On 3/2/07, Preston St. Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Don't get me wrong here. I like Arch. But you're being unfair to Ubuntu. Running the default install and EasyUbuntu involves very little user interaction (relatively) and installs all the proper codecs and such that you need. I haven't found any system yet where its easier to get it all working. -Preston PS I'm using sidux right now
I didn't suggest one more than the others... even for a totally newbie I selected to install Ubuntu instead of Arch (for my aunt btw). It's not a matter of what is the best OS but more likely which one is good for your needs. On my side I tried both and I have both on my system becasue I'm really excited about the idea of Ubuntu, the gathering of the developper there and the great momentum they are creating right now. There is a low of users around the globe and they have a lot of money they can build on. On my side, at the beginning of the Ubuntu project I would have chosen another type of package manager than apt because I found it slow and difficult to maintain, but that's my opinion. Michel On 3/2/07, Leif Thande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Still, Ubuntu is lacking in several respects. [...] I still do not > believe it is user-friendly enough for the average Windows power user" > > Pretty much says it all... > > > Anyway, I think more people are doing it the other way around, like I > did ( Kubuntu --> Archlinux --> Linspire, nah just kidding .. ) > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch > _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
