Scientific Linux

Reader supplied reviews for Scientific Linux Average rating 8.0 from 9 review(s) What are your thoughts on Scientific Linux? Please include a few pros and a few cons, along with your overall impression of the operating system. Our FAQ page has tips on writing a good mini-review. Version: -- 7.46.95.114.83.0.9 Rating:    -- 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 out of 10 Comments (maximum 2,048 characters): Past reviews - sort by: DateVotes Version: 6.9 Rating: 6 Date: 2017-10-24 Votes: 0 Windows user learning Linux, rating reflects my deficit in knowledge of setting up to mimic Windows systems. Applications for windows are easy to install and to identify. Second, my use of NVIDIA Graphics Card and drivers are not supported. Still, as a student of Linux Systems it is a platform that mimics Red Hat commands well. Thank You. Was this review helpful? Yes No Version: 7.3 Rating: 9 Date: 2017-09-18 Votes: 3 I chose SL for the focus on Maths and Science in particular Q-Mechanics and other physics related needs. Loaded up with absolutely no issues and up and running in no time. GNome has been my favorite for a long time. Libre is there along with Maria so it's out the box a great one. Was this review helpful? Yes No Version: 6.9 Rating: 8 Date: 2017-09-03 Votes: 14 I tried Scientific Linux 6.9 as, while I have 64-bit hardware, I have a lot of 32-bit software and used the 32-bit Scientific. I found it stable, but switched to Mageia 6 for a wider software selection. I used Mageia 5 for several years, but am looking for a replacement as its out of date libraries were causing browser crashes. In Scientific 6.9, I found an easy installation with one caveat---the network installation disk doesn't include software for making a wireless connection and that's what I need on this system. I had to use a full installer. Then, the installer doesn't set up my wireless connection so I have to log it in manually whenever I start my desktop. The choice of desktops is needlessly limited---I don't like either Gnome 4 or KDE 3, far too heavy and awkward. I like Mate and LXDE, light enough and work well. They should be in the Scientific distro. I have some scientific interests, and would like access to R and Octave packages, as well as Yorick and Scilab. Just for fun, but with some wish to make personal use some of the R and Octave packages. As a chess and chess software buff, I would like to see a few more chess packages in Scientific. And I "roll my own" fairly often, and would like to have a more updated gcc such as the full set of gcc-4.9.4 files and/or the software to build and install my own copies of a gcc release. I just built gcc-7.2.0 and am quite pleased with it, except that they say gcc's java is out of date and was removed in recent releases. To finish on a positive point, Scientific is very well tested and bugfree, and that's a huge advantage compared to some of the poorly tested distros around now that don't install or run properly. Not enough Linux enthusiasts are putting the needed effort into testing on their target systems to make sure that installing, upgrading, repartitioning and so forth work like they should. Scientific is on my short list of very good trustworthy distros. Was this review helpful? Yes No See all 9 reader reviews of Scientific Linux...