogeneous data center. (Of course, if you're going to centralize on OpenSUSE, you'll learn it once and move on.)

The big question is: Given that Red Hat bases its Fedora distribution on OpenSUSE, and that Fedora and OpenSUSE are both distributions with advanced features intended for power users, why would you pick one over the other? Fedora is marginally more widely supported in data centers and prebuilt software packages, but not enough to tip the scales one way or the other. But while they both have active developer communities and a support path, I prefer Novell's approach here: Novell's supported version of SUSE Linux is the same as the free OpenSUSE version, while Red Hat requires you to uninstall Fedora and install the commercial version (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) if you want full support.

At the end of the day, I guess it comes down to philosophy. Novell has gained some karma points for its aggressive defense of Linux against SCO, and the company has a history of fostering innovative open-source projects. Red Hat not so much. Novell has also spent a lot of time and effort on Windows integration with projects such as Mono, which lets .Net software run on Linux platforms; a necessary evil if Linux is going to play well in the corporate environment. These are all to the plus side of Novell.

On the other hand, Novell has cozied up pretty firmly with Microsoft lately in ways that have even some of its own employees speaking out. Novell signed a cross-patent agreement with Microsoft that many open-source advocates see as an admission by Novell that there's Microsoft intellectual property in Linux. These issues probably won't sway a corporate user against Novell; however, they're more persuasive to the die-hard free software crowd.

In summary, OpenSUSE 11.0 is a stable and powerful Linux distribution, but one that doesn't accommodate the inexperienced Linux user. It may be just the thing for your servers, but day-to-day and even business desktop users may want to lean toward a more user-friendly distribution.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

James Turner

Computerworld

Comments

Anonymous

1

Are you serious?

This is a horrible review!

OpenSuse and Fedora both difficult to install for the casual user? Huh? I guess the casual user has never installed Windows from a CD then...

There are 2 schools of thought when it comes to Linux installation? Really??? Well, there are LiveCD's that just install the LiveCD contents on the hard drive, and those come in 3 varieties: installer based, no user participation installs, and cheat code installs. Then there are installer based installs like OpenSuse & Mandriva PowerPack that simply install from the CD, but are not LiveCDs. Then there are minimal install CD's like Debian and PCLinuxOS MiniMe that require you to buildup your installation from a minimal setup, Debian being very minimal and CLI, where PCLinuxOS MiniMe is a minimal KDE desktop (and still a LiveCD as well). Next, there are source installation schemes like Gentoo and LFS, which can sometimes have a very primitive installer option. Then there are net-install CDs, like the Debian option, which also requires you to buildup your install. And, finally, there are hybrids of these. Just two schools of thought? Where have you been?

Just like most software installations in Windows, installer based installs of Linux can pretty much be done by continually clicking on the "Next" button, watching to make sure you setup your timezone correctly and minor stuff like that, which can also be done later. It can't possibly get any simpler than that, without making compromises in user configurability.

Red Hat does <b>NOT</b> base Fedora on OpenSuse. Fedora is based on Red Hat's own technology, code, and FOSS. Fedora is essentially an experimental training ground for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which uses much more hardened code. Red Hat Linux is older than Suse, which was based on Slackware and incorporated Red Hat's RPM packaging system.

Where did you get this crap? What Linux experience do you have? It must be very minimal...

The debate on Novell's actions with Microsoft have long been over. Yes, it left a bad taste in the mouths of many a Linux user. However, what does that have to do with a review of their product? What does that have to do with how well the distro works? Judgments of Novell's business practices have nothing to do with any of this, and besides, no matter what distro you use, you're probably using one of Novell's many innovations (Mono, XGL [Compiz]) or software that they participate heavily in the development of (kernel, KDE, Gnome...).

Novell is a first order distro developer. What that means is they develop their distro entirely from scratch, without relying on a "mother" distro. Ubuntu, Mepis, Knoppix and others rely on the work of Debian. Other distros also rely on the work of another distro, such as PCLinuxOS, who uses Mandriva to base off of. It's distros like OpenSuse, Red Hat/Fedora, Debian, and Mandriva that the entire world of Linux rely on for development. Novell is a significant contributor to the Open Source Linux community, and a valuable asset.

Comments are now closed.

Latest News Articles

Most Popular Articles

Follow Us

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Resources

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Compare & Save

Deals powered by WhistleOut
WhistleOut

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?