[gBarreras]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I think Ubuntu is more stable in the way it's easier to make system or drivers modifications. Getting adobe flash or graphics support can be hell in some distros.

[gBarreras]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I think Ubuntu is more stable in the way it's easier to make system or drivers modifications. Getting adobe flash or graphics support can be hell in some distros.

[The Real Slim Shady]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I disagree - while they all use the same kernel some have inherently better support for a wider range of hardware and drivers out of the box. Some are also better at choosing the right drivers for the right hardware. Also, in my experience some distributions have better support for hardware.

Ive literally upgraded a Linux Distribution only to find out that my xorg wouldnt start, my nic wouldnt connect to the network and my usb ports wouldnt activate. I had to download network drivers on another computer and burn them to a cd in order to fix my distro. This is not convenient.

In my experience, the two Linux distributions with the fewest overall major fuckups were Redhat/Fedora and (X)ubuntu. So while all linux systems (may) be equally "upgradeable" using open source software, they are not all equal.

[The Real Slim Shady]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I disagree - while they all use the same kernel some have inherently better support for a wider range of hardware and drivers out of the box. Some are also better at choosing the right drivers for the right hardware. Also, in my experience some distributions have better support for hardware.

Ive literally upgraded a Linux Distribution only to find out that my xorg wouldnt start, my nic wouldnt connect to the network and my usb ports wouldnt activate. I had to download network drivers on another computer and burn them to a cd in order to fix my distro. This is not convenient.

In my experience, the two Linux distributions with the fewest overall major fuckups were Redhat/Fedora and (X)ubuntu. So while all linux systems (may) be equally "upgradeable" using open source software, they are not all equal.

[Daedalus]

Right now I have Linux Mint 15 XFCE running on this laptop. I was considering trying out Arch, but since this is my main general use PC, I decided to go with a distro with a little less hassle. So far, so good.

I also used Slackware a bit when I was experimenting with running my own web server, which taught me a tremendous amount and I really enjoyed it for the most part. Seriously, forcing yourself to endure the headaches of setting up Slackware is a great way to give yourself a deeper understanding of Linux. I highly recommend it!

Speaking of Slackware, anyone have a preference between Gentoo/Arch/Slackware? From my understanding they all are pretty bare-bone distros. What are some of the benefits of each?

[Daedalus]

Right now I have Linux Mint 15 XFCE running on this laptop. I was considering trying out Arch, but since this is my main general use PC, I decided to go with a distro with a little less hassle. So far, so good.

I also used Slackware a bit when I was experimenting with running my own web server, which taught me a tremendous amount and I really enjoyed it for the most part. Seriously, forcing yourself to endure the headaches of setting up Slackware is a great way to give yourself a deeper understanding of Linux. I highly recommend it!

Speaking of Slackware, anyone have a preference between Gentoo/Arch/Slackware? From my understanding they all are pretty bare-bone distros. What are some of the benefits of each?

[gBarreras]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I disagree - while they all use the same kernel some have inherently better support for a wider range of hardware and drivers out of the box. Some are also better at choosing the right drivers for the right hardware. Also, in my experience some distributions have better support for hardware.

Ive literally upgraded a Linux Distribution only to find out that my xorg wouldnt start, my nic wouldnt connect to the network and my usb ports wouldnt activate. I had to download network drivers on another computer and burn them to a cd in order to fix my distro. This is not convenient.

In my experience, the two Linux distributions with the fewest overall major fuckups were Redhat/Fedora and (X)ubuntu. So while all linux systems (may) be equally "upgradeable" using open source software, they are not all equal.

Agree with you. Except in the concrete distros preferences. I've not tested so many linux distros. However, in my experience, some of them have been way more easy to configure than others.
You may want to use a easy-configurable systems or not, that's totally up to the user. I do also understand the position of people who want to have its own configured system instead of a custom installation.

[gBarreras]

I think Ubuntu is the most stable and upgradeable.

I disagree no distribution is more stable or upgradeable than another, when it comes to this they are all equal as they all use the same basic kernel (although modified to suit the project). All distros are open source so all of them benefit from being (relatively) easily modified to allow more stability and all distributions can be configured and upgraded the same way.

I disagree - while they all use the same kernel some have inherently better support for a wider range of hardware and drivers out of the box. Some are also better at choosing the right drivers for the right hardware. Also, in my experience some distributions have better support for hardware.

Ive literally upgraded a Linux Distribution only to find out that my xorg wouldnt start, my nic wouldnt connect to the network and my usb ports wouldnt activate. I had to download network drivers on another computer and burn them to a cd in order to fix my distro. This is not convenient.

In my experience, the two Linux distributions with the fewest overall major fuckups were Redhat/Fedora and (X)ubuntu. So while all linux systems (may) be equally "upgradeable" using open source software, they are not all equal.

Agree with you. Except in the concrete distros preferences. I've not tested so many linux distros. However, in my experience, some of them have been way more easy to configure than others.
You may want to use a easy-configurable systems or not, that's totally up to the user. I do also understand the position of people who want to have its own configured system instead of a custom installation.

[ART33R]

I use Linux Mint 15, My favorite one!

[ART33R]

I use Linux Mint 15, My favorite one!