In this article, we will review the 10 most used Linux distributions
based on the huge availability of software, ease of installation and
use, and community support on web forums.

https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/10-most-used-linux-distributions-of-all-time-2/

--
[s]
Internetado.

Internetado <internetado@alt119.net> wrote:
> In this article, we will review the 10 most used Linux distributions
> based on the huge availability of software, ease of installation and
> use, and community support on web forums.
>
> https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/10-most-used-linux-distributions-of-all-time-2/
>

Interesting but since it is titled "10 Most Used Linux
Distributions of *All Time*", why Zorin or Elementary as
opposed to Slackware.

Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
to get popular in the late 90s.

--
[t]csh(1) - "An elegant shell, for a more... civilized age."
- Paraphrasing Star Wars

On 2024-03-28 16:06, John McCue wrote:
> Internetado <internetado@alt119.net> wrote:
>> In this article, we will review the 10 most used Linux distributions
>> based on the huge availability of software, ease of installation and
>> use, and community support on web forums.
>>
>> https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/10-most-used-linux-distributions-of-all-time-2/
>>
>
> Interesting but since it is titled "10 Most Used Linux
> Distributions of *All Time*", why Zorin or Elementary as
> opposed to Slackware.
>
> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
> to get popular in the late 90s.

The section on openSUSE is not fully correct. I can't say about the
other sections.

First, it is openSUSE, not OpenSUSE. They spell it 3 times wrong and two
correct.

Then they say that the enterprise version is based on openSUSE. This is
is not fully correct; it derives loosely from the factory version, but
the free stable version, Leap, derives closely from the enterprise
version (binary compatible). Things change over the years, though.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
> to get popular in the late 90s.

Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But earlly
days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.

Elijah
------
recalls using Redhat in late nineties

Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
>> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
>> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
>> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
>> to get popular in the late 90s.
>
> Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But earlly
> days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.
>
Oh boy, Yggdrasil! That brings me back, my first Linux installation from
around 20 floppy on a Compaq with a massive (Massive! I say) 10MB HD.

> Elijah
> ------
> recalls using Redhat in late nineties

And that was my second... I actually bought the box.

G

On 29/03/2024 10:01, G wrote:
> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
>>> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
>>> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
>>> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
>>> to get popular in the late 90s.
>>
>> Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But earlly
>> days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.
>>
> Oh boy, Yggdrasil! That brings me back, my first Linux installation from
> around 20 floppy on a Compaq with a massive (Massive! I say) 10MB HD.
>
>> Elijah
>> ------
>> recalls using Redhat in late nineties
>
> And that was my second... I actually bought the box.
>
> G

Only two versions I knew back in the day were Debian and Red Hat, a
friend had SUSE.

When the time came I tried out everything and Debian worked OK, but was
lacking in desktop frills, so I tried Ubuntu, but for whatever reason
the installation failed, so I tried mint Mate.

And have never seen any reason to try anything else.

--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 29/03/2024 10:01, G wrote:
>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in reality, there
>>>> were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian. In the early days,
>>>> Linux was Slackware then others started to get popular in the late
>>>> 90s.
>>>
>>> Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But
>>> earlly days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.
>>>
>> Oh boy, Yggdrasil! That brings me back, my first Linux installation
>> from around 20 floppy on a Compaq with a massive (Massive! I say)
>> 10MB HD.
>>
>>> Elijah
>>> ------
>>> recalls using Redhat in late nineties
>>
>> And that was my second... I actually bought the box.
>
> Only two versions I knew back in the day were Debian and Red Hat, a
> friend had SUSE.
>
> When the time came I tried out everything and Debian worked OK, but
> was lacking in desktop frills, so I tried Ubuntu, but for whatever
> reason the installation failed, so I tried mint Mate.
>
> And have never seen any reason to try anything else.

Began with SLS [1], installed Slackware when it first appeared as an
"improved" SLS, still using Slackware (now V15) today.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softlanding_Linux_System

On 2024-03-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 29/03/2024 10:01, G wrote:
>
>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
>>>> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
>>>> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
>>>> to get popular in the late 90s.
>>>
>>> Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But earlly
>>> days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.
>>>
>> Oh boy, Yggdrasil! That brings me back, my first Linux installation from
>> around 20 floppy on a Compaq with a massive (Massive! I say) 10MB HD.
>>
>>> Elijah
>>> ------
>>> recalls using Redhat in late nineties
>>
>> And that was my second... I actually bought the box.
>
> Only two versions I knew back in the day were Debian and Red Hat, a
> friend had SUSE.
>
> When the time came I tried out everything and Debian worked OK, but was
> lacking in desktop frills, so I tried Ubuntu, but for whatever reason
> the installation failed, so I tried mint Mate.
>
> And have never seen any reason to try anything else.

The first Linux I ran was Slackware, for a simple pragmatic reason:
I looked at the Linux books in the local bookstore, and the book I
liked best was by Patrick Volkerding and came with a Slackware 3.5
CD. I stayed with Slackware for some time, but eventually got tired
of chasing dependencies when installing or updating software. Maybe
it had a package manager, but I didn't know about it. At that point
I tried a number of other distributions on my laptop, leaving my
main machine alone until I made a decision. I stayed with CrunchBang
(with BlackBox) for a while (lean and mean), then tried Mint, which
was OK but had nothing that really excited me. Mageia didn't last
long; KDE was beautiful but heavyweight, and I kept getting console
messages from strange processes I had never asked for and didn't want.
Ubuntu was pretty and easy to use, but release 10 went to the Unity
desktop, which I didn't like. Eventually I settled on Debian (with
Xfce) and have been happily there ever since.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
/ \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

On 30/03/2024 17:00, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-03-29, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 29/03/2024 10:01, G wrote:
>>
>>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc, John McCue <jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nothing against those 2 distros, but in the 90s, in
>>>>> reality, there were really 2 Linuxes, Slackware and Debian.
>>>>> In the early days, Linux was Slackware then others started
>>>>> to get popular in the late 90s.
>>>>
>>>> Debian is only a couple of months younger than Slackware. But earlly
>>>> days I remember a lot more Yggdrasil than Debian.
>>>>
>>> Oh boy, Yggdrasil! That brings me back, my first Linux installation from
>>> around 20 floppy on a Compaq with a massive (Massive! I say) 10MB HD.
>>>
>>>> Elijah
>>>> ------
>>>> recalls using Redhat in late nineties
>>>
>>> And that was my second... I actually bought the box.
>>
>> Only two versions I knew back in the day were Debian and Red Hat, a
>> friend had SUSE.
>>
>> When the time came I tried out everything and Debian worked OK, but was
>> lacking in desktop frills, so I tried Ubuntu, but for whatever reason
>> the installation failed, so I tried mint Mate.
>>
>> And have never seen any reason to try anything else.
>
> The first Linux I ran was Slackware, for a simple pragmatic reason:
> I looked at the Linux books in the local bookstore, and the book I
> liked best was by Patrick Volkerding and came with a Slackware 3.5
> CD. I stayed with Slackware for some time, but eventually got tired
> of chasing dependencies when installing or updating software. Maybe
> it had a package manager, but I didn't know about it. At that point
> I tried a number of other distributions on my laptop, leaving my
> main machine alone until I made a decision. I stayed with CrunchBang
> (with BlackBox) for a while (lean and mean), then tried Mint, which
> was OK but had nothing that really excited me. Mageia didn't last
> long; KDE was beautiful but heavyweight, and I kept getting console
> messages from strange processes I had never asked for and didn't want.
> Ubuntu was pretty and easy to use, but release 10 went to the Unity
> desktop, which I didn't like. Eventually I settled on Debian (with
> Xfce) and have been happily there ever since.
>
I was watching a lot of video and listening to auidio as well and Mint
came with all the right codecs installed

That was key to my staying with it
Debian +xfce is a neat choice if you don't want to run videos etc.

--
WOKE is an acronym... Without Originality, Knowledge or Education.