Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

ubuntu vs opensuse

Filed under
SUSE
Ubuntu
-s

I was glancing through the top searches for my site and noticed one string I thought I'd try to answer it. That search was openSUSE vs Ubuntu. Now, I've avoided formally comparing Ubuntu to other distros such as openSUSE or Mandriva before because in my book it's like comparing apples to oranges, but for the sake of those searching, I will try.

Downloading and Installing:

The first difference that presents itself is the choice of downloads. Ubuntu comes in a one installable live CD or alternatively, a one CD installer. OpenSUSE comes first in a five CD or one DVD installer. They also offer a one CD installable system as well in either a GNOME or KDE flavor. Of course, Ubuntu is the only one who will send you a CD for free.

OpenSUSE's installer is a refined graphical installer with lots of user choices. It can be a quick easy install or more advanced if so needed usually by clicking further options. It includes desktop and package selection, setting up root password, net connection, other hardware configuration, boot loader, and a user account. Ubuntu's installer is becoming more and more polished, but it's a one size fits all install. No package selection or root password, but it does walk the user through basic settings such as a user account and boot loader. As all Linux, both require an install and swap partitions and give the user the means during install to make them if needed. OpenSUSE's installer is much more powerful, but both get the job done.

The Desktops:

Ubuntu's desktop is what appears to me to be a slightly customized for aesthetics but otherwise basic GNOME. OpenSUSE gives the user a choice as to which desktop to use: KDE, GNOME, or one of several other popular lighter solutions. OpenSUSE customizes their KDE and GNOME desktops quite a bit. First for aesthetics but also for things which developers feel will enhance the desktop experience such as Kickoff menus, integrated search, extra applets. OpenSUSE has far more polish and professional appearance.

The topic of eye candy, curb appeal, or default look is a bit fluid as it is one of easiest areas to customize and completely change. Ubuntu seems to prefer earthtones with an emphasis on browns whereas openSUSE tends toward greens. Both offer customized wallpapers and color schemes and openSUSE had their own window decoration. Both seem customize application splashes as well as boot screens, system startup splashes, and desktop splashes. In this area it's mainly a matter of personal choice.

The latest release of Ubuntu is suppose to offer advanced desktop effects with compiz fusion out of the box for supported graphic cards whereas openSUSE still needs to be activated.

Included and Installing Apps:

Default set of applications depends on which of the openSUSE images chosen. Comparing the 4 gig DVD to Ubuntu's one Live CD will go as you might expect - openSUSE provides much more. But even so, you don't really get much with Ubuntu by default. There's one browser, one email application, an instant messenger, a music player, a movie player, a CD burner, OpenOffice, and the GIMP for image manipulation.

Fortunately, Ubuntu does have a repository with lots more software available for easy installation. Ubuntu comes with a quick Add/Remove Software tool that even has user ratings for listed software. There is also Synaptic available which is a bit more powerful. Ubuntu comes with software repositories already available for use. openSUSE had their software manager as well. It's a complicated program for installing and removing software and updates. New Linux users may find Ubuntu's more simplified interface easier to use. Both come with an update manager and both seem to work equally well.

In the area of system monitoring and configuration tools, openSUSE definitely has Ubuntu beat. Ubuntu comes with the GNOME preferences modules and a few other hardware configurations such as a network connection tool. I've found it to be iffy at best and usually inoperative. openSUSE has a wide variety of tools for many purposes as well as skill and outcome levels. New Linux users may not need all the functionality provided by openSUSE, but for those wishing for powerful advanced configuration tools will want openSUSE.

Both in their latest releases offer easy installation of some multimedia codecs. On both desktops if a codec is needed a pop up opens to help the user install them. Ubuntu comes with a Restricted Drivers application that will download and install proprietary graphics or wireless drivers. openSUSE has their One-Click install of these as well, although you will have to visit their site to get started. I think Ubuntu's Restricted Manager is a bit more convenient being available from within the menu system as opposed to browsing the openSUSE website for the One-Click applications although openSUSE offers more choice once you get there. Neither have enough codecs for every multimedia format at the time of this writing.

        

Under the hood Ubuntu is based on Debian Linux, a distro with a long history and a solid reputation for stability. As such, Ubuntu utilizes APT for package management although all their applications have been rebuilt and optimized to work within the Ubuntu framework. openSUSE isn't really based on anything else, unless you'd like to say it's based on the enterprise system SuSE Linux. Many moons ago, SuSE Linux was based on Slackware Linux, another distro with a long distinguished history and reputation for stability. But I don't think you'd find too much of those roots left today. Ubuntu has been around for about three years now and openSUSE has been in development, if by different names and owned by other parent companies, since about 1994.

Hardware Support:

Most hardware support comes from the Linux kernel, and these days the Linux kernel supports just about everything in a normal pc or laptop. However, there are still aspects of the userspace environment that can effect hardware support. Two big culprits are powersaving and ethernet, and perhaps on a lesser scale sound and graphics.

I've never had a problem getting any kind of internet connection out of openSUSE, but I've had more failure than success in this area from Ubuntu, especially wireless. In the latest releases of both of these distros, I've had some difficulty with suspend/hibernate.

So, basically in today's Linux world with the advanced capabilities in the kernel and userspace detection and auto-configuration, most all Linux distributions handle hardware very well. However, I've found that openSUSE's userspace support is a bit better.

Bottom Line:

So really the big basic difference is that Ubuntu is a simplified cookie cutter distribution designed to not overwhelm the new user with choice. openSUSE on the other hand is the polar opposite offering choices for every aspect of Linux computing. openSUSE is very scalable and it can be as easy or advanced as one needs. You could install openSUSE on a dozen machines and none be the same if that was your wish, whereas install Ubuntu on a dozen machines and it would be exactly alike except some might not be able to connect to the internet.

As stated at the beginning, there really isn't much of a comparison between these two distros as they are so vastly different in target audience, capabilities, and philosophies. If you are a brand new Linux user perhaps you should get your feet wet with Ubuntu as openSUSE might seem a bit overwhelming. After a coupla weeks and you begin to feel claustrophobic, then branch out to try openSUSE. If you have any Linux or advanced Windows experience, then you might prefer the functionality found in openSUSE.

openSuSE and the cookie cutter distribution ..

I've used both and while openSuSE does provide a lot more on the DVD, it does so at the cost of complexity, for instance out of the box, to add the missing bits, it requires disabling zen and enabling the smart package manager, then manually adding third party repositeries that may or may not work.

Getting third party apps to compile seems to be a bit of a headache, mpeg4ip requires lame which requires mp3 which requires etc. I'm not saying Ubuntu wouldn't suffer the same fate but once you exit the safe habour of Yast, you're on your own .. Smile

To add the extra bits in Ubuntu all it took was firing up Synaptic Package Manager and enabling repositeries. Simplicity of use doesn't necessarly mean simplicity under the hood. As a desktop I would use Ubuntu while reserving openSuSE for the backend. What more does the average user want from a desktop than a browser, email, IM, Music player, Movie player, CD burner, OpenOffice and image manipulation. Anything bigger and you need to run it on a server.

Finally I find there is a lot more online support for Ubuntu than openSuSE that and it isn't encumbered with any licensing nonsence makes it a prime choice for me.

opsuse and complexity

"I've used both and while openSuSE does provide a lot more on the DVD, it does so at the cost of complexity, for instance out of the box, to add the missing bits, it requires disabling zen and enabling the smart package manager, then manually adding third party repositeries that may or may not work."

Actually that was only with opensuse 10.1, dunno about Zen problem... I personally have never has that issue. I will agree, 10.1 was a headache which I still remember. as for complexity - I guess it depends, I found Ubuntu far more complex. Either way the 10.1 issues were fixed with updates. On to opensuse 10.3 . . .

Today with openSuSE 10.3, open yast; select software; select community repositories, and just click on the repos you want to add - and walla. All the updates you need without having to install 3rd party package managers. Also now with the one click install offered - opensuse is very flexible. I also do have smart and synaptic installed on this 10.3 machine. They all work very well.... just add packman, listed on the yast repositories website - and in yast Community Repositories already... apt appears to still be in beta at this time for 10.3.

Personally I am really liking the way 10.3 is headed - but I do still have some issues (everything will have its issues).

If you are going to run Wireless... make sure you can get your machine to an rj45 jack, or just download the DVD if you are unsure if you must compile a driver. I have not tried the gnome CD install, but on the KDE CD, there is no make or gcc. So while I had my wireless drivers - I was stuck. DVD includes those and I was able to compile. We all have our wireless issues in Linux... I hope they reconsider putting make on the CD in the future. However - ndiswrapper works perfectly (should I say - as perfect as ndiswrapper can work). Once compiled - or ndiswrapped; yast makes wireless pretty darn easy. My one desktop, it's rt2500 was set up automatically, and my laptops broadcom 4306 was a brease with ndiswrapper. This desktops rt2561 card I had to compile the serialmonkey drivers - I used the DVD, the other two I used the KDE CD install.

How I see it is this, Both have communities and large repos. I prefer opensuse mainly bacause I have a real root account - which is my preference. I also enjoy having all the init levels as a posix standard(1 thru 5, with 6 being reboot, yadda yadda yadda). So.. try both if you can, see which you prefer. Both "flavors" are a good choice, and have their fans. I know we will hopefully see the good points of each distro listed. I know both offer much more than what has been discussed thus far.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

Today in Techrights

today's leftovers

Linux Kernel/Foundation

  • Linux Foundation Brings Power of Open Source to Energy Sector
    The Linux Foundation launched on July 12 its latest effort—LF Energy, an open-source coalition for the energy and power management sector. The LF Energy coalition is being backed by French transmission system operation RTE, Vanderbilt University and the European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E). With LF Energy, the Linux Foundation is aiming to replicate the success it has seen in other sectors, including networking, automotive, financial services and cloud computing.
  • Marek Squeezes More Performance Out Of RadeonSI In CPU-Bound Scenarios
    AMD's leading open-source RadeonSI Gallium3D developer, Marek Olšák, sent out a new patch series this week aiming to benefit this Radeon OpenGL driver's performance in CPU-bound scenarios. The patch series is a set of command submission optimizations aimed to help trivial CPU-bound benchmarks to varying extents. In the very trivial glxgears, the patch series is able to improve the maximum frame-rates by around 10%.
  • Intel Sends In A Final Batch Of DRM Feature Updates Targeting Linux 4.19
    After several big feature pull requests of new "i915" Intel DRM driver features landing in DRM-Next for Linux 4.19, the Intel open-source developers have sent in what they believe to be their last batch of feature changes for queuing this next kernel cycle.

OSS Leftovers

  • Open source governance accelerates innovation [Ed: Evolution of the tactics by which anti-FOSS proprietary software firms, Sonatype in this case, try to sell their 'wares']
  • GitHub Enterprise 2.14 brings unified search of cloud and local
  • GitHub Enterprise 2.14 is ‘open goodness’ behind an enterprise firewall
  • DragonFly BSD Lead Developer Preaches The Blessing Of SSDs
    DragonFlyBSD lead developer Matthew Dillon has provided an update on the open-source operating system project's infrastructure and acknowledging the SSD upgrades that are noticeably beneficial over HDDs. DragonFlyBSD has recently been replacing various HDDs with SSDs in their build machines and other systems having an important presence in their infrastructure. Following these storage upgrades, things have been running great and ultimately should deliver a snappier experience for users and developers.
  • Binutils 2.31 Offers Faster DLL Linking For Cygwin/Mingw, Freescale S12Z Support
    A new release of the Binutils collection of important tools is now available with a number of new features and improvements. Binutils 2.31 contains work like direct linking with DLLs for Cygwin/Mingw targets now being faster, AArch64 disassembler improvements, MIPS GINV and CRC extension support, Freescale S12Z architecture support, the x86 assembler now supports new command line options to enable alternative shorter instruction encodings, and the Gold linker now supports Intel Indirect Branch Tracking and Shadow Stack instructions.
  • GCC 8/9 Land Fix For "-march=native" Tuning On Modern Intel CPUs
    The other day we reported on a GCC 8 regression where Skylake and newer CPUs with "-march=native" haven't been performance as optimally as they should be. Fortunately, that patch was quickly landed into the GCC SVN/Git code for GCC 9 as well as back-ported to GCC 8. In the GCC 8.1 release and mainline code since April, as the previous article outlined, when using "-march=native" as part of the compiler flags with GCC the full capabilities of the CPU haven't been leveraged. This affects Intel Skylake CPUs and newer generations, including yet to be released hardware like Cannonlake and Icelake.
  • ARM Kills Its RISC-V FUD Website After Staff Revolt
    ARM is under fire for the way it attempted to kneecap a fledgling open-source hardware project, and has retreated from its own line of attack after several days. ARM had launched a website, riscv-basics.com, which purported to offer “real” information on the rival ISA. As one might expect, the “information” on display was a bit less neutral than a visitor might hope for. Taking this kind of shot against an open-source hardware project also struck many in the OSS community as being in exceptionally poor taste, given how critical open source software has been to ARM’s overall success and visibility. First, a bit of background: RISC-V is an open-source ISA based on RISC principles and is intended to eventually provide flexible CPU cores for a wide variety of use-cases. By using the BSD license, the RISC-V teams hope to allow for a greater range of projects that support both open and proprietary CPU designs. RISC-V CPUs are already available today in a range of roles and capabilities. Despite some modest initial success, RISC-V, today, isn’t even a rounding error in CPU marketshare measurements. It’s certainly no threat to ARM, which enjoys the mother of all vendor lock-ins measured in per-device terms.
  • Python boss Guido van Rossum steps down after 30 years
     

    He lays out a list of things that the users will need to consider going forwards like who has banning rights and who inducts noobs to the core developer team, but its laid out in a context of ‘do what you want but keep me out of it'.  

    "I'll still be here, but I'm trying to let you all figure something out for yourselves. I'm tired, and need a very long break."