2009's 10 Worst Linux Distributions

Ken Hess khess is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009, 4:43 pm |
-1
Any list of best or worst will have its opponents and proponents and I foresee that this list of worst Linux distributions will be no different. There were, at last count, almost 300 Linux distributions and they all can't be great. But, this list of Linux distributions are, in my opinion, the worst of the lot. Beginning with the least offensive at number 10 to the least desirable at number 1, this list is a compilation of my opinions and experiences with various distributions over the past 15 years but only current distributions are included.

10. Security-enabled Distributions - If you want to get hacked and owned, just label your next distribution with the word 'Security' somewhere in its name or description and wait about 5 hours. Some offenders in this category are Astaro, NetSecL and Engarde Secure Linux. The biggest problem with these kinds of distributions is that they aren't updated regularly enough to provide the security that they tout.

9. Super-specialized Distributions - A couple of years ago I saw a Linux distribution called something like 8086 Linux. OK, I admit that it's cute but is it practical? Keep those kinds of distros in academia where practicality isn't important. The throwaways in this category include GeeXBoX, LinuxConsole and Zenwalk.

8. Minimal Desktop - How many of these do we need? Seriously, if you want a minimal desktop, install busybox, xfce or lxde and use it. We don't need 50 distros named 'minimal.' Ones to avoid are CrunchBang, INX and LormaLinux.

7. Foreign Language Distros - Most major distros ask during installation which language you want to use so why do we need these? I mean, do we really need an Eskimo Linux? One exception here--I think Red Hat should have kept Redneck as one of their installation language choices--it was the second language after English that they had for Red Hat. There are too many transgressors in this category to list here.

6. Create Your Own Distribution Distributions - Maybe it's just me but I've never successfully created my own distribution with any of these. Either the instructions are too vague or I just don't have the time to waste trying to troubleshoot every dependency under the sun. Big time wasters include LinuxFromScratch, Slax and Cross Linux From Scratch.

5. Unfinished Symphony Distros - These are distributions that either never get finished or somehow stall due to lack of interest but still remain as examples of Linux greatness. The descriptions are awesome but failed due to poor execution. Fine examples are aLinux, BBLCD and NetMAX.

4. Embedded Distributions - OK, not ALL embedded distros suck but, in general, why should I care about these? Aren't they for embedded system builders and such? If a device comes with an embedded version of Linux, great but I'm not tearing open a $400 gadget to try an hack Linux onto it. That's for geeks without families to support. I, for one, don't live in my parent's basement nor do I have that kind of disposable income. No specific examples here--just the category as a whole.

3. Mobile Distributions - Related to, but not the same as, embedded distributions are the Mobile distributions. Again, if it comes with a Linux distribution, cool, I'm happy. If not, who cares? This is one big reason projects like OpenMoko, Moblin and Hackable:1 just don't hold my already too-short attention.

2. Useless Appliances - Look at VMware's Virtual Appliance Marketplace and you'll see a gaggle of virtual appliances in 20 or so different categories. Some are really good but most are worthless and a waste of bandwidth and boot time. I don't have any specific to mention but there are a lot of them, believe me. If you want to use a virtual appliance, decide what you need and, if you can't build it yourself, then go download some from the marketplace to test. One of the big problems with these things is that many are created using non-free software so while the download is 'free' the appliance or some of its components are not. Proceed with caution.

1. Microsoft Killers - It seems that this category is the most popular with bloggers, techies, CXOs and even yours truly. I think I've officially given up on a Linux-based Microsoft killer at least for the Desktop operating system. Love it or hate it, Windows is on the desktop to stay--at least in the foreseeable future. While there are some inspirational and ambitious projects out there, somehow they all fall short of the Windows operating system...even a crap pile like Vista--although Vista almost did the job for Linux all by itself.
I'm not speaking for myself here but for the millions of other business and personal users who use Windows. I personally prefer Linux but no matter how cool the likes of Google's Chrome OS, Presto and Ubuntu are, they will never be Microsoft killers.

There you have them--my list of 2009's worst Linux distributions.

Write back and let me know which distributions you think are the worst.
Quick reply to this message  
0
dandart dandart is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
To kill MS, all one needs to do is create a linux distro that is not in the least bit "annoying", which is what Ubuntu's papercuts is trying to do. Include Wine, codecs, graphics drivers. and you have brilliance. I do believe Sabayon rules in that context, but still needs work.
Most still need work, but don't kill LFS - it was nice and easy and I made at least 3 distros with it.

We need one perfect distro, with options at the beginning to specify the desktop out of all choices. We need to choose what to include (various appliances and tools). like checkboxes for Apache. svn. etc, easy. We need a great repository so we don't need to add more like in Ubuntu. Let's-a go!
 
0
Dwasifar Dwasifar is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this guy just basically include EVERY Linux distro in at least one category of his list?
 
0
matthewb matthewb is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
I would say that the validity of the entire post is more than doubtful.

Firstly: foreign languages.
"Foreign" to whom? Needless to say, the native language of Linux should be Finnish. As there is no explanation attached, I have to assume that in the author's mind White Anglo-Saxon Protestants own all the IT world by definition. It seems quite chauvinistic to assume that no one needs Eskimo languages in Linux only because Ken Hess does not speak any Yupik or Inuit languages himself. Ignorance is never a reason to be proud.

Secondly: Google Chrome OS.
How can you criticize an OS that has not even been released? Writing a review of a product you have not tried is simply unethical.

Thirdly: Linux From Scratch.
As anyone can see on the LFS website, LFS is developed for people who want to learn how the system works. Of course it takes a lot of effort to get it running. It is simply the matter of reading the distro description and choosing the right one for a given task.

Anyway, I can see that building LFS can be difficult if you do it cross-platform, but Slax? It is a LiveCD for crying out loud...
 
0
khess khess is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
@matthewb

You'd be surprised to know that I'm not a WASP as you suggest. I found LFS to be difficult but it's been 3 years since I've tried it...maybe I'll give it another go on Dan's advice. As for SLAX, it's also supposed to be a platform where you'd create your own distros. Many distros are based on it. Here is a partial description: "SLAX-Live CD is a bootable live CD based on Slackware Linux distribution. All the scripts and source code are included to build your own live CD, or just download the ISO image."
 
0
matthewb matthewb is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
@Ken

Thank you for answering. My experience with LFS started 2 years ago and it was OK (apart from cross-platform, where I still tend to get lost); obviously I need to look into Slax some more. Sorry for any misguided comments.

Whatever your reasons are, I still see no reason to fight internationalization of any OS. But, considering that I run every single OS in English anyway, my opinion here hardly matters.
 
0
esavard esavard is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
2009's 10 Worst Linux Distributions... What a joke!

And this article is the #1 worst 2009's article about Linux!

Damn, I just lost 5 min. reading it...
 
0
necrolin necrolin is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
How about buggiest Linux distro of 2009. My vote goes to OpenSuse 11.1. They should just call it Linux ME.
 
0
ebug ebug is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
Hess just mentioned almost all distros of every kind. I almost believed in him but this article is outright misguided. The lowest kind!!! Just got my fortune cookie a while ago that's says "The best remedy for anger is delay". Well, not this time!!!
 
0
khess khess is offline Offline | Jul 12th, 2009
I mentioned the worst of the lot for each type plus some generic types that are just terrible.

@necrolin: Thanks for that, it is funny.
 
 


Message:


Similar Threads
Thread Tools Search this Thread



About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | DaniWeb | Acceptable Use Policy | RSS Feed

©2003 - 2009 DaniWeb® LLC