Hard to compare really, practically different genre's all-together.

I think so too. Proto punk can get old quite quickly at times. I find that I have extreme cravings for proto punk at times though. Even though I listen to post punk way more I would have to say I like them equally.

I feel that both certainly have their merits. Lately, I've been into way more post punk, but I'm not going to say definitively that it's my favorite. They're two very different animals, but both quite inviting to me.

proto punk for me.

I couldn't possibly compare, I like them both equally! Both have their gems; The Stooges and Delta 5 etc.

I really don't know why post-punk is named as such. Certainly doesn't sound very punk to me, though I'm quite a fan. I've never heard of proto-punk before. No idea what it is.

It's called post-punk because it's the music that came right after punk and was heavily influenced by it.

It's the music that came right before punk and was a direct influence on it.

On the last.fm definition, in spite of the word "post", it came from around the same time Punk did. Not after. And I really struggle to hear the influence of punk on bands like Interpol.

It came out just after like in 1977 and was in full flow by 1978, 1979 and 1980and was used to describe bands that were much more diverse than straight-up punk bands, most post-punk bands have a noticeable punk influence, but some much more so than others.

I'm totally in the proto-punk camp. My love of garage rock is probably the reason, since the two can so easily spill into each other, and some of my favorites including The Sonics, 13th Floor Elevators, MC5 and even Link Wray can straddle that line. I find a lot of punk like Sex Pistols and the Clash too clean and crisp. The noisy, buzzy sludge of garage rock is so much like proto-punk and that's why I love it.

To be fair, I haven't given post-punk much of a listen.