Sure. Next, take a true random poll of how many people use RH, vs how many people use Slack. Seriously: Google doesn't give you any sort of statistically valid way to determine whether Slack or RH is harder to use.
You could use that reasoning to claim that Windows is better than Linux.
Slack's packaging works OK, assuming you're using one to five computer. That's what Rob seemed to be pointing out - it doesn't scale, at all.
I don't think Slackware is designed with huge installbases in mind. In any case, how does having dependency checking help in that case anyway? If the package installs on one machine, shouldn't it install on all? I have installed and maintained huge labs of both Fedora and Suse machines. More often than not the automated updates would fail _because_ of the dependency checking. Often the people who wrote the udpates would assume you had done a "full" install rather than a custom low-overhead one, and have all these pointless dependencies listed which weren't needed. I was always having to install packages by hand until yum would upgrade properly again. I have had rpm packages that would frustrate me for hours trying to figure out which package was needed. With slackware when a package won't run because of a missing dependency, I never found it any harder to diagnose than an rpm with the same problem. An added bonus with Slackware is when you installed a newer package of something like glibc it would leave the older files around so that you didn't break any of your existing system. Vince who is not resisting the urge to get involved in a flamewar very well
