PDA

View Full Version : Fedora ahead of ubuntu again



madjr
April 16th, 2010, 07:09 AM
ubuntu is hot, but seems that with all the prettiness we have forgotten about the internals

instead of wasting time discussing if the close button should be on the left or right, fedora has been working hard implementing a set of awesomeneses features

hope ubuntu can copy (err adopt) them soon, maybe by 11.04 ^^

high lights
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_13_Talking_Points

complete feature list
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/13/FeatureList


http://linuxers.org/article/some-cool-features-fedora-13-goddard



"BFO is one of the unique features in Fedora. This effort by Fedora community hopes to completely remove DVD installations in long term. It allows users to download a single, tiny image and install current and future versions of Fedora without having to download additional images."

Also found in Fedora 13 is the ability to use the roll-back feature of the Btrfs (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=fedora_13_btrfs&num=1) file system: "Btrfs lets you take lightweight snapshots of the file system which can be mounted or booted into selectively. This means that you can easily take a snapshot of the partition and in case something bad happens, just boot into the older snapshot."

am really looking forward to rollbacks with BTRFS (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=fedora_13_btrfs&num=1), i wonder when will we start working on that, many of us want ubuntu to become bullet proof

so yeap is that time of the year again, some good ol comp'l'etition Fed vs Ub

http://i44.tinypic.com/17zjf4.jpg

AllRadioisDead
April 16th, 2010, 07:14 AM
Oh snap dawg.

Linuxforall
April 16th, 2010, 07:17 AM
This is grossly unfair to claim that Ubuntu is only concentrating on inteface, there are many and some real new changes, some of which can be found here https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lucid-changes/

Fedora is always cutting edge but there is a price for that and one of the reasons it never catches up to Ubuntu in the user base list on distrowatch.

cariboo
April 16th, 2010, 07:27 AM
UDS-M (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UDS-M) is May 10-14 2010, we should see fairly soon what cool stuff Marvelous Meerkat will have.

cmat
April 16th, 2010, 07:31 AM
I've used Fedora 6, 9, 10, 12 (at home and in labs) and I've always went back to Ubuntu after a few weeks. It's awesome as a Red Hat alternative for the server but falls flat as a desktop for me at least.

MichealH
April 16th, 2010, 07:32 AM
@cariboo907 its Maverick isnt it?

Oh and the thing that gets me off fedora is its looks I dont want to spend hours finding a theme out of desperation.

3rdalbum
April 16th, 2010, 08:28 AM
Fedora 13 doesn't have to be commercially supported for 3 years on the desktop and 5 years on the server. BTFS is not ready for use by anyone except people testing it; filesystems must be completely stable and feature-complete before they are suitable for use!

Quite of lot of Red Hat stuff ends up in Ubuntu so I wouldn't be surprised to see much of those Fedora programs in Ubuntu 10.10.

Viva
April 16th, 2010, 08:34 AM
Ubuntu has better marketing

szymon_g
April 16th, 2010, 08:50 AM
BTFS is not ready for use by anyone except people testing it; filesystems must be completely stable and feature-complete before they are suitable for use!

ext4 wasn't ready too- but it was implemented by (almost) every distro.


Quite of lot of Red Hat stuff ends up in Ubuntu so I wouldn't be surprised to see much of those Fedora programs in Ubuntu 10.10.

well- redhat and novell are corporations that, actually, create linux (kernel, gcc, glibc etc- most patches are written by redhat's/novell's staff)- every distro uses things created (or co-created) by any of them.

Linuxforall
April 16th, 2010, 08:55 AM
Automatic printer detection eg. plug and print is also in Ubuntu, all you have to do is turn printer on and it fires up the applet to find and proper printer driver and install it, some of the other changes listed in Fedora are also in Lucid, however Fedora doesn't have to be LTS, Lucid does and thats the difference. After every install on Fedora, I have had issues like kernel crash, plymouth crashing, unable to install or run Opera due to dependency issues, nightmare installing nvidia drivers from the run file etc. Even then I respect and admire Fedora as its cutting edge and introduces new stuff for Linux desktop, some of which Ubuntu and others benefit greatly from, I would never make it my daily distro nor would I dare to install it on someone just coming from Windows.

Raiju
April 16th, 2010, 08:56 AM
... filesystems must be completely stable and feature-complete before they are suitable for use!...


ext4+ubuntu 9.10 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZs1429nbyo)

ssj6akshat
April 16th, 2010, 08:59 AM
Hope Fedora 13 'Goddard' doesn't become Fedora 13 'Goddamn' like 12.

Crunchy the Headcrab
April 16th, 2010, 09:03 AM
Fedora is a great distro, but it's not near as friendly as Ubuntu. Try installing Nvidia drivers in Fedora and you will have to add a third party repository AND go through a mess of stuff to disable noveau. Granted this is more difficult in Fedora because they only allow foss software to be included in the distro, but since when does the freedom of using open source mean that using proprietary software (if you want to) should be a pita?

Khakilang
April 16th, 2010, 09:05 AM
For normal user like me I don't see any difference. As all as its work smoothly I really don't care much unless I got another computer to test it out. It is too much hassle to install every time there is a better OS and I don't have the resources to use Virtual machine.

3rdalbum
April 16th, 2010, 09:08 AM
ext4 wasn't ready too- but it was implemented by (almost) every distro.

It was implemented at a much later stage than BTFS is currently.

asddf
April 16th, 2010, 09:15 AM
I still think design is the biggest flaw in Linux Distros, those default themes need to look way better.

Crunchy the Headcrab
April 16th, 2010, 09:18 AM
I still think design is the biggest flaw in Linux Distros, those default themes need to look way better.
Agreed. Usability *****, Programs *****, Default looks -----

asddf
April 16th, 2010, 09:26 AM
Agreed. Usability *****, Programs *****, Default looks -----


Spot on.

Eye Candy is what makes people give Ubuntu a try.

Usability and Programs is what keeps them.

mockingbird
April 16th, 2010, 09:52 AM
Fedora has sucked for many years now because Redhat is an arrogant company and their RPM system sucks.

As long as Ubuntu will use Aptitude, it will be superior to Fedora.

Same goes for SuSe and yast. Aptitude is just 10 times better than anything out there.

szymon_g
April 16th, 2010, 10:00 AM
@mockinbird

could you give me a *real* advantage of aptitude over zypper (or, in short- of deb over rpm)?
i can provide plenty of advantages of rpms vs debs (like delta rpms, lzma compression etc)

and what about 'arrogancy'? RH is the biggest linux company, their influence into linux world is great. should i remind you, that redhat is one of the oldest, still developed linux-flavor (back to 1994)? Linux on desktop was introduced mainly because redhat (user-friendly installer, not to bad package system etc).

sxmaxchine
April 16th, 2010, 10:09 AM
i personaly found fedora to be much more buggy them ubuntu and i beleive that the better OS is the one that doesnt break as much or as often

mockingbird
April 16th, 2010, 10:23 AM
This is nonsense, you want to tell me that RPMs are more popular than .deb files?

Why RPM sucks:
1) Interoperability between different versions of the same distribution is terrible.
2) Interoperability between similar distributions is almost non-existant

.deb interoperability is fantastic. Up until Karmic, you could basically take Ubuntu .debs and use them on Debian or whatever. Mepis debs usually work with everything. .deb is the new .exe, it just works everywhere and has completely overtaken RPM as there are many more packagers for it.

I had a friend who was sworn to SuSe (In fact, he used it exclusively when he worked for IBM). I had a little talk with him and now he's using Mint (Another Debian derivative). Even that stubborn fellow couldn't deny the superiority of Aptitude. (Though I can't understand why the heck he uses Mint).


@mockinbird

could you give me a *real* advantage of aptitude over zypper (or, in short- of deb over rpm)?
i can provide plenty of advantages of rpms vs debs (like delta rpms, lzma compression etc)

and what about 'arrogancy'? RH is the biggest linux company, their influence into linux world is great. should i remind you, that redhat is one of the oldest, still developed linux-flavor (back to 1994)? Linux on desktop was introduced mainly because redhat (user-friendly installer, not to bad package system etc).

szymon_g
April 16th, 2010, 10:57 AM
This is nonsense, you want to tell me that RPMs are more popular than .deb files?

#define 'popularity'



Why RPM sucks:
1) Interoperability between different versions of the same distribution is terrible.

well... different programs requires different versions of libraries (and some of them aren't backward compatible)- therefore, program compilled for fedora core 1 will not work under f12/13- but try to install deb from debian woody on lenny/squeeze :)


2) Interoperability between similar distributions is almost non-existant

no, not necessarly. first at all- we have got LSB (and rpm is a part of it)- so, programs written properly will work under distros compatible with LSB (and that includes Debian and Ubuntu btw). secondly- SPECs are really nice and easy (unlike debian rules)- so re-creating package for particular distribution is easy.


.deb interoperability is fantastic. Up until Karmic, you could basically take Ubuntu .debs and use them on Debian or whatever. Mepis debs usually work with everything. .deb is the new .exe, it just works everywhere and has completely overtaken RPM as there are many more packagers for it.

1. debs are 'universal' mostly because most of those debian- derivates are pretty similar to each other. basically- you can add new wallpaper, codecs /depending from your country's laws/, flash- and you have got your own distro ;)!

differences between RPM-based distros are much greater, so not all packages can be swapped between them (but, as i wrote earlier- there is always LSB which makes those differences almost non-existent)


I had a friend who was sworn to SuSe (In fact, he used it exclusively when he worked for IBM). I had a little talk with him and now he's using Mint (Another Debian derivative). Even that stubborn fellow couldn't deny the superiority of Aptitude. (Though I can't understand why the heck he uses Mint).

i'm not talking about 'which distro is better'- i'm writing about differences between rpm vs deb (or, zypper/yum vs aptitude), *not* about policies of packagings for specified distributions (like: necessary groups for every package etc).

so, if aptitude is so great- how can i get names of running processes that still uses deleted libraries (for example- i just upgraded one/or more/ of system libraries)? you know- old library had a exploitable bug, and i'm afraid that someone can hack into my computer using service that uses that sh*tty library- and i don't want (or i cant) restart whole computer, and i don't want to restart all services- only those necessary.
i can do it with zypper by running

zypper ps

mockingbird
April 16th, 2010, 11:05 AM
Ok, fair enough, you want to talk about which one is more cutting edge? Perhaps RPM is technologically superior to Aptitude today, but Aptitude was better several years ago. This is irrelevant. People today are packaging for Ubuntu, and that means Debian derivatives are what people should stick with if they want the latest and greatest.

Also I contest what you said that library incompatibilities are the only reason why earlier FC RPMs won't work with later versions and vice versa. I remember many years ago modifying RPMs for FC and I was changing stupid little variables where RedHat made minute changes which screwed up everything.

Dragonbite
April 16th, 2010, 01:37 PM
I wish Ubuntu would pick up the OpenFWWF that Fedora did, so my Broadcom wireless card works out-of-the-box like it did with Fedora 12.

Ultimately, though, some of the enhancements Fedora produces will make it into Ubuntu and others.

While Fedora focuses on the internal workings and more underlying framework stuff it frees Ubuntu up to focus on user interface and "soft-and-squishy-ware". This is just a means that having all of these Linux distributions is a GOOD thing, not a bad; they build off of each other.

It would be wise for Ubuntu to NOT incorporate all of Fedora's changes until it has had a chance to work the bugs out and determine if the benefit is enough to fit it into the Ubuntu package.

Open Source; collaborative, not competitive.

wojox
April 16th, 2010, 05:26 PM
Constantine's my newest default OS for my tower. It is tight and runs like a champ.
I was running Fedora 12 on my laptop but decided to swap it out for Lucid.

bwhite82
April 16th, 2010, 05:32 PM
i wish ubuntu would pick up the openfwwf that fedora did, so my broadcom wireless card works out-of-the-box like it did with fedora 12.

Ultimately, though, some of the enhancements fedora produces will make it into ubuntu and others.

While fedora focuses on the internal workings and more underlying framework stuff it frees ubuntu up to focus on user interface and "soft-and-squishy-ware". This is just a means that having all of these linux distributions is a good thing, not a bad; they build off of each other.

It would be wise for ubuntu to not incorporate all of fedora's changes until it has had a chance to work the bugs out and determine if the benefit is enough to fit it into the ubuntu package.

Open source; collaborative, not competitive.

+2

zekopeko
April 16th, 2010, 07:00 PM
Ubuntu has better marketing

Ubuntu has a better distro.

FTFY.

zekopeko
April 16th, 2010, 07:05 PM
I don't think Fedora and Ubuntu compete at all.

Fedora is Red Hat's playground. They use it to test stuff that will end up in RHEL. Thats why you don't see LTS support.
Contrast that with Ubuntu being THE product Canonical is selling services with. They have to make it good since they directly support it.

Personally the last time I used Fedora it was really sucky. I don't even know what is their target audience. IIRC there was a huge flame war not long ago on their mailing list about who are they exactly catering to.

cariboo
April 16th, 2010, 07:08 PM
One of the features they point to is upstart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstart), so it's a two way street.

cmat
April 16th, 2010, 07:16 PM
... installing nvidia drivers from the run file etc.

Oh yeah I had fun with that too.

Paqman
April 16th, 2010, 07:44 PM
"BFO is one of the unique features in Fedora. This effort by Fedora community hopes to completely remove DVD installations in long term. It allows users to download a single, tiny image and install current and future versions of Fedora without having to download additional images."

Sounds very similar to the Ubuntu Minimal ISO, although you do need a new copy of that for each new version of Ubuntu. But since it's a 10MB download, that's no great hardship.

Dragonbite
April 16th, 2010, 07:54 PM
"BFO is one of the unique features in Fedora. This effort by Fedora community hopes to completely remove DVD installations in long term. It allows users to download a single, tiny image and install current and future versions of Fedora without having to download additional images."

Sounds an awful lot like a Netinstall, which has been out for a looong time!

You boot this tiny CD, you point to where the repositories are (why it doesn't know automatically? who knows!) and select what you want to install just like the DVD and *presto*, not only do you only download what you WANT, but you also download the LATEST VERSION automatically!

I've done it in CentOS, Fedora and openSUSE a while now, so I'm not sure how this is different yet.

Ric_NYC
April 16th, 2010, 08:24 PM
How is Flash playback in Fedora?

zekopeko
April 16th, 2010, 08:46 PM
Sounds an awful lot like a Netinstall, which has been out for a looong time!

You boot this tiny CD, you point to where the repositories are (why it doesn't know automatically? who knows!) and select what you want to install just like the DVD and *presto*, not only do you only download what you WANT, but you also download the LATEST VERSION automatically!

I've done it in CentOS, Fedora and openSUSE a while now, so I'm not sure how this is different yet.

It is different. Netinstalls boot a kernel and is tied to a single distro release. What this does is on a lower level. I'm guessing they are using PXE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preboot_Execution_Environment) or similar tech. So you could boot this environment and install any distro you want.

I used PXE before and it is rather cool. You setup a server with all the distros you want and simply select one from a menu (ala GRUB). It boots the system of the network and you can install it or use it as a liveCD session.

kevCast
April 16th, 2010, 08:55 PM
Ubuntu has better marketing

Indeed.

wojox
April 16th, 2010, 08:57 PM
How is Flash playback in Fedora?

Awesome. Plus Fedora comes mono-free, like your signiture.

wojox
April 16th, 2010, 09:02 PM
It is different. Netinstalls boot a kernel and is tied to a single distro release. What this does is on a lower level. I'm guessing they are using PXE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preboot_Execution_Environment) or similar tech. So you could boot this environment and install any distro you want.

I uses PXE before and it is rather cool. You setup a server with all the distros you want and simply select one from a menu (ala GRUB). It boots the system of the network and you can install it or use it as a liveCD session.

Probably PXE and Kickstart.

RaZe42
April 16th, 2010, 09:32 PM
Ubuntu has better marketing
Ubuntu has bad marketing.

Fedora has no marketing at all.

dyltman
April 16th, 2010, 10:24 PM
Installing nvidia drivers on fedora 12, finding good tutorials for it aswell.

*cries*

Also atleast in fedora 12 there was alot less packages, same goes for opensuse. I liked opensuse but without the same support for packages it kinda died for me.

jbrown96
April 16th, 2010, 11:30 PM
Just wanted to address some of the RPM criticisms. I think that with the inclusion of the Yum Presto plugin in Fedora 11 RPM is spanking DEB. For packages like OpenOffice, updates are pain free on Fedora.
Debs aren't really more universal; Rpms work across lots of systems as well. The problem is that Fedora is so bleeding-edge that many of the dependencies are not met by other distros using the format, which, like RHEL, tend to be far more conservative with libs and such. It also has a lot to do with what distros you use. Obviously if you use Debian-based, then Deb seems like a more universal format as well as the converse.

Phoronix had a nice article about the features http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14793 that actually made it for the "rollback" feature. It is definitely awesome, and something that I think is very important for the future of Linux, but to be honest, it's at least a Fedora version away from completeness, which means two versions for most other distros.

I have tried Fedora many times, but was never satisfied with it. I've always tried to get along with SELinux, but it was a huge fight. Audio was problematic over several versions; the list goes on. However, I have a P4 Thinkcentre that has been running F12 for several months, and I've had no complaints about it. It gets a little desktop usage but is mostly a DHCP, NFS, Samba, backup server. On my laptop, I use Kubuntu 9.10, and I don't think that I will move away from Kubuntu for the foreseeable future.

Fedora is a "testing" distribution. It's almost comical that they have releases; lots of bugs, late, but tremendously feature-full. I'm not a dev, so I don't depend on a dev's distribution. Red Hat doesn't support, sell, or recommend Fedora, so they can really push the limits. Canonical does all of those for Ubuntu so the stability and polish bars are set higher. That leads to Ubuntu being behind technically.

To each, his own.

Frak
April 16th, 2010, 11:35 PM
Ubuntu has better marketing
This.


Installing nvidia drivers on fedora 12, finding good tutorials for it aswell.

*cries*

Also atleast in fedora 12 there was alot less packages, same goes for opensuse. I liked opensuse but without the same support for packages it kinda died for me.

http://www.mjmwired.net/resources/mjm-fedora-f12.html

He'll have one for 13 as well.

bwhite82
April 17th, 2010, 12:06 AM
Ubuntu has excellent word-of-mouth marketing (for good reason).

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 12:08 AM
Ubuntu has excellent word-of-mouth marketing (for good reason).
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

bwhite82
April 17th, 2010, 12:09 AM
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

Eh? Where did you come up with that number. (I am 28 btw).

TheNosh
April 17th, 2010, 12:12 AM
Eh? Where did you come up with that number.

i'd assume it was an estimate. based on my personal experience, it seems like it would be pretty close to accurate.


(I am 28 btw).

"mainly" doesn't mean the same as "only."

_sAm_
April 17th, 2010, 12:15 AM
I always like to read about upcoming versions of Fedora, it often tells me what will come in later versions of Ubuntu.

I am also really glad that we have a cutting edge distro as Fedora, with lots of experienced users that can(and have time) to test it and find/fix bugs.

If you really want the latest and greatest(and the problems, time or need for knowledge that follows), then its great we have options as Fedora.

I think Ubuntu gives a fine balance between latest & greatest vs. stable(problem free) experience. Me and my family are better of with it then say Fedora. And if you miss something you can always find a repo for it or compile it yourself.

Lucid will not f.example have the latest version of Evolution nor Tracker, and I want them both. But that's ok for me if the result is a stable distro for those who need it. I can add it myself if I want later on, so why complain. If Ubuntu is going to be an alternate to Windows it needs to be easy.

Its not a competition between them about who got the most cutting edge stuff; they have (generally)different audience/purposes.

So to all Fedora folks, thanks:-)

bwhite82
April 17th, 2010, 12:16 AM
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

I would say not....

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1292803

kevCast
April 17th, 2010, 12:22 AM
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

First rule of making profit: get 'em while their young.

There's a reason McDonald's has slides and a clown mascot.

azagaros
April 17th, 2010, 12:23 AM
lol..

word of mouth??!?

I heard of Ubuntu from word of mouth... I used it for 3 months and fought with it for for those 3 months. Not to mention it seemed to make the laptop run harder than even vista did.

I gave up and went to OpenSuse and noticed a lot stabler platform using essentially identical os levels. The computer isn't over heating and other peaceful things.

Fedora 11 or 12 wouldn't install on this laptop. 12 had more advanced kernels than 10.01 at the time. I will see what my father tries with 13. He has used fedora for a long time with only minor issues. 11 installed on his laptop 12 wouldn't.

I do miss the synaptic update structures but I am getting use to OpenSUSE's structures. And I can find easier solutions to things I had issues with on Ubuntu. Hence their forums aren't cluttered with the common issues like Ubuntu's is.

My experiences with Alpha, beta 1 and beta 2 of 10.0x series made me change. Alpha would install on my laptop beta 1 and 2 wouldn't.

My food for thought about ubuntu.

Uncle Spellbinder
April 17th, 2010, 12:38 AM
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

No offense, but that's idiotic. First of all, I'll be 46 in August. Second, I know at least 5 other Ubuntu users personally. Each over 30 and one is 62. If marketing was done by teenagers, as you suggest, the user base would not be as diverse as it is.

Otis Spunkmiyer
April 17th, 2010, 12:58 AM
This thread in and of itself is what is and has held Linux back from the main stream. The lack of 'Standards'
Geeks don't have a problem, but the average user just wants things to work.

It would be nice if the Linux community would keep their ego's in check and help get manufactures to load a Linux OS for general retail, without the need to special order.

Ubuntu with a major sponsor in Canonical is the only viable answer to Microsoft. For the first time ever Linux/Ubuntu is just as easy to use for me as was Windows XP. I can install programs I need, tweek Firefox and even install another browser etc. All this from never having to go to 'Terminal'.

The masses demand simplicity, and without a major sponsor 'open source' is dead !

Dragonbite
April 17th, 2010, 01:21 AM
The masses demand simplicity, and without a major sponsor 'open source' is dead !

I think Red Hat, which is not quite aimed for the "masses" or "simplicity", would not agree as they beat their quarterly estimates time after time and all while the economy STINKS!

It all depends on who you are targeting. Ubuntu targets general users while Red Hat targets Enterprises and servers. Fedora targets testing and innovating the framework while openSUSE targets... well, I'm still trying to get that out of them ;).

Funny thing is Canonical and Ubuntu are taking their structure out of Red Hat's book (single release, enterprise and community)!

yester64
April 17th, 2010, 03:07 AM
Since this is a thread about Fedora vs. Ubuntu, i can not really comment on that. But i did had Fedora installed once.
It did not work well for me. So i'll tossed it.
Currently i am running OpenSuse and i am pretty happy.
Ubuntu is great and it gets you exited and all. But it does have a couple of problems i found annoying.
I know if i list my issues some other user will say he never had any of these problems. So its kinda useless to list.
In the end, Suse works for me best.
I am not sure which distro is better or superior over another. Not sure if thats even the case.
All distro's have a mission. To offer a distro for particular usergroups with different needs.
Most people are best served with ubuntu, others go with distro B or whatever you fell like. In the end, it is Linux and thats whats counting.
Is DEB better than RPM? No idea, but i don't even care about that.

But last time i checked distrowatch it said that Fedora is more focused on business as potentially users, than an average user.
Not sure at that really, but if they write that then there must be some truth to it.

Mr. Picklesworth
April 17th, 2010, 03:25 AM
In fairness, regarding internals, Ubuntu's boot process with Lucid is more than just some polish. It happens because of some really incredible work (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/BootPerformance) done over the last year, building on our very own init daemon, Upstart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstart).

Watch the hard drive light on your computer as Ubuntu starts. The beauty of that work will become quite clear :)

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 03:33 AM
Looks like some great stuff in core 13. Now if only fedora weren't so nazi-esque about shoving open standards down peoples throat. Don't get me wrong, I believe in Open format standards, ogg/vorbis .. I'm on board, but I also have a vast legal music collection which is not in that format, and a few media players and streaming servers for personal use that don't like that format, and I don't want my OS to designate a priority to me of converting it, and trying to make everything else work, nor do I want to try to hunt down people's individual PPA's to get supports to my formats. I've my own agenda I'd like to follow before theirs.

trig
April 17th, 2010, 04:00 AM
I am personally 34, my best friend is 33 and my older brother, new to ubuntu, us 38.

skymera
April 17th, 2010, 04:12 AM
I like Fedora, i think it's far superior and innovative than Ubuntu, but i just didn't feel it.

It felt dull.
Saying that, Ubuntu no longer has any thrills, a new theme maybe. But underneath it seems the same old girl we've all been with the last few years...

WinterRain
April 17th, 2010, 04:22 AM
Ubuntu has better marketing

Where? I have yet to see any advetisements of any sort, anywhere. So, where is this marketing taking place?

WinterRain
April 17th, 2010, 04:26 AM
Looks like some great stuff in core 13. Now if only fedora weren't so nazi-esque about shoving open standards down peoples throat. Don't get me wrong, I believe in Open format standards, ogg/vorbis .. I'm on board, but I also have a vast legal music collection which is not in that format, and a few media players and streaming servers for personal use that don't like that format, and I don't want my OS to designate a priority to me of converting it, and trying to make everything else work, nor do I want to try to hunt down people's individual PPA's to get supports to my formats. I've my own agenda I'd like to follow before theirs.

Last time I checked, ubuntu doesn't come with non free codecs either. It's just as easy to install codecs in fedora as in ubuntu. I really don't understand why you said those things, and are overreacting a bit. Fedora is not against non free codecs, they just don't include them. (just like ubuntu!)

WinterRain
April 17th, 2010, 04:31 AM
No offense, but that's idiotic.

I agree, and I'm almost 50. Several other people I know that use it are well over 18.

Linuxforall
April 17th, 2010, 04:37 AM
Because it's mainly advertised by people under the age of 18?

As Fedora is for senile geriatric FOSS nazis ;)

Seriously, try and update via package manager in Fedora, its a nightmare compared to Debian or debian based distros like Ubuntu, all dependencies are pulled in satisfactorily and automatically, no missing this or that. Installing something basic as Opera browser sends Fedora into a tizz, even with all the dependencies met, Opera refuses to start. As for package manager,compared to Synaptic, Fedora package manager is slow and buggy in every sense, the only bright light is yum-presto but it still doesn't make it come close to debian package management or the myriads of packages available for debian based distros.

When is Fedora going to make installing video drivers easy btw? No I don't want your crummy useless Nouveau drivers for my spanking new nvidia high end card, I need the latest support via nvidia's own drivers, why make me go through hell just to install that and yes, SE Linux should be a choice during install, not enabled by default really, it causes more grief than anything else.

areteichi
April 17th, 2010, 06:19 AM
It felt dull.
Saying that, Ubuntu no longer has any thrills, a new theme maybe. But underneath it seems the same old girl we've all been with the last few years...

I sympathize with you. I installed Lucid in VirtualBox and wondered: "Why should I upgrade to this?"

But I wouldn't be surprised if other distros are as stagnated as Ubuntu is, so for the moment, I can't imagine myself using anything other than Ubuntu at least for the next few releases.

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 06:23 AM
As Fedora is for senile geriatric FOSS nazis ;)

Seriously, try and update via package manager in Fedora, its a nightmare compared to Debian or debian based distros like Ubuntu, all dependencies are pulled in satisfactorily and automatically, no missing this or that. Installing something basic as Opera browser sends Fedora into a tizz, even with all the dependencies met, Opera refuses to start. As for package manager,compared to Synaptic, Fedora package manager is slow and buggy in every sense, the only bright light is yum-presto but it still doesn't make it come close to debian package management or the myriads of packages available for debian based distros.

OK, now go try it and give us your opinion. Your lack of specificity signals to me that you just made this up. Neither I nor any of my colleagues have had any of the problems you just mentioned, and in fact praise Yum over what DPMS has to offer. The package manager GUI is fast (and not just a big webkit browser), Opera runs just fine, and we don't have to worry about wasting bandwidth on duplicate bits (delta-rpms).

But in all seriousness, go try Fedora, it's a nice distro.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:24 AM
Last time I checked, ubuntu doesn't come with non free codecs either. It's just as easy to install codecs in fedora as in ubuntu. I really don't understand why you said those things, and are overreacting a bit. Fedora is not against non free codecs, they just don't include them. (just like ubuntu!)

No, it isn't.. at all. Every time I've brought this up in fedora forums, I'm told to go get other non-fedora project supported or individual's repositories just to play mp3's.. Ubuntu at least makes the codes available in their main repos with disclaimers. It's been that way since about core 3, and its still that way. If its changed, its not well documented, or as simply accomplished as .. well just about any distribution I've ever used outside of fedora.

Some quick googling about getting mp3 support in fedora still returns articles and howto's circa 2009 with walkthroughs pulling binaries from 3rd party locations to do it.

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 06:35 AM
No, it isn't.. at all. Every time I've brought this up in fedora forums, I'm told to go get other non-fedora project supported or individual's repositories just to play mp3's.. Ubuntu at least makes the codes available in their main repos with disclaimers. It's been that way since about core 3, and its still that way. If its changed, its not well documented, or as simply accomplished as .. well just about any distribution outside of fedora.

Some quick googling about getting mp3 support in fedora still returns articles and howto's circa 2009 with walkthroughs pulling binaries from 3rd party locations to do it.
I may make a new guide, but I'll just post the commands here:


su
yum install gstreamer-plugins-ugly gstreamer-plugins-bad gstreamer-ffmpeg

If you need mplayer codecs:


su
wget http://www.mplayerhq.hu/MPlayer/releases/codecs/all-20071007.tar.bz2
tar -jxvf all-20071007.tar.bz2 --strip-components 1 -C /usr/lib/codecs/

libdvdcss


su
rpm -ivh http://rpm.livna.org/livna-release.rpm
rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-livna
yum install libdvdcss

The RPM commands setup the Livna repository and the last command installs libdvdcss.

RiceMonster
April 17th, 2010, 06:40 AM
No, it isn't.. at all. Every time I've brought this up in fedora forums, I'm told to go get other non-fedora project supported or individual's repositories just to play mp3's.. Ubuntu at least makes the codes available in their main repos with disclaimers. It's been that way since about core 3, and its still that way. If its changed, its not well documented, or as simply accomplished as .. well just about any distribution I've ever used outside of fedora.

Some quick googling about getting mp3 support in fedora still returns articles and howto's circa 2009 with walkthroughs pulling binaries from 3rd party locations to do it.

http://www.rpmfusion.org/

Follow the instructions to add the repos. Takes about 10 seconds. Everyone says to use rpmfusion.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:43 AM
http://www.rpmfusion.org/

Follow the instructions to add the repos. Takes about 10 seconds. Everyone says to use rpmfusion.

I didn't say it was impossible, I said its not as easy. Call me silly, but I trust rpmfusions repo about as much as I trust getdeb. QC is a good thing, and it sucks for fedora users to subject themselves to the public swimming pools that are repos like rpmfusion, just to get some pretty simple and very common functionality.

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 06:46 AM
I didn't say it was impossible, I said its not as easy. Call me silly, but I trust rpmfusions repo about as much as I trust getdeb. QC is a good thing, and it sucks for fedora users to subject themselves to the public swimming pools that are repos like rpmfusion, just to get some pretty simple and very common functionality.
Well, you have to use Medibuntu to get legally restricted packages as well. So I don't see your point on that part.

Though, the maintainers of Dribble, FreshRPMs, and Livna are some of the most trusted packagers in the Fedora world, even more so than many of the official package maintainers.

cariboo
April 17th, 2010, 06:46 AM
OK, now go try it and give us your opinion. Your lack of specificity signals to me that you just made this up. Neither I nor any of my colleagues have had any of the problems you just mentioned, and in fact praise Yum over what DPMS has to offer. The package manager GUI is fast (and not just a big webkit browser), Opera runs just fine, and we don't have to worry about wasting bandwidth on duplicate bits (delta-rpms).

But in all seriousness, go try Fedora, it's a nice distro.

How do you use DPMS (Display Power Management Signaling) to install packages? 8)

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:46 AM
Well, you have to use Medibuntu to get legally restricted packages as well. So I don't see your point on that part.

Though, the maintainers of Dribble, FreshRPMs, and Livna are some of the most trusted packagers in the Fedora world, even more so than many of the official package maintainers.

because I don't need to use medibuntu to get mp3 support, and I was never referencing DVD playback or windows media codecs. I was referencing, very specifically, mp3 support, a codec I've been using since 1994 that fedora makes more difficult to access than any other OS I know about.

RiceMonster
April 17th, 2010, 06:47 AM
I didn't say it was impossible, I said its not as easy. Call me silly, but I trust rpmfusions repo about as much as I trust getdeb. QC is a good thing, and it sucks for fedora users to subject themselves to the public swimming pools that are repos like rpmfusion, just to get some pretty simple and very common functionality.

rpmfusion isn't similar to getdeb. It's just meant to provide a few things like codecs not included in Fedora, so calling it a "public swimming pool" does not apply. As it says in the FAQ: "RPM Fusion is not a standalone repository, but an extension of Fedora."

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 06:49 AM
because I don't need to use medibuntu to get mp3 support, and I was never referencing DVD playback or windows media codecs. I was referencing, very specifically, mp3 support, a codec I've been using since 1994 that fedora makes more difficult to access than any other OS I know about.
http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/

It's free.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:49 AM
rpmfusion isn't similar to getdeb. It's just meant to provide a few things like codecs not included in Fedora, so calling it a "public swimming pool" does not apply.

Fair enough, Maybe I don't know enough about rpmfusion specifically, except that it still falls into the critera of "not a fedora project repo"

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:51 AM
http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-mp3-decoder/

It's free.

ok, whats your point? what part of "its not in the fedora default repo's" am I failing to deliver here? I didn't ask for all the alternatives everyone knows about that is outside of what is shipped and pre-configured with fedora, I understand how to make mp3's work in fedora, and I know its more involved, which I dislike, and therefore haven't used it in a long time as a primary OS.

I never said that mp3's don't work in fedora at all, but it shouldn't be that big of an issue to fedora in the first place. I don't like the way they make FOSS formats intrusive to those who decidedly choose not to convert to them. thats all.

RiceMonster
April 17th, 2010, 06:53 AM
Fair enough, Maybe I don't know enough about rpmfusion specifically, except that it still falls into the critera of "not a fedora project repo"

However, it's maintained by people who contribute to Fedora and does receive testing as well. Maybe it's not as accessible as in Ubuntu, but it takes seconds to enable it.

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 06:55 AM
ok, whats your point? what part of "its not in the fedora default repo's" am I failing to deliver here? I didn't ask for all the alternatives everyone knows about that is outside of what is shipped and pre-configured with fedora, I understand how to make mp3's work in fedora, and I know its more involved, which I dislike, and therefore haven't used it in a long time as a primary OS.

I never said that mp3's don't work in fedora, but it shouldn't be that big of an issue to fedora in the first place. thats all.
Fedora just takes a stance towards free software. They aren't "shoving it down your throat", they just refuse to ship anything that's questionable. Besides that, they don't put any guards in place to stop you from installing them, because as I said, they just don't want to provide it themselves. That's where RPMFusion comes in as an extension of Fedora, but Fedora itself does not aim to be Ubuntu.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 06:58 AM
Fedora just takes a stance towards free software. They aren't "shoving it down your throat", they just refuse to ship anything that's questionable. Besides that, they don't put any guards in place to stop you from installing them, because as I said, they just don't want to provide it themselves. That's where RPMFusion comes in as an extension of Fedora, but Fedora itself does not aim to be Ubuntu.

Thats perfectly fine, and I accept that 100% It's also one of the reasons I'm an ubuntu user. Taking a stand to me would be better fought on the encoder side, where mp3 is being perpetuated, not on the player/decoder side, where the work has already been done / money already been spent. Thats one of my issues with it, and why I don't make fedora's stand. :) All they're doing in their stand, strictly in my point of view, is unnecessarily re-prioritizing my work. One day I might want to take on the very involved and long project that is converting my whole library (digital and analog LP's I haven't made digital) to open standards, but I'd prefer to decide on the when without getting pressured by an agenda.

3rdalbum
April 17th, 2010, 07:07 AM
Fedora is a different distribution to Ubuntu - different aims, different philosophy. Ubuntu takes a slightly less restrictive line to Fedora. Both positions are okay in my opinion, and it's good to note that Fedora has a lot of users who like the status quo in that distribution.

In the end, Fedora benefits from Ubuntu and vice-versa. Some tools developed for Ubuntu end off in Fedora and RHEL, and vice-versa (virt-manager? Palimpsest? System-config-printers and system-config-samba? Plymouth? All from Fedora/RHEL. Fedora uses less that you can identify as being developed by Ubuntu, but Ubuntu and its massive community has contributed new software and improvements to existing software; let's not forget that Ubuntu has done more on Pitivi in six months than the Pitivi developers have done in the last four years).

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 07:10 AM
Fedora is a different distribution to Ubuntu - different aims, different philosophy. Ubuntu takes a slightly less restrictive line to Fedora. Both positions are okay in my opinion, and it's good to note that Fedora has a lot of users who like the status quo in that distribution.

In the end, Fedora benefits from Ubuntu and vice-versa. Some tools developed for Ubuntu end off in Fedora and RHEL, and vice-versa (virt-manager? Palimpsest? System-config-printers and system-config-samba? Plymouth? All from Fedora/RHEL. Fedora uses less that you can identify as being developed by Ubuntu, but Ubuntu and its massive community has contributed new software and improvements to existing software; let's not forget that Ubuntu has done more on Pitivi in six months than the Pitivi developers have done in the last four years).

Well put.

cariboo
April 17th, 2010, 07:12 AM
You don't need the Medibuntu repositories to install libdvdcss2, once you've installed the ubuntu-restricted-extras meta package, go to /usr/shar/doc/libdvdread4, and run installcss.sh as root.

toupeiro
April 17th, 2010, 07:14 AM
You don't need the Medibuntu repositories to install libdvdcss2, once you've installed the ubuntu-restricted-extras meta package, go to /usr/shar/doc/libdvdread4, and run installcss.sh as root.

I'll be damned. :P Learn something new every day.

dsavi
April 17th, 2010, 07:16 AM
Fedora is a different distribution to Ubuntu - different aims, different philosophy. Ubuntu takes a slightly less restrictive line to Fedora. Both positions are okay in my opinion, and it's good to note that Fedora has a lot of users who like the status quo in that distribution.

In the end, Fedora benefits from Ubuntu and vice-versa. Some tools developed for Ubuntu end off in Fedora and RHEL, and vice-versa (virt-manager? Palimpsest? System-config-printers and system-config-samba? Plymouth? All from Fedora/RHEL. Fedora uses less that you can identify as being developed by Ubuntu, but Ubuntu and its massive community has contributed new software and improvements to existing software; let's not forget that Ubuntu has done more on Pitivi in six months than the Pitivi developers have done in the last four years).
Indeed, isn't this like the point of open source? If Fedora is doing better than Ubuntu in some areas, or even a lot of areas, don't whine about it; Applaud them and then adopt the code as necessary. "Stealing" is okay. I also agree that Fedora and Ubuntu are different philosophically, why else would they be two different distros?

madjr
April 17th, 2010, 07:21 AM
Indeed, isn't this like the point of open source? If Fedora is doing better than Ubuntu in some areas, or even a lot of areas, don't whine about it; Applaud them and then adopt the code as necessary. "Stealing" is okay. I also agree that Fedora and Ubuntu are different philosophically, why else would they be two different distros?

actually is more like "borrowing and contributing back any enhancements"

zekopeko
April 17th, 2010, 02:07 PM
actually is more like "borrowing and contributing back any enhancements"

No its actually like using it under the terms of the license and fulfilling its conditions.
The funniest part is when somebody bitches about "Ubuntu not contributing back to upstream" and Ubuntu is THE upstream.

szymon_g
April 17th, 2010, 02:25 PM
The funniest part is when somebody bitches about "Ubuntu not contributing back to upstream" and Ubuntu is THE upstream.

hm... so, could you provide me with information- how many lines of code of kernel, glibc, gcc etc, were written by an employee of Canonical :?

Linuxforall
April 17th, 2010, 02:38 PM
OK, now go try it and give us your opinion. Your lack of specificity signals to me that you just made this up. Neither I nor any of my colleagues have had any of the problems you just mentioned, and in fact praise Yum over what DPMS has to offer. The package manager GUI is fast (and not just a big webkit browser), Opera runs just fine, and we don't have to worry about wasting bandwidth on duplicate bits (delta-rpms).

But in all seriousness, go try Fedora, it's a nice distro.

And then you are lying blatantly or being overtly biased just to prove your point, I always make it a point to install the second most popular distro out there and that is Fedora, these issues prevail, just go down to Fedora forum and look for video driver install, in all seriousness, try and use ubuntu for at least a month before you pass the judgment:), I sense your purpose is plainly apparent here and thats to just put down Ubuntu and Debian in general, yum is ok, it definitely is not apt, try and install Skype and you will see nightmare galore, in case of gdebi, all necessary packages are pulled in beautifully. In case of nvidia, its a royal mess with kmod and others making life miserable, one needs to disable SE Linux via kernel hack and only then does the nvidia driver install, but its a hit or miss, sometimes it wouldn't install right and its good old boot into terminal time.

The only silver lining is that scripts like Autoten and Easylife has made life easy for users of Fedora.

http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=204752

This shows the complexity in installing nvidia drivers, all one does in Ubuntu is sudo apt-get build-essential downloads run file from nvidia, does ctrl+alt+F1 and logs in hits sudo service gdm stop installs the drivers and reboots, plain and simple the way it outta be.

sdowney717
April 17th, 2010, 02:49 PM
Also found in Fedora 13 is the ability to use the roll-back feature of the Btrfs file system: "Btrfs lets you take lightweight snapshots of the file system which can be mounted or booted into selectively. This means that you can easily take a snapshot of the partition and in case something bad happens, just boot into the older snapshot."

ButterFS is going to be great. I think it will be the next default Linux FS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs

The principal developer of the ext3 and ext4 file systems, Theodore Ts'o, has stated that ext4 is simply a stop-gap and that Btrfs is the way forward,[9] having "a number of the same design ideas that reiser3/4 had".[10]

zekopeko
April 17th, 2010, 03:35 PM
hm... so, could you provide me with information- how many lines of code of kernel, glibc, gcc etc, were written by an employee of Canonical :?

Hmmm... could you provide me with the information on why this is relevant at all?

richs-lxh
April 17th, 2010, 03:43 PM
....... filesystems must be completely stable and feature-complete before they are suitable for use!



Which is why Ubuntu opted for the Ext4 filesystem and the data loss problems along with it?

wojox
April 17th, 2010, 03:45 PM
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=204752

This shows the complexity in installing nvidia drivers, all one does in Ubuntu is sudo apt-get build-essential downloads run file from nvidia, does ctrl+alt+F1 and logs in hits sudo service gdm stop installs the drivers and reboots, plain and simple the way it outta be.

Bad example. Installing nvidia on Fedora is a snap. Not to mention quicker than your example. BTW you left out a critical step in your ubuntu example. Next time you get a kernel updrade you'll break your driver module.

detroit/zero
April 17th, 2010, 03:49 PM
BTFS is not ready for use by anyone except people testing it; filesystems must be completely stable and feature-complete before they are suitable for use!
Just like EXT4 was when Ubuntu made that the default!

Right? Amirite, folks?

richs-lxh
April 17th, 2010, 03:58 PM
Just like EXT4 was when Ubuntu made that the default!

Right? Amirite, folks?

See post #90 :-D

RiceMonster
April 17th, 2010, 04:01 PM
The funniest part is when somebody bitches about "Ubuntu not contributing back to upstream" and Ubuntu is THE upstream.

People aren't talking about Ubuntu specific projects when they say that, which is the only case when that is true. Ubuntu is not upstream for the kernel, xorg, gnome, glibc, binutils, and so on and so forth.

Frak
April 17th, 2010, 04:17 PM
This shows the complexity in installing nvidia drivers, all one does in Ubuntu is sudo apt-get build-essential downloads run file from nvidia, does ctrl+alt+F1 and logs in hits sudo service gdm stop installs the drivers and reboots, plain and simple the way it outta be.

Good job taking a 1 step process and turning it into a job. Jockey can install the driver for you. Besides that, your method will break with every kernel update.

On Fedora, you enable the RPMFusion repo and install the Nvidia driver. It's literally that simple. There's no 10 step process.

What makes me laugh is that you tried to back up your statement with the most difficult installation of a driver I've ever seen, considering there has been a tool in Ubuntu for the past couple of years that has done all of that for you. It really makes me question if you've used Fedora or Ubuntu before.

As for the updates thing you kept going on about, your problems are isolated. Very, very few people have any problems with updates.

stanca
April 17th, 2010, 04:22 PM
All in all I just give a try to Fedora 13 Goddard Beta x86_64 right now.I think it's time for me to try a rpm based distro too after using 2 years only Debian and Ubuntu based off distros.;):)

xir_
April 18th, 2010, 12:18 PM
I think Red Hat, which is not quite aimed for the "masses" or "simplicity", would not agree as they beat their quarterly estimates time after time and all while the economy STINKS!

It all depends on who you are targeting. Ubuntu targets general users while Red Hat targets Enterprises and servers. Fedora targets testing and innovating the framework while openSUSE targets... well, I'm still trying to get that out of them ;).

Funny thing is Canonical and Ubuntu are taking their structure out of Red Hat's book (single release, enterprise and community)!

From my experience its used a lot in research. I really wish i could get them to switch to ubuntu. open SUSE is not fun.

ikt
April 18th, 2010, 01:21 PM
instead of wasting time discussing if the close button should be on the left or right, fedora has been working hard implementing a set of awesomeneses features

Those features are so awesome, I cannot wait to download fedora for "rollbacks with BTRFS".

Linuxforall
April 18th, 2010, 01:36 PM
Bad example. Installing nvidia on Fedora is a snap. Not to mention quicker than your example. BTW you left out a critical step in your ubuntu example. Next time you get a kernel updrade you'll break your driver module.

WOW! So Fedora gurus give bad example, didn't know that really.

Nothing breaks on Ubuntu, everytime there is a kernel update, I just reinstall the driver, easy as pie, its not easy on fedora, turning off SE Linux, making grub hack for nouveau, thats an understatement even hardcore fedora users admit.

Linuxforall
April 18th, 2010, 01:38 PM
Those features are so awesome, I cannot wait to download fedora for "rollbacks with BTRFS".

LOL yes, its so awesome that it never manages to even once topple Ubuntu on the totem pole, for once I would really like to see Ubuntu below Fedora honestly so that it brings back some humility on the devs maybe ;)

ikt
April 18th, 2010, 01:39 PM
Nothing breaks, everytime there is a kernel update, I just reinstall the driver, easy as pie, its not easy on fedora, thats an understatement even hardcore fedora users admit.

Yes, easy as pie, I have no idea why nvidia and ubuntu don't just give up their interfaces and go the maverick route of installing stuff via the cli since it's so easy.

Simian Man
April 18th, 2010, 01:57 PM
The reason that .debs often work better across distributions is because there is really only one distribution that creates .debs, Debian. Other distros that use these just fork and modify Debian so of course there is a lot of compatibility. Fedora, OpenSuse and Mandriva are all totally independent distros that just use the same packaging tool. It has absolutely nothing to do with the differences in the rpm and dev format or tools.

Yes installing proprietary stuff is a little trickier on Fedora than Ubuntu. Part of the reason for that is that Red Hat is a big company in the United States and has to be a little more wary of the law than Ubuntu. As a Fedora user it takes me a few minutes to install flash, mp3 codecs and nvidia drivers but for new users it would take longer. If you want it to be easy (even easier than Ubuntu), you can install autoten (http://dnmouse.org/autoten.html) or easylife (http://easylifeproject.org/) which can install a whole bunch of stuff automatically for you. BTW RPM Fusion works together with the Fedora project and is just as reputable as the main repos.

I am excited about Btrfs, but it is not the default filesystem of Fedora 13 like some seem to believe. It is just included as an option for the brave of heart or those who don't care about massive data loss :).

I have been using F13 for a few weeks and one of the really killer features (for me) is that the Nouveau drivers support 3D acceleration. That means I have been using compiz with the open source driver that was installed by default. I imagine that in a few releases they can start turning on desktop effects on the LiveCD for machines that support it which would be a pretty nice thing to have.

Lastly I can totally understand Ubuntu users not wanting to switch to Fedora, but I can't understand the dislike a lot of you have. Without Red Hat and the Fedora project you guys would be stuck with Warty Warthog.

Frak
April 18th, 2010, 05:24 PM
I have been using F13 for a few weeks and one of the really killer features (for me) is that the Nouveau drivers support 3D acceleration. That means I have been using compiz with the open source driver that was installed by default. I imagine that in a few releases they can start turning on desktop effects on the LiveCD for machines that support it which would be a pretty nice thing to have.

IIRC, Desktop effects were enabled for my ATi card using Open Source drivers, which is neat.


Lastly I can totally understand Ubuntu users not wanting to switch to Fedora, but I can't understand the dislike a lot of you have. Without Red Hat and the Fedora project you guys would be stuck with Warty Warthog.

Truth! Remember, people, that Fedora is not aiming to be Ubuntu. Fedora has no concern that Ubuntu even exists.

J V
April 18th, 2010, 05:37 PM
Ubuntu bug-report system is fundamentally broken: No-one bothers to look at the bugs :)

I'd switch to fedora without much ado but do they allow encrypted home directories? (Especially on install, pre-karmic an encrypted home was a b*tch)

Jon Monreal
April 18th, 2010, 05:43 PM
This thread has inspired me to give Fedora a try.

Don't worry, I'm not leaving Ubuntu (and I already use Gentoo).

I find this entire thread to be kind of odd; different distributions do different things different ways. If you don't like that, just use a different distribution. But consider other factors as well (such as community and support).

rotwang888
April 18th, 2010, 05:58 PM
I'd switch to fedora without much ado but do they allow encrypted home directories?

Yes.

-humanaut-
April 18th, 2010, 06:06 PM
I've always had a love hate with Fedora; Fedora 11 was there hallmark example of a great O.S. 12 left be running back to Ubuntu because of there poor use of the nouvue driver BTRFS should be A Linux ZFS but its not even close to ready and certainly shouldn't be included in a LTS Release.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 06:09 PM
@OP If you say so. I always have nothing, but problems on Fedora. If that's what you call progress then I'm glad Fedora is so far ahead. I hope Ubuntu never gets that good.

Frak
April 18th, 2010, 06:12 PM
I like to hear that the only people having massive problems in Fedora JUST HAPPEN TO BE very, erm, *loyal* Ubuntu users.

RiceMonster
April 18th, 2010, 06:17 PM
Nothing breaks on Ubuntu

What parallel universe do you live in? I don't think I'd say that about any distro that stays up to date.


everytime there is a kernel update, I just reinstall the driver,

So what you mean is that the driver breaks with every kernel update. Funny how you managed to contradict yourself in the same sentence.


@OP If you say so. I always have nothing, but problems on Fedora. If that's what you call progress then I'm glad Fedora is so far ahead. I hope Ubuntu never gets that good.

How constructive.

Jon Monreal
April 18th, 2010, 06:26 PM
What parallel universe do you live in? I don't think I'd say that about any distro that stays up to date.

Really. As much as I like Ubuntu and as well as it has worked on my hardware, I can tell you about problems with nvidia drivers, logging in and getting nothing but a cursor with a black screen behind it, configuration files getting messed up for who knows what reason, and a slew of other issues (all of which were easily fixed, but imagine what a non-technical user would go through).

That said, I've probably had more problems with Windows in the same time, from file corruption to Vista slowing to a crawl while indexing files.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 06:29 PM
I like to hear that the only people having massive problems in Fedora JUST HAPPEN TO BE very, erm, *loyal* Ubuntu users.

Maybe the people that are loyal Ubuntu users are that way because it works best for them? Maybe they are using Ubuntu because things like Fedora didn't work, so well with them? Notices in my statement I said "I" have had nothing, but problems. That's why I say use what works for you. Because your mileage may very.
I don't spend my life trying to push Ubuntu on people. I could care less what they use. If someone doesn't want to use Ubuntu more power to them. When people make broad statements it aggravates me.

RiceMonster
April 18th, 2010, 06:49 PM
Maybe the people that are loyal Ubuntu users are that way because it works best for them? Maybe they are using Ubuntu because things like Fedora didn't work, so well with them? Notices in my statement I said "I" have had nothing, but problems. That's why I say use what works for you. Because your mileage may very.

"If you say so. I always have nothing, but problems on Fedora. If that's what you call progress then I'm glad Fedora is so far ahead. I hope Ubuntu never gets that good."

That sounds more like you're asserting that Fedora is universally bad because of your experiences.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 07:14 PM
"If you say so. I always have nothing, but problems on Fedora. If that's what you call progress then I'm glad Fedora is so far ahead. I hope Ubuntu never gets that good."

That sounds more like you're asserting that Fedora is universally bad because of your experiences.

No Fedora doesn't work well for me at all. What I'm saying is I don't care how far ahead it is, if it doesn't work for me. If being far ahead means I'm not going to be able to use it, then I would rather stay in the stone age. It doesn't feel like progress if none of the stuff works for me. The OP said far ahead as if Ubuntu needs to be more like Fedora, and I'm just glad it's not.

zekopeko
April 18th, 2010, 07:45 PM
I like to hear that the only people having massive problems in Fedora JUST HAPPEN TO BE very, erm, *loyal* Ubuntu users.

Perhaps they are loyal Ubuntu users because Fedora doesn't play nice with their systems?

kevin01123
April 18th, 2010, 07:54 PM
I have a lot of respect for Fedora, but I don't prefer it.

Frak
April 18th, 2010, 07:57 PM
Perhaps they are loyal Ubuntu users because Fedora doesn't play nice with their systems?
Well, what gets me is when people move over to Fedora expecting it to be an Ubuntu replacement (much like people who move from Windows to Ubuntu expecting it to be a replacement). They don't take the time to figure out how the system works, and then abandon it claiming "it's a pile of crap" because it doesn't give easy access to X, Y, and Z, when that's not the focus of it in the first place.

Point to all of those who care: Fedora is for people who want a bleeding edge, RPM system built on open source components. If you want a stable RPM system, use OpenSuse. If you want a vetted-cutting-edge RPM system, use Mandriva. If you want a distribution so simple a monkey could use it that is targeted directly by n-number of companies (such as Codeweavers, VMWare, Google etc), Ubuntu and Mint are right up your alley.

-humanaut-
April 18th, 2010, 07:58 PM
I like Fedora it's just I prefer Debian & Debian based O.S.'s probably because I've spent A great deal of time studying Ubuntu (yeah I Read books to learn!)

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 08:12 PM
Point to all of those who care: Fedora is for people who want a bleeding edge, RPM system built on open source components. If you want a stable RPM system, use OpenSuse. If you want a vetted-cutting-edge RPM system, use Mandriva. If you want a distribution so simple a monkey could use it that is targeted directly by n-number of companies (such as Codeweavers, VMWare, Google etc), Ubuntu and Mint are right up your alley.

Ubuntu is for People who like Ubuntu. There are different reasons, different people like Ubuntu. I like Ubuntu because of it's Debian based, and has a 6 month release cycle, and it has always worked well for me. The philosophy is in line with what I want in an operating system. I don't want a system that is so stable it's boring, and I don't want one that's so cutting edge that half the stuff doesn't work for me, and the system breaks. If people would consider that their favorite x isn't the best y for everyone else, it would make things so much easier. I'm sure there are many people out there that love Fedora, but I'm not one of them, and I don't want Ubuntu to be like it.

RiceMonster
April 18th, 2010, 08:16 PM
Ubuntu is for People who like Ubuntu. There are different reasons, different people like Ubuntu. I like Ubuntu because of it's Debian based, and has a 6 month release cycle. The philosophy is in line with what I want in an operating system. I don't want a system that is so stable it's boring, and I don't want one that's so cutting edge that half the stuff doesn't work for me, and the system breaks. If people would consider that their favorite x isn't the best y for everyone else, it would make things so much easier. I'm sure there are many people out there that love Fedora, but I'm not one of them, and I don't want Ubuntu to be like it.

Good for you; don't use it then. I don't know why exactly you're being so persistent about this. Nobody is saying Ubuntu should mimic Fedora.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 08:31 PM
Good for you; don't use it then. I don't know why exactly you're being so persistent about this. Nobody is saying Ubuntu should mimic Fedora.

Oh. For some reason I thought the thread was about how far ahead Fedora is of Ubuntu, and how Ubuntu needs to catch up. I thought that I would mention that they have different goals, and a different user base. Sorry for the confusion.

toupeiro
April 18th, 2010, 08:55 PM
Oh. For some reason I thought the thread was about how far ahead Fedora is of Ubuntu, and how Ubuntu needs to catch up. I thought that I would mention that they have different goals, and a different user base. Sorry for the confusion.

I don't think you were confused. That was the implication by this thread, it's just been dissected into something unrecognizable, apparently.

mickie.kext
April 18th, 2010, 08:59 PM
Fedora ahead of ubuntu again

<sarcasm>
Rawhide is ahead of Fedora. Fedora must catch up.
</sarcasm>

Fedora is always ahead of Ubuntu and anyone else (except maybe Sidux or Arch testing). It's ahead by design. If there was no Fedora, we would still be using ext2. BTRFS has go through Fedora before it comes to Ubuntu.

RiceMonster
April 18th, 2010, 09:06 PM
Oh. For some reason I thought the thread was about how far ahead Fedora is of Ubuntu, and how Ubuntu needs to catch up. I thought that I would mention that they have different goals, and a different user base. Sorry for the confusion.

Well arguably it was implied by the OP, but nobody else was really saying that.

Whatever, nevermind.

toupeiro
April 18th, 2010, 09:11 PM
Fedora is always ahead of Ubuntu and anyone else (except maybe Sidux or Arch testing). It's ahead by design. If there was no Fedora, we would still be using ext2. BTRFS has go through Fedora before it comes to Ubuntu.

I agree with this. Why else do you think current RHEL is so many cores behind current fedora? RHEL5 entered beta in november 2006, which is just a few months after Ubuntu released the 6.06 LTS. When they decide to release rhel, they base it on a fedora core and freeze/mature it until its truly ready for showtime, and voala, you have RHEL, and they will continue to harden it for a much longer cycle, whereas ubuntu will roll out LTS's much more frequently. RHEL5 is based on Fedora Core-6. I think there is a bigger separation between RHEL/Fedora and Ubuntu/Ubuntu-LTS, and thats primarily because I think ubuntu, for the most part, does a better job of keeping apps that are unstable out of its point-releases. just my opinion.

Ubuntu is a nice, in my opinion very comfortable, medium between fedora's speed to production and RHEL's stability. If you're wondering why I compared ubuntu to fedora, its simply because I don't have the experience with its parent OS, debian, to compare it to.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 09:15 PM
Well arguably it was implied by the OP, but nobody else was really saying that.


Oh, well in that case, sorry for staying on topic.

RiceMonster
April 18th, 2010, 09:17 PM
Oh, well in that case, sorry for staying on topic.

You are not forgiven.

Linuxforall
April 19th, 2010, 08:17 AM
What parallel universe do you live in? I don't think I'd say that about any distro that stays up to date.





So what you mean is that the driver breaks with every kernel update. Funny how you managed to contradict yourself in the same sentence.




How constructive.

Definitely not the same universe you live in for sure. Do you even live in a universe really?

Playing devil's advocate for Fedora here really are you, thats the procedure for installing via run file for any distro, not just Ubuntu, how silly. Its the same procedure in Fedora as well.

Still better than disabling SE Linux, disabling Nouveau and then installing and praying that system boots, at least in Debian and Ubuntu, its surefire as long as you follow proper procedure.

Sarcasm for anyone not agreeing with your set of views. Thats what happens when you live in a universe weaved out of cocoon of your own imagination.

The whole post is a joke declaring Ubuntu is behind Fedora, the entire premise and then you have someone just arguing just for argument's sake. if you love Fedora so much, use it by all means, just don't go expecting Ubuntu to be one, we like it as it is and so do all the ones who put Ubuntu consistently at top of disto watch list.

Dragonbite
April 19th, 2010, 01:20 PM
Another aspect I like about Fedora is they include a bug-reporting tool that makes it very easy to submit as well as keeping track of what you've submitted so you aren't repeating the same thing over-and-over-again.

Did things crash in Fedora for me? Yes, but they were handled pretty nicely. Most crashes didn't bring down the entire system, and the application could be restarted without issue.

Do things crash in Ubuntu? Yeah, but it is nowhere nearly as often for me. Maybe I'm lucky?

It seems to me that Fedora knows there will be bugs, and makes provisions for it. This aids in their focus on testing new technology and being the "bleeding edge" distribution. At least, though, they know it and plan for it.

Overall, my crashes in Ubuntu match about those crashes I've gotten in XP. Maybe a few more, but not significantly. To me that means it's doing a pretty darn good job!

Frak
April 19th, 2010, 11:48 PM
Playing devil's advocate for Fedora here really are you, thats the procedure for installing via run file for any distro, not just Ubuntu, how silly. Its the same procedure in Fedora as well.

It is recommended that you use Jockey to install drivers in Ubuntu and RPMFusion to install drivers in Fedora. Installing via runfile is not supported by Canonical or RedHat.

That's why people are arguing with you, you are suggesting things that aren't recommended by the vendors.

wojox
April 20th, 2010, 12:30 AM
WOW! So Fedora gurus give bad example, didn't know that really.

Nothing breaks on Ubuntu, everytime there is a kernel update, I just reinstall the driver, easy as pie, its not easy on fedora, turning off SE Linux, making grub hack for nouveau, thats an understatement even hardcore fedora users admit.

Sorry didn't know you were a Fedora Guru. If you install the file from the nvidia site there is a simple way to make sure your driver doesn't break on the next kernel upgrade. I could probably share that info with you, but being I'm not at Guru status, I'll just keep it to myself.

As Frak stated previously, using jocky or RPMFusion really is the preferred method.

Out of curiosity, why do you feel it's necessary to install the file from the nvidia site?

bruce89
April 20th, 2010, 12:55 AM
Disclaimer: I use Fedora nowadays.

There is no such thing as a perfect distro, use what you like, and let others use what they want. I might like Fedora, but that doesn't mean everyone should.

Linuxforall
April 20th, 2010, 04:21 AM
Sorry didn't know you were a Fedora Guru. If you install the file from the nvidia site there is a simple way to make sure your driver doesn't break on the next kernel upgrade. I could probably share that info with you, but being I'm not at Guru status, I'll just keep it to myself.

As Frak stated previously, using jocky or RPMFusion really is the preferred method.

Out of curiosity, why do you feel it's necessary to install the file from the nvidia site?

And neither am I, just a user, I have always installed latest drivers from nvidia since my early days with SuSE 8. It has worked flawlessly and have given me the chance to use latest features of my card. For instance, the latest mplayer via git requires latest nvidia 195 series drivers to work, if you are depending on your repo, all you get is 185 series which is older, the latest drivers also fix many bugs so installing from nvidia's site or ATI's site is always a better idea.

As for breaking the kernel, thats such a misnomer, if your kernel breaks, your system is hosed for good, its your X that needs to be fixed and a simple uninstall and reinistall of nvidia driver is extremely easy.

Whats hard about sudo service gdm stop

sudo nvidia-uninstall reboot to terminal mode and reinstall via sudo .sh

No need of any gurus, plain and simple ;)

Linuxforall
April 20th, 2010, 04:34 AM
It is recommended that you use Jockey to install drivers in Ubuntu and RPMFusion to install drivers in Fedora. Installing via runfile is not supported by Canonical or RedHat.

That's why people are arguing with you, you are suggesting things that aren't recommended by the vendors.

So let me see, I get cutting edge nvidia or ati card and then go to jockey to install a buggy older driver, that don't look too good for linux does it when all I do in Windows world is download the latest, greatest most compatible bug fixed driver from the manufacturer's site and point and click,reboot, simple and done. Also Jockey itself is buggy and a joke, most of the time it crashes and when it does manage to install the driver, its unable to inform the user of that or tell the user to reboot. No thanks, the run file way works out to be far superior.

-humanaut-
April 20th, 2010, 04:42 AM
Just a thought perhaps the "ubuntu loyalty" is based on the fact this is the Ubuntu forums I dunno just a thought. I like fedora but Debian & Ubuntu (and accutally solaris) run my systems

YeOK
April 20th, 2010, 05:49 AM
So let me see, I get cutting edge nvidia or ati card and then go to jockey to install a buggy older driver, that don't look too good for linux does it when all I do in Windows world is download the latest, greatest most compatible bug fixed driver from the manufacturer's site and point and click,reboot, simple and done. Also Jockey itself is buggy and a joke, most of the time it crashes and when it does manage to install the driver, its unable to inform the user of that or tell the user to reboot. No thanks, the run file way works out to be far superior.

The Nvidia .run file will replace some of your system files. Its a well known issue and Nvidia themselves recommend you use a distro specific package if you wish to avoid breaking things, for example, try compile anything requiring libGL. Sure, the casual user may never notice, that does not change the fact the .run file causes issues.

I don't know about jockey, but RPMFusion has the latest 'stable' nvidia package, though as expected its usually a few days behind while it makes the rounds of the testing repo.

renkinjutsu
April 20th, 2010, 06:51 AM
I don't get why people are forming arguments against Fedora based on User friendliness when it's not what Fedora's focus is.. How would you like it if someone were to assume Ubuntu is an inferior distro because it doesn't come with Cluster utilities/filesystems in the main repos, or that there aren't any packages for the CELL-SDK.. The distros are there for different reasons (like the BSD examples below)

FreeBSD - for maximum performance
OpenBSD - for maximum security
DragonFly BSD - ultimate goal is for SMP and native Clustering

Linuxforall
April 20th, 2010, 07:54 AM
The Nvidia .run file will replace some of your system files. Its a well known issue and Nvidia themselves recommend you use a distro specific package if you wish to avoid breaking things, for example, try compile anything requiring libGL. Sure, the casual user may never notice, that does not change the fact the .run file causes issues.

I don't know about jockey, but RPMFusion has the latest 'stable' nvidia package, though as expected its usually a few days behind while it makes the rounds of the testing repo.

I have installed via .run file on myriads of machines so far and none have given any issues, if you are talking about x32 libso.gl, that works out fine with a reinstall, all x32 apps work fine in x64 distro, Googlearth is one example of it. Point is at the end of the day, latest video driver is what makes or breaks for some and for them, there is no other choice but use the run and it runs fine.

In Fedora, apart from rpm fusion, autoten and easylife also provide an easy way to install nvidia and ati drivers.

Linuxforall
April 20th, 2010, 08:00 AM
Just a thought perhaps the "ubuntu loyalty" is based on the fact this is the Ubuntu forums I dunno just a thought. I like fedora but Debian & Ubuntu (and accutally solaris) run my systems



Absolutely right, this sort of thing won't be tolerated in Fedora, SuSE or sidux forums. To come into Ubuntu forum and say that Fedora is ahead of Ubuntu is classic troll bait. How bout if one goes to Fedora forum and makes a post with distro watch list and post with a title 'when will fedora ever catch up to ubuntu' I guarantee you that sparks will fly.

I always make it a point to install Fedora so apart from Ubuntu, Fedora and sidux are two other distros I install, of course Ubuntu remains my primary distro but I definitely enjoy new releases of Fedora and sidux. I also enjoy forums there.

Simian Man
April 20th, 2010, 02:25 PM
So let me see, I get cutting edge nvidia or ati card and then go to jockey to install a buggy older driver, that don't look too good for linux does it when all I do in Windows world is download the latest, greatest most compatible bug fixed driver from the manufacturer's site and point and click,reboot, simple and done. Also Jockey itself is buggy and a joke, most of the time it crashes and when it does manage to install the driver, its unable to inform the user of that or tell the user to reboot. No thanks, the run file way works out to be far superior.
Let's see what Nvidia driver I have installed:


[ian@sanpedro ~]$ rpm -q kmod-nvidia
kmod-nvidia-195.36.15-1.fc12.2.i686

And the version available from Nvidia directly is currently...195.36.15! I don't know about Ubuntu with Jockey, but the RPM Fusion devs are extremely good about staying up to date with their hardware drivers. Moreover the version from RPM Fusion is tested to work with Fedora and actually gets updated along with your kernel so you don't have to do that ridiculous fix every time you update the kernel. And yes it is ridiculous :).

And, in general, if having the latest updates is very important to you Ubuntu is not a good distribution to run anyway.

Shining Arcanine
April 20th, 2010, 02:39 PM
I still think design is the biggest flaw in Linux Distros, those default themes need to look way better.

Most Linux distributions have that flaw. I use Gentoo Linux, which solved that problem by having no Desktop Environment by default.

I installed KDE and I like how it looks, so I do not really have that problem. In the past when I used Ubuntu, I did have a problem with how it looked.

Linuxforall
April 20th, 2010, 03:17 PM
Well at least in Linux distro, its easy as pie to change themes and there is myriads of it available unlike in the other distro where 3rd party uxtheme patch has to be applied or an utility bought just to change the themes.

Dragonbite
April 20th, 2010, 04:07 PM
As been said numerous times, Fedora and Ubuntu focus on different markets.

Fedora does a great job of working and improving the underlying structure that benefits most Linux distros whether or not it is obvious. How many distros use Network Manager?

Ubuntu does a good job focusing on the user and providing things like integrating the UbuntuOne cloud drive with synchronizing Contacts, Notes and Bookmarks, a coming online music store, easy Flash installation and available support for the community versions and GUI's galore (haven't had to go into the CLI without it being a choice anymore).

I will probably be fooling around with Fedora on the side, but my main systems run Ubuntu (LTS for most systems) because they are easy to set up, manage and maintain.

Frak
April 20th, 2010, 04:32 PM
all x32 apps work fine in x64 distro

No?


Absolutely right, this sort of thing won't be tolerated in Fedora, SuSE or sidux forums. To come into Ubuntu forum and say that Fedora is ahead of Ubuntu is classic troll bait. How bout if one goes to Fedora forum and makes a post with distro watch list and post with a title 'when will fedora ever catch up to ubuntu' I guarantee you that sparks will fly.

Humility, have some.

If a Fedora user comes in and critiques OpenSUSE on the SUSE forum, an argument will be had, but it won't be a brawl for "OMG< THIS IS TEH BESTz!". If an Ubuntu user comes on to a Fedora, OpenSUSE, etc. forum and says "Ubuntu is better than this because of x" you will be instantly labeled "Just another Ubuntu user" and kicked to the side of the curb. This comes from a long history of Ubuntu users going out of their way to tell everybody why Ubuntu is just the best thing since sliced bread.

Dragonbite
April 20th, 2010, 04:40 PM
No?



Humility, have some.

If a Fedora user comes in and critiques OpenSUSE on the SUSE forum, an argument will be had, but it won't be a brawl for "OMG< THIS IS TEH BESTz!". If an Ubuntu user comes on to a Fedora, OpenSUSE, etc. forum and says "Ubuntu is better than this because of x" you will be instantly labeled "Just another Ubuntu user" and kicked to the side of the curb. This comes from a long history of Ubuntu users going out of their way to tell everybody why Ubuntu is just the best thing since sliced bread.

Hey, I haven't been banned yet!

Frak
April 20th, 2010, 04:47 PM
Hey, I haven't been banned yet!
Congratulations, here's a cookie:

http://imgur.com/rS3Was.jpg

YeOK
April 20th, 2010, 06:02 PM
I have installed via .run file on myriads of machines so far and none have given any issues, if you are talking about x32 libso.gl, that works out fine with a reinstall, all x32 apps work fine in x64 distro, Googlearth is one example of it. Point is at the end of the day, latest video driver is what makes or breaks for some and for them, there is no other choice but use the run and it runs fine.

In Fedora, apart from rpm fusion, autoten and easylife also provide an easy way to install nvidia and ati drivers.

I've used Linux for years, and the Nvidia .run package has been a constant cause of pain. You either have a new kernel update to recompile for, a new X-Server or you want to compile an OpenGL based app and can't.

As I said, it is recommended by Nvidia themselves, to use a distro specific package.

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=72490 (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=72490)

Dragonbite
April 20th, 2010, 06:50 PM
Congratulations, here's a cookie:

http://imgur.com/rS3Was.jpg

Yum!

(pun intended!)

swoll1980
April 20th, 2010, 06:54 PM
How the hell did "Fedora is ahead of Ubuntu" turn into "Nvidia.com vs the repos"? The Internet is an amazing place.

stanca
April 21st, 2010, 01:14 PM
After several days of trying and using Fedora 13 beta x86_64 on my multiboot system I find it quite pretty stable and solid for a beta yet,after I installed all the needed extra repos (rpmfusion,livna,etc.) now I have all the same things I have in Ubuntu too,the only annoying issue (for me in this case) is that the rawhide rpmfusion nonfree repos don't have the nvidia legacy drivers(173.14.25) and kernel headers needed for my old AGPx8 Nvidia GPU(Geforce Fx 5500,256mb) yet.The nouveau default driver doesn't support 3D,the experimental mesa drivers don't work either and even the run package diver from Nvidia site can't be installed because of the too new kernel(2.6.33.2fc13) compiled with newer program than the nvidia driver.
In rest I'm surprised how well and faster is working Firefox 3.6.3 and the flashplugin in Fedora x86_64,not even a crash or a glitch so far.;):):P

Linuxforall
April 21st, 2010, 01:18 PM
After several days of trying and using Fedora 13 beta x86_64 on my multiboot system I find it quite pretty stable and solid for a beta yet,after I installed all the needed extra repos (rpmfusion,livna,etc.) now I have all the same things I have in Ubuntu too,the only annoying issue (for me in this case) is that the rawhide rpmfusion nonfree repos don't have the nvidia legacy drivers(173.14.25) and kernel headers needed for my old AGPx8 Nvidia GPU(Geforce Fx 5500,256mb) yet.The nouveau default driver doesn't support 3D,the experimental mesa drivers don't work either and even the run package diver from Nvidia site can't be installed because of the too new kernel(2.6.33.2fc13) compiled with newer program than the nvidia driver.
In rest I'm surprised how well and faster is working Firefox 3.6.3 and the flashplugin in Fedora x86_64,not even a crash or a glitch so far.;):):P


Firefox definitely works better in Fedora, also the distro doesn't have the ipv6 issue that Ubuntu has.

-humanaut-
April 21st, 2010, 07:08 PM
Congratulations, here's a cookie:

http://imgur.com/rS3Was.jpg

That cookie is one of the coolest things I have ever seen haha.

anyways back on topic one of the best Distro's for nVidia is VectorLinux. It builds it into the kernel on install.

kevin01123
June 3rd, 2010, 07:53 PM
I retract my previous statement. Fedora 13 is amazing.

NightwishFan
June 3rd, 2010, 07:57 PM
I like Fedora as well. It is a close 2nd to Debian. Their spin of XFCE is cool as well.

nomnex
August 25th, 2010, 04:13 PM
Guys, Ubuntu 10.04 has been a complete let down on my hardware (various but old). Most of the bugs are well documented (i855 gpu, system freeze on shut down, CD does not install, etc.)

After reading this article: http://gregdekspeaks.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/red-hat-16-canonical-1/
To quote DeKoenigsberg: "Canonical is a marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization."

I have tried Fedora 13 by curiosity. Everything--but really everything--installed and worked out of the box with my hardware. No a single workaround (but to edit a xorg.conf). Moreover, no MONO crap, less eye candy, the distro is very polished. I have been impressed, especially after hearing so many comments about the bad usability of Fedora.

The fedora documentation (Wiki) is concise and excellent. To install the external repositories was a breeze. Yum is okay. Of course, this positive experience might change when I will purchase a newer hardware, but so far it is very good.

I like Ubuntu as my first distribution, but staring from Karmic, I have the feeling the main point of focus of Ubuntu is the GUI look, at the detriment of the stability and the quality. 9.04 was rock solid with my hardware, 9.10 occasioned a few problems, 10.04 too many.

At this time, and with my current hardware, I am in the favor of Fedora 13 vs. Ubuntu 10.04.