Lately, we've been covering a lot about Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal, Fedora 15, and Linux in general. However, we haven't really talked about another popular distribution that has been around for quite a while. The distro is called Linux Mint and it currently holds the second spot on Distrowatch.

Though the popularity of Ubuntu amongst the Linux-curious crowd is immense, Mint has quietly found itself a spot in the hearts of many new users. This gradual rise in the popularity of Mint makes it a distro that simply cannot be ignored anymore. So, let's compare Linux Mint 11 ‘Katya’ with our very own Natty and see how it holds out.

The user interface is the most important part of a distribution. Most often, it is the first thing a user notices or cares about, if of course, he's trying it on a live CD. Many times the User Interface is the sole deciding factor that can compel a Windows user to switch to a Linux-based distribution. While Ubuntu has recently moved to the controversial Unity interface, Linux Mint, with Katya, has decided to stick with the good old GNOME 2.x. Unity takes advantage of the powerful effects Compiz provides in order to create a beautiful shelled desktop. There are transparencies, different kinds of new effects and functionalities that give a modern look to the desktop. While this may work for new users who have never used Linux before, many seasoned Linux users have disliked this move, and many of them have even moved to Mint.

The elusive launcher on the left, the locked down panels and dash, lack of integration with default applications has brought down Ubuntu's popularity down a notch. For experienced Linuxers, the changes are too many to handle at once. Linux Mint in this case, steps up as a good, easy to use, viable alternative to Ubuntu. Of course, Ubuntu does ship with the GNOME 2.x desktop. However, that is going to change in the next version. Hence, Ubuntu users either have to get used to Unity or simply switch to another desktop. Linux Mint on the other hand, makes this switch possible for many users by keeping things really simple.

For those who don't know this, Linux Mint is Ubuntu-based, so users can enjoy all the goodness of Ubuntu but with a fresh minty flavor. From installation steps, Linux Mint makes sure that new users don't have any trouble installing it on their systems. They've kept the installer similar to the one Ubuntu has except for a few aesthetic changes. At the boot up itself, Mint pleases the user with one of the best GRUB splash screens that we've ever seen. Ubuntu however, sticks with the plain aubergine. When we compare the desktops, Mint has a fresh minty-green feel to it. Ubuntu on the other hand, pleases the user with the perky aubergine desktop that gives it its trademark look. Mint has modified the classic GNOME by combining the top and bottom panels into a single panel at the bottom. The real show stealer though, is the Start Menu (known as Mint Menu). This is what Unity should have incorporated instead of the locked-down dash. The menu includes links to ‘Places’ and ‘System’ on the left, and on the right there is a place for pinning the favorite applications. A search bar at the bottom makes it a complete menu. Dash on the other hand, simply includes shortcuts and a search bar.

Coming to the taskbar, Unity employs a modern-looking launcher that sits at the left of the screen. It comes with various functionalities like Quick lists, Lenses, Shortcuts and more. The launcher also has the ability to dodge windows intelligently. Mint on the other hand, employs the familiar task bar, which will please all the folks who long for the look and feel of a traditional desktop interface.

Also, when it comes to default selection of themes, Mint beats Ubuntu hands down with its collection of minty fresh themes that work perfectly. Ubuntu also comes with a wide variety of themes, but some of them aren't compatible with the buttons on the left. Also, few of them look ugly with the new Unity interface. The wallpaper collection in Mint is kept to bare minimum. It comes with around 9 Linux wallpapers but all of them look wonderful. Ubuntu however, has a much wider collection of wallpapers.

So, after looking at the UI aspect of both the desktops, there is no doubt that Mint Katya beats Ubuntu Natty hands down. Unity tries to do too much leaving the user both perplexed and agitated at times. Mint however, sticks to the minimal basics yet pleases the user aesthetically.

Winner: Linux Mint

Ubuntu has its own software center that was updated in Natty to include ratings and reviews. Mint users on the other hand, were already enjoying those features. What's more, Mint's software manager even has a pretty splash screen. Ubuntu's Software Center (USC) comes with all the features Mint's Software Manager provides including a few more. It includes support for installing paid applications like Family Farm, World of Goo and many others. Other than that, there's not much of a difference between both the Software managers. So, solely on the merit that USC lets users install paid applications, Ubuntu just wins this round.

Lately, Ubuntu has been playing around with its default application set. However, no matter how hard it tries, it can never match up to what Mint brings to the platter. Don't believe me? Here, take a look at what Mint offers:

Graphics: GIMP, Simple Scan, gThumb, LibreOffice Draw

Internet: Firefox, Pidgin IM, Giver, Sun Java 6, Thunderbird, Transmission, XChat IRC

Multimedia: Banshee, Brasero, GNOME Mplayer, Movie Player, Sound Recorder, VLC Media Player

Office: Dictionary, LibreOffice

Now, with applications like those, a user doesn't have to install anything extra to get started. The very fact that Mint includes applications like VLC and Mplayer puts it miles ahead of Ubuntu in this round. Ubuntu does have a decent set of applications but it simply isn't as impressive as the one Mint provides. Hence the winner here is Mint.

Again, Linux Mint being Ubuntu-based, performs almost the same way as Ubuntu does. However, if we consider the performance while using the actual desktop, Linux Mint takes the lead. This is because, even if you have a powerful graphics card, the quality of proprietary drivers that are out there for Linux aren't up to the mark. So, Unity having features that take advantage of the graphics card, many users may feel a significant drop in performance. Moreover, with Unity, the time to load the desktop from the GDM login screen has visibly increased. Linux Mint, as it stays on the safer side, works as snappy as ever. So, based purely on how the desktop performs, Mint wins this round.

Reiterating the point we made before, Ubuntu tries to do too much with Unity. It's not something that a new user will get used to straight away. Mint on the other hand, retains all the principles of the standard desktop. Hence, a new user will get accustomed to the interface within no time. Also, users who are switching from Windows will love the non-fussy minimalist look of Mint. The winner here of course, is Mint again.

Winner: Linux Mint

Reliability here is not to be confused with stability. If you're a frequent distro-hopper and are using Ubuntu, moving to Mint after reading this review, would be a child's play for you. However, if you use the computer for doing actual work and your productivity depends on its stability, you'll be a bit reluctant to switch right away. About a couple of years ago, switching distributions wasn't a big deal as most of them offered similar features. However now, with the whole GNOME 3 and Unity bifurcation, switching distros is like moving to another operating system. Hence, no matter how good Mint is, there will be people who'll be a bit hesitant to switch.

The very fact that Ubuntu is backed by a big company like Canonical makes Ubuntu more reliable as a 'product'. Moreover, Ubuntu has a strong community, a good fan following (P.S: Bandwagon effect), and a branding that is the best a Linux distribution can have. Also, some users are willing to stick with Ubuntu simply because it dared to make some brave moves. They believe that, with some added effort, Ubuntu has the potential to become the best operating system around. As far as support is concerned, Ubuntu offers top-quality professional Linux support (paid support) and sites like askubuntu.com and ubuntuforums.org have large amount of active users helping each other. So, considering its popularity and the prospects it has for the future, this round goes to Ubuntu.

Linux Mint being Ubuntu-based, almost 99% of the applications that are available for Ubuntu will work for Mint. However, inexperienced users who have just switched to Mint may find it difficult to find applications that are outside the software center. For example, if a new user goes to the Dropbox website to download the official application, he or she might get confused by not seeing an option to install the same software on Mint. That person might not be aware of the fact that any software that works on Ubuntu will also work for Mint. This has been a problem for Mint despite being so popular. Also, with new Ubuntu-only features like indicator applets, quicklists and lenses, the list of applications that make use of those features just keep on growing. In fact, popular applications like Dropbox online backup have even added support for Indicator applets. So, this round goes to Natty again.

Since Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu, there is not much of a difference between both the distros. One key feature that Mint offers is that it comes with all the codecs installed. But now that Ubuntu also allows users to install the codecs beforehand, there's not much of a difference between the two distributions. Hence, there's a tie here.

[Drumroll please] Ladies and Gentlemen, the results of the most epic desktop battle are out. The reigning champion Ubuntu Natty has scored 4 points. [Wait for Applause]. Linux Mint however, wins by scoring 5 points and becoming the new World Desktop Champion. [Some cheers amidst booing from Ubuntu fanboys]

But wait, we will be giving sort of a "People's Choice Award", so you may now cast your votes below:

Although Ubuntu 11.04 comes with tons of new features, it simply fails to impress as much as Linux Mint 11 does. Mint is fast, easy to use and just fresh. Ubuntu Natty though, has a lot to work upon. Earlier, Mint was always a step behind Ubuntu, but by sticking with GNOME classic, it has proven itself as a superior distribution. Only time will tell whether it can retain the top spot as Ubuntu is readying itself for bigger challenges.


Written by: Abhishek, a regular TechSource contributor and a long-time FOSS advocate.

All things are set for today’s epic battle. Two major release versions of two major Linux distributions will take the stage for what could be the fight of the year. Dubbed as the Battle Royale, it’s Ubuntu 8.04 vs. openSUSE 11 for our mega main event.

Please pay attention for the formal introduction:

This distro has a long standing record of excellence. It is widely known for its beauty, usability, and features. Fresh from its highly successful key release, please welcome the #1 challenger, the green mean distro fighting machine, openSUSE!

This distro has taken Linux to the next level. Its fast rise to fame can be credited for its user-friendliness, stability, and outstanding community support. Riding high from its recent LTS release, please welcome the defending world distribution champion, the distro Superstar, Ubuntu!

Now, let’s stop this silly intro and get down to business. I know that all of you are already excited to witness this historic match-up. So without any more delay, let’s get ready to rumble!

Distrowar Arena (Test Machine Specs):
Board: Intel Corporation D102GGC2
Processor: 3.40 GHz Intel Pentium D
Hard Drive: Samsung 80GB ATA with 8GB allocated to VM disk
Memory: 2GB DDR2 RAM with 512MB allocated to VM memory

Speed Test:
Installation Time- Winner, Ubuntu!
Boot/Start-up Time - Winner, Ubuntu!
Responsiveness- Draw!

Decoding...
Installation Speed:
We have carefully timed the installation from start to finish, and Ubuntu 8.04 finished faster than openSUSE 11. It took only 17 minutes for Ubuntu to completely finish the installation, while openSUSE needed 22 minutes to complete.

Boot/Start-up Speed:
We have meticulously measured the boot/start-up speed or the time it takes for a distro to boot from grub menu to the main desktop. After 3 tries, Ubuntu’s start-up speed average is around 41 seconds. openSUSE meanwhile came close with an average of 43 seconds flat. So, Ubuntu has a slim advantage over openSUSE in this category.

Responsiveness:
They are both wicked fast and responsive in their GNOME desktop so I had to call it a draw for “Responsiveness”.

Aesthetics:
Default Theme- Winner, openSUSE!
Artwork- Winner, openSUSE!
Extras- openSUSE!

Decoding...
Default Theme:
Both Ubuntu 8.04 and openSUSE 11 have a sleek and polished default theme, but I had to pick a winner on this one. I picked openSUSE because I think the elements of its default theme have blended well with the overall desktop look. --whatever that means ;-)

Artwork:
Artwork is judged based on the appearance of distro’s default boot slash image, login menu screen, and wallpaper. I handed it to openSUSE 11 because it has a more professional appeal. I also love the new green and black combination.

Extras:
Another openSUSE 11 win for “Extras” because I’m judging this category based on the added eye-candy that a distro can give you out-of-the-box. I just think Ubuntu lacks a bit of X-factor.

Features:
Pre-installed Applications- Draw!
Available Packages from Repo- Draw!
Ease of Use- Winner, Ubuntu!

Decoding...
Pre-installed Applications:
Since both Ubuntu 8.04 and openSUSE 11 comes with outstanding selection of free and open source software and has some equally amazing list of custom applications, I decided to give a draw verdict for this category.

Available Packages from the Repo:
Both Ubuntu 8.04 and openSUSE 11 also have plenty of available packages from their respective repositories, so it’s another draw here.

Ease-of-use:
Ubuntu is still unbeatable in this category because of its simplified desktop and excellent community support. However, openSUSE 11 is within striking distance.

Stability:
Hardware Detection- Winner, Draw!
Software Management- Ubuntu!
Error Handling- Draw!

Decoding...
Hardware Detection:
I can’t make a concrete judgment in this category because I have tested openSUSE 11 and Ubuntu 8.04 in VMWare only. However, they both performed remarkably well as they have properly configured all of the important VM hardware. So, I have to call it a draw.

Software Management:
Ubuntu 8.04 is the winner in this category because its “Synaptic Package Manager” performed better than the Yast2 software installer of openSUSE 11. Synaptic is much reliable in handling dependencies and it's a little quicker than Yast2.

Error Handling:
Since both Ubuntu 8.04 and openSUSE 11 handled some minor issues that I have encountered quiet well, and they are both quick to send updates and security fixes, it’s a tie for “Error Handling”.


The verdict:
Ladies and gentlemen, the gruelling Battle Royale has come to an end. Let’s now see the scorecard. In Speed Test, the score is 2-0 in favor of Ubuntu! In Aesthetics, the score is 3-0 in favor of openSUSE! In Features, the score is 1-0 in favor of Ubuntu! In Stability, the score is 1-0 in favor of Ubuntu! With the final total score of 4-3, the winner and still distro champion of the world, the distro Superstar, Ubuntu!

Conclusion:
In my own choice of categories and tests, and in my own judgment alone, Ubuntu 8.04 has beaten openSUSE 11 but only by a very slim margin. It only shows that openSUSE is worthy to be called the second most popular Linux distribution at the moment, and Ubuntu is still the cream of the crop.

I hope you enjoyed this one. Feel free to share to us your thoughts.

PS - Anyway, I almost forgot to remind you all that our distrowar is just for the spirit of fun and should not be taken seriously. However, you can always take it seriously if you want to ;-)

Greetings Linux fans from around the world. We are here again to witness the clash of two ultra-lightweight distributions. As you may know, these two distros have collided in the past and have fought until the end. One ended up victorious, while the other one was not as fortunate. So today, we shall give the losing distro a chance to even the score. Now, without further delay, let's welcome our two fully loaded distro warriors!

On your left is the challenger, weighing in at exactly 48.5MB, armed with the latest weapon version, please welcome the totally upgraded DSL 4.2. On your right is the defending champion, now leaner than ever and weighing in at exactly 87.1MB, put your paws together for the newly trained Puppy Linux 4.0.

Decoding: The time it takes to download DSL is obviously less due to its smaller size, so it has an advantage over Puppy. DSL is again the clear winner for "Boot/Start-up Time" (measured from boot menu to desktop) because it took only around 29 seconds for DSL to reach its JWM desktop. Puppy meanwhile was slower and took about 36 seconds to boot. It is another draw for "Responsiveness" because the two distros are both nimble, and I cannot really decide which has the clear edge.

Decoding: Since both are using JWM as their window manager, I gave a draw verdict for "Default Theme" in the aesthetics category. "Extras" went to Puppy Linux because it is now utilizing the more advanced GTK2 engine. For "Artwork", I have to give it to DSL this time because I love the new darker theme. Puppy won last time because of that cute Puppy wallpaper. I just love dogs, I guess :-)

Decoding: Puppy Linux is feature-packed and has plenty of pre-installed applications. I know it's unfair because Puppy is bigger hence it has more packages out-of-the-box than DSL. But as I always say, we are just having fun here, so be it. Puppy is also the winner for "Ease of Use" because of its much- improved overall GUI, like it's user-friendly package manager.

Decoding: Since both Puppy ad DSL have no trouble in detecting and configuring my test machine's hardware, it's a draw for "Hardware Detection". It's another draw for "Software Maintenance" because their package managers both performed well on several tests that I made. DSL's occasional failure to switch between window managers made me gave "Error Handling" to Puppy. I've never encountered a serious bug while in Puppy.

The final score was close, with Puppy Linux emerging triumphant yet again. However, DSL should not be underestimated because it showed us that it has the capability to beat distros that are much bigger in size. Maybe I will give DSL a smaller opponent next time, like SliTaz. What do you think?

That concludes our battle for today. This is all just for the spirit of fun; I hope you enjoyed this one. As always, I am the sole judge of this so-called Distrowar, therefore your opinions are greatly appreciated.

Another exciting month has almost passed. So far, I tried and tested two equally fantastic and capable Linux distributions. Wolvix 1.1.0 and Pardus 2007.3 are well-crafted distros that truly deserve some attention. Some might ask which one is better between the two. There’s only one way to find out. Let’s put Wolvix and Pardus on stage and start a distrowar.

Ladies and gentlemen, put your hands together for our two distro warriors. On the right corner, weighing in at 483MB, please welcome the Norwegian Wolf, Wolvix. On the left corner weighing in at exactly 686MB, please welcome the Pride of Turkey, Pardus.

Now sit back, relax, and read on. It’s Wolvix vs. Pardus, wolf vs. leopard, dog vs. cat. Let’s get it on! :)

Decoding:
Wolvix edged out Pardus by just a small margin in “Installation Time (the time it takes to finish the installation)”. Meanwhile, Pardus is the clear winner in “Start-up Time (measured from Grub menu to the main desktop)” because it completely booted for around 52 seconds, whereas Wolvix took more than 3 minutes to finish booting. Because Wolvix uses the lighter XFCE desktop manager, it tends to be a little bit quicker and more responsive than Pardus which uses KDE.

Aesthetics:
Default Theme- Winner, Wolvix!
Extras- Winner, Pardus!
Artwork- Winner, Pardus!

Decoding:
I made Wolvix the winner for “Default Theme” because I love its simple and elegant look. Pardus won “Extras and “Artwork” for its added desktop eyecandy, like the transparent effects and the enhanced Kickoff style menu, and also for its great looking icon sets.

Features:
Pre-installed Applications- Winner, Pardus!
Available Packages from Repo- Draw!
Ease of Use- Winner, Pardus!

Decoding:
For “Pre-installed Applications”, Pardus won due to the fact that it is bigger in terms of size than Wolvix, which means it contains a larger number of pre-installed software. Quality wise, they both include great software packages out-of-the-box. Also, they equally have plenty of “Available Packages from Repo” that is why I called it a draw. For “Ease of Use”, Pardus is my choice because of its straightforward graphical installation and package management, and for its uncomplicated Control Center.

Stability:
Hardware Detection- Draw!
Software Management- Winner, Pardus!
Error Handling- Winner, Pardus!

Decoding:
Since Pardus and Wolvix had no problems in properly detecting and configuring my hardware, it’s a draw for “Hardware Detection”. Pardus won “Software Management” because of its highly capable and Synaptic-like package manager called PiSi. I gave “Error Handling” to Pardus for the reason that I encountered fewer issues with it than with Wolvix.

Final Score:
Pardus = 7
Wolvix = 3
*Winner, Pardus!

Conclusion:
Pardus won by quite a large margin mainly because in my own opinion it is more polished and complete than Wolvix. However, I can’t fully assume that Wolvix is the ultimately loser in this battle since my judgment was solely based on the results of my tests and on my hardware alone. To be really fair, I need other people’s opinion. So, to those who have also tried these two distros, feel free to give us your thoughts.

Anyway, our distrowar is all for fun and should not be taken seriously. If you want to take this gravely, it’s your choice. Just don’t blame me if you’ll encounter heart problems (hehe).

Today, two Slackware-based Linux distributions from the lightweight division will square off to find out once and for all, who has the clear edge.

On the left corner, please welcome the Brazilian sensation, GoblinX. On the right corner, put your hands together for the Zenmaster, Zenwalk.

I will be the sole and fair (hopefully) judge of this Slack-off as I have recently tried and tested the latest versions of the two distros. I know that it is kind of unfair to compare the two as Zenwalk is bigger than GoblinX “Mini Edition” in terms of size and therefore has more pre-installed applications and features. And, I could have used the “Standard Edition” edition instead. But, we are all just having fun here so we shall push through. Who knows, this could somehow end up like the fight between David and Goliath.

Decoding:
Both GoblinX and Zenwalk were completely installed at almost the same speed, so I just gave a draw verdict on “Installation Time”. Zenwalk took about 41 seconds to boot (measured from Grub menu to the main desktop) compared to GoblinX’s 45 seconds. They were both very responsive since the two are using the same lightweight window manager which is XFCE.

GoblinX won the entire "Aesthetics" category because of its unique and artistic appeal. Zenwalk was just too plain and simple. Though for me, simplicity in design is not a disadvantage, I just thought that GoblinX has that X-factor in terms of looks.

Being the bigger distro, Zenwalk has the obvious advantage against the smaller GoblinX for available “pre-installed applications”. But, they both have plenty of packages on hand from their software repositories. Also, they were both user-friendly and I had a hard time choosing which one is better so I'm giving a draw verdict for “Ease of Use”.

The minor predicament in GoblinX during installation is the reason why Zenwalk won “Hardware Detection” and “Error Handling”. Zenwalk was just too smooth and trouble-free during the set-up. Since both have the same package management system, it’s a tie for “Software Management”.

The older and more experienced Zenwalk Linux won, but by just a slim margin. Its stability and added features were just too much for the young GoblinX to take. Nonetheless, GoblinX didn’t just easily go down because it fought until the end. I think it has a huge potential to succeed, and perhaps, could someday become a distro to be reckoned with.

A well-deserved win by Zenwalk in my own view, but as always, I want more opinions from our dear readers.

Fluxbuntu and MiniMe are ultra-lightweight versions of two equally popular Linux distributions namely Ubuntu and PCLinuxOS. Fluxbuntu is keeping it light by utilizing a Fluxbox window manager as well as other unhefty pre-installed applications. Meanwhile, MiniMe uses a KDE desktop but with minimum out-of-the-box software packages.

It is time once again for our monthly distrowar. As usual, I will be the sole judge, and it’s only me who can decide which will be declared a winner or a loser.

Two distros that I have recently reviewed will take the stage. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s Fluxbuntu 7.10 (RC) vs. the MiniMe edition of PCLOS for today’s main event.

Decoding:
MiniMe just blew me away with its super quick installation, while Fluxbuntu needed some extra time to fully complete its set-up. Fluxbuntu boots faster (measured from Grub menu to the main desktop) which took about 44 seconds. MiniMe consumed around 53 seconds at boot. MiniMe is very responsive even with its KDE desktop, and Fluxbuntu as expected is the same way receptive. Hence, my verdict for 'responsiveness' is dead heat.

Aesthetics:
Default Theme- Winner, Fluxbuntu!
Extras- MiniMe!
Artwork- Winner, Fluxbuntu!

Decoding:
Fluxbuntu’s default theme and artwork is a winner for me because I just love its clean and simple default look. It truly reflects its ultra-light character. MiniMe is plain looking but it is highly customizable, that is why I gave it the upper hand in the ‘Extras’ category.

Features:
Pre-installed Applications- Fluxbuntu!
Available Packages from Repo- Draw!
Ease of Use- Winner, MiniMe!

Decoding:
Fluxbuntu has a better and greater line-up of pre-installed software applications compared to MiniMe. But, both have plenty of available software packages from their respective repositories. I find MiniMe a lot easier to use based on the ease of installation, newbie-friendly KDE desktop, and very reliable, complete and comprehensible Control Center.

Stability:
Hardware Detection- Winner, MiniMe!
Software Management- Draw!
Error Handling- MiniMe!

Decoding:
Due to some known issues with Fluxbuntu, MiniMe won 'hardware detection' and 'error handling'. MiniMe just works without giving me that much of a hard time configuring all the necessary hardware devices. Software management is a tie since they both performed well in dealing with software packages like downloading, installation, updating, and uninstallation.

Final Score:
MiniMe = 5
Fluxbuntu = 4
*Winner, MiniMe!

Conclusion:
MiniMe won by a very slim margin, a point to be exact. It is not really a convincing win by MiniMe so I would like to give Fluxbuntu the benefit of the doubt. The conclusion was just based IMOP (in my own opinion). Therefore, I would appreciate to hear some views from our dear readers who have tried both MiniMe and Fluxbuntu.

So, that is it for now. Till then and see you on our next Distrowar! :)

Battle of the Elite: openSUSE vs. Mandriva - Mandriva and openSUSE are two well-established Linux distributions worthy to be considered elite. Both of them have successfully conquered the hearts of many Linux enthusiasts long before Ubuntu and PCLinuxOS took the stage. With their latest releases namely Mandriva Linux 2008 and openSUSE 10.3, they remained a force to be reckoned with.

In case you are wondering which is better among the two, then you are in luck because it is time once again for our distrowar. It’s Mandriva Linux 2008 vs. openSUSE 10.3 for today’s main event!

Mandriva Linux was completely installed with less time consumed compared to a rather long process in openSUSE. Mandriva also boots faster which took around 48 seconds to reach the main desktop from the Grub menu, while openSUSE took about 57 seconds. They were both responsive and I saw no considerable differences that separated the two.

For “Default Theme” and “Artwork” I picked openSUSE as the winner because I prefer the color green over Mandriva’s blue as it has a much cleaner and sleeker appeal. Mandriva’s desktop is also well polished but I just love green, that’s all. For “Extras”, the 2D effects of Mettise gave Mandriva the upper hand over openSUSE.

Both have a good line-up of pre-installed software applications and both also have plenty of available software packages from their respective repositories. I considered Mandriva a lot uncomplicated to use compared with openSUSE, based on the ease of installation and its straightforward approach in software and hardware maintenance. Mandriva is also very easy to tweak and I find its graphical configuration tools ideal for Linux beginners.

They were both running smooth and steady on my test machine so it is kind of hard for me to decide which has the clear advantage. So, I just gave a draw verdict on “software maintenance” and “error handling” just to be safe. However, Mandriva won “hardware detection” because it properly detected my graphics card and then flawlessly installed the necessary device driver to make it fully functional.

Mandriva Linux 2008 may have convincingly won the battle against openSUSE 10.3 but not unanimously because there’s only one judge and that is me :) So, to those who have experienced using these two distros and can compare which of them is better, feel free to give us some feedback.

Distrowar: TinyME vs. Sidux - A month has already passed since our last distrowar, so we are at the right moment to bring it on again. This time, two equally capable Linux distributions that I have recently tried and tested will battle it out to determine who has the upper hand.

It’s TinyME against Sidux for today's main event. Now, without further ado, let’s get ready to rumble! It's showtime!

Decoding:
Obviously, TinyME is the winner in the “Download Time” category because of its smaller-sized installer. I consider it a plus for a distro that has lesser size and hence can be completely downloaded in lesser time also. Sidux boots surprisingly faster than TinyME, but only around 8 seconds separated their startup time speed. It’s a tie for “Responsiveness” because they were both quick performers.

Decoding:
For "Aesthetics", it is really hard to decide because they both look good. Nevertheless, Sidux seems to have a slight edge against TinyME in every "Aesthetics" sub-category so I made it the winner.

Decoding:
I have to give it all to TinyME for the “Features” category for the following reasons; it has better line-up of pre-installed software applications and utilities, it has more available software packages from its repositories, and it is relatively easier to use compared to Sidux.

They both performed smooth and steady on my test machine. Accordingly, I can only give a draw verdict for the “Stability” category. Also, I know that an extensive use is required for me to accurately judge their constancy. So, I will just leave it to those that may have used Sidux and TinyME for a much longer period of time than I had and can precisely compare which is more stable among the two.

Conclusion:
For the first time ever in the history of distrowar, we have a tie. This only means that Sidux and TinyME may differ in strengths and weaknesses, but in the end, they are in the same way competent.

As always, let me remind you that distrowar is just for the spirit of fun and should not be taken seriously. However, you can always take it seriously if you want to. :)

As some of you may know, I have recently tried and tested each one of them, and have found out some of their strengths as well as their weaknesses.

Linux Distro War: Sabayon vs. Mint - A lot of people have been pairing and matching their favorite distros with the hope of finding out which is better or superior among their choices; and I'm one of them. I often visit different forums or do a search on Google looking for answers and curious about the real winner among my favorites.

Distro Name:---------------------------Sabayon Linux----------------Linux Mint

Installation:-----------------------------Graphical(LiveCD)-----------Graphical(LiveCD)

Speed Test:

Decoding: In VMware, it only took about 15 minutes to install Sabayon against 20 minutes in Mint. The Boot/Startup Time, measured from Grub to desktop, took 58 seconds for Sabayon and 65 seconds for Mint. It's a draw for Responsiveness due to fact that both distros are light and fast and I can't see a considerable difference between the two.

Decoding: Mint is my winner in all Aesthetics Category. The default theme is pleasing to the eye with several extra Mint wallpapers available. The artworks are sleek and polished like its boot-splash screen and log-in menu.

Decoding: The Pre-installed Applications Category is deadlocked because both have several important features installed by default like the multimedia capability of Sabayon and the key softwares found in Mint. The Debian/Ubuntu repositories have all the good and latest stuff available for Mint compared to the sometimes dated Gentoo packages. Ease of Use is hands down to Mint for being newbie-friendly.

Decoding: I can only give a draw verdict in all of the "Stability" sub-categories because I have never used Mint and Sabayon long enough to declare a clear winner. But based only on my initial tests, I found out that both of them are very much capable and are generally stable for productive uses. I hope the readers can fill in the gap.

The results are only based on my own opinion and were solely based on the tests I made. Mint may have won the war but the DVD version of Sabayon might have all the necessary weaponry it needs to beat Mint. What do you think?