PDA

View Full Version : Fc6..... Yuck!



raqball
October 24th, 2006, 08:04 PM
I installed FC6 final release today and after about an hour I am NOW installing Ubuntu 6.06 back on the laptop.

Boot times in FC6 are pathetic and install time is even more pathetic. Hated it so back I go to the good ol reliable 6.06.. :)

Anyone else try FC6?

matthew
October 24th, 2006, 08:07 PM
I moved this to the proper forum.

SpEcIeS
October 24th, 2006, 08:10 PM
I installed FC6 final release today and after about an hour I am NOW installing Ubuntu 6.06 back on the laptop.

Boot times in FC6 are pathetic and install time is even more pathetic. Hated it so back I go to the good ol reliable 6.06.. :)

Anyone else try FC6?
Really? I guess I am going to waste a DVD and try it out anyway. I am not going to get rid of Ubuntu, but install it on a 20GB drive for testing. Still downloading... 8%.. and crawling. :)

r4ik
October 24th, 2006, 08:14 PM
Might dual-boot in fact i am pretty sure.
Have to see it myself.
Wonder if this stupid itch trying other dists will ever stop.

SpEcIeS
October 24th, 2006, 08:18 PM
Might dual-boot in fact i am pretty sure.
Have to see it myself.
Wonder if this stupid itch trying other dists will ever stop.
Has not stopped for me yet. :D I have dulled it down to dual-booting also, but no M$. Just different linux's with Ubuntu as the primary distro.

acascianelli
October 24th, 2006, 08:58 PM
I think Fedora 6 looks better than Ubuntu, but Ubuntu's package management is what keeps bringing me back. Fedora has gotten better with YUM. I wouldn't have any problems recommending Fedora to anybody, for me Ubuntu and Fedora are about equal. I've used Fedora since Core 1, and Ubuntu since 5.04(Hoary).

IYY
October 24th, 2006, 09:02 PM
I've never used Fedora Core (or Red Hat) but there are some features that look cool:

GUI security options
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=749&slide=46

GUI Xorg configuration (even with dual-display)
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=749&slide=44


The default theme and icons also look nice.

aanderse
October 24th, 2006, 09:10 PM
i am downloading FC6 as we speak ... i'm really excited for it! in my eyes ubuntu and fedora are always so close - which one is better ... fedora core 4 was better (for me) than when i first tried ubuntu5.04 so i stuck with fedora. then breezy badger came out and i liked it more than fedora, so i switched to ubuntu. next was dapper versus fedora core 5, which dapper won by a landslide. i'm looking forward to comparing edgy to fc6 =D i think fc6 is gonna be really good.

taurus
October 24th, 2006, 09:49 PM
Really? I guess I am going to waste a DVD and try it out anyway. I am not going to get rid of Ubuntu, but install it on a 20GB drive for testing. Still downloading... 8%.. and crawling. :)

You should try to use the DVD+/-RW. Save money and the environment as well... ;)

raqball
October 24th, 2006, 10:30 PM
Really? I guess I am going to waste a DVD and try it out anyway. I am not going to get rid of Ubuntu, but install it on a 20GB drive for testing. Still downloading... 8%.. and crawling. :)

You might as well try it, you might like it! I hated it! The install time gave me flashbacks to the Suse 10.1 3 hour install times (FC6 is not that bad but it is about an hour or so)

Boot times compared to 6.06 are horrible, boot times compared to 6.10 are flat out sad!

The icon theme does look nice and pretty though :)

Yum, is still yum, no thanks, i'll keep apt :)

Lord Illidan
October 24th, 2006, 10:32 PM
The theme looks better..but the icons are still the same bluecurve..no thanks.

I like the xorg config tool, perhaps we can make a similar one for Ubuntu?

ComplexNumber
October 24th, 2006, 10:52 PM
The theme looks better..but the icons are still the same bluecurve..no thanks.

see post 18 in this (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=282290&page=2) thread.

Lord Illidan
October 24th, 2006, 10:54 PM
see post 18 in this (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=282290&page=2) thread.

Looks slightly childish.. i prefer ubuntu icons, but an improvement!

ComplexNumber
October 24th, 2006, 11:00 PM
Looks slightly childish.. i prefer ubuntu icons, but an improvement!
i suppose you can always install the icons of your choice and make them default.

SpEcIeS
October 24th, 2006, 11:04 PM
You should try to use the DVD+/-RW. Save money and the environment as well... ;)
Never was big on RW's. Seem to produce bad spots after a few reburns. Meh... I do my part for the environment and drive my wife nuts, but I am not going to go nazi over it. Besides cost is an issue for me. ;)


The icon theme does look nice and pretty though
The redhat artwork package, after converting, installed nice on Ubuntu 6.10 as well as Ubuntu 6.06, but on 6.10 the theme bluecurve controls are screwed up. Bluecurve is one of my favorite themes. Mmmmm.... Grape. 8)

It will be interesting to compare the differences between Edgy and Fedora.

Lord Illidan
October 24th, 2006, 11:05 PM
i suppose you can always install the icons of your choice and make them default.

aye, but in FC 5, I remember the GUI icons, like in Nautilus etc, were particularly ugly..

ComplexNumber
October 24th, 2006, 11:22 PM
aye, but in FC 5, I remember the GUI icons, like in Nautilus etc, were particularly ugly..
the icons in nautilus (eg back, forward, up, stop, reload, etc) are determined by the theme that you select via gnome theme manager.

you can also change your default icons by going to /usr/share/icons/default. in there you will find a file that determines the default icons.

raqball
October 24th, 2006, 11:27 PM
Wonder if this stupid itch trying other dists will ever stop.

LOl... I know my girlfriend would be thrilled if I would or could stop playing with my computer

:)

katgfan
October 25th, 2006, 08:16 PM
FC6 actually looks good thier current theme but thats just it for me. I tried to install in my NEC laptop and some devices is still not recognized boot time is also slow.

Back to Ubuntu for me. Anyways Apt still better than Yum.

KStorm
October 26th, 2006, 11:44 AM
I like it...FC6 is on one of my partitions along with Ubuntu and PCLinuxOS that occupy the other two.

hey_ian
October 27th, 2006, 11:28 AM
I like it...FC6 is on one of my partitions along with Ubuntu and PCLinuxOS that occupy the other two.

I agree that FC6 is not bad, all in all a really nice distro.

BUT DEBIAN IS BETTER!

SpEcIeS
October 27th, 2006, 11:53 AM
I do not know about better, but I like it. On my system it does appear to run a little quicker too. Ubuntu, on my computer, is on a 7200 Maxtor drive and Fedora is on a 5400 Maxtor drive, however Fedora's software reponds much quicker. Booting is a little slow though, but not by much.

Congrats to the Fedora team. :D

hey_ian
October 27th, 2006, 11:59 AM
I do not know about better, but I like it. On my system it does appear to run a little quicker too. Ubuntu, on my computer, is on a 7200 Maxtor drive and Fedora is on a 5400 Maxtor drive, however Fedora's software reponds much quicker. Booting is a little slow though, but not by much.

Congrats to the Fedora team. :D
Well Ubuntu has indeed a slow GNOME. It would be better an faster if Buntu would offer a plain GNOME, just like Debian and others do. Fedora has a very fast GNOME, as fast as on Debian Etch.

SpEcIeS
October 27th, 2006, 12:10 PM
Well Ubuntu has indeed a slow GNOME. It would be better an faster if Buntu would offer a plain GNOME, just like Debian and others do. Fedora has a very fast GNOME, as fast as on Debian Etch.
Also, other applications such as OOo responded very quickly compared to Ubuntu 6.10.

apoclypse
October 27th, 2006, 07:29 PM
i thinkthey are using some sort of prelinking to get there speed increase. I still prefer ubuntu. What I'm wondering is how they got aiglx by defualt and it looks like they are using metacity as the window manager. Yet ubuntu doesn't have it installed yet. That makes no sense to me considering that this is supposed to be the edgy release and so far there is very little edgy in edgy eft. That doesn't mean that I'm goign to switch, ubuntu's packaging system is the best by far and can't b e beat for speed and use, at least compared to redhat's or suse's solution. I have yet to have a packaging issue that couldn't be resolved easily, the same cannot be said about redhat. That has more to do with their dependance on 3rd party repos and bad packaging practices in these repos. Ubuntu has more better packages and they usually always.

SpEcIeS
October 27th, 2006, 07:37 PM
i thinkthey are using some sort of prelinking to get there speed increase...
Yes, they are applying DT_GNU_HASH to there software.


All Fedora Core applications have been rebuilt using `DT_GNU_HASH`, which provides a significant performance boost during start-up for applications using dynamic linking.

Seems to make a difference, but there has been some complaints regarding bloat.

hey_ian
October 27th, 2006, 07:52 PM
Yes, they are applying DT_GNU_HASH to there software.



Seems to make a difference, but there has been some complaints regarding bloat.
You are right DT_GNU_HASH is used an it makes FC6 faster while the PC is up and running, but the start time is twice of the start time of Ubuntu Edgy Eft.
@apoclypse: The Debian Packaging system is the best in the world and there are no package system that could beat APT. I am wondering why RedHat does not allow Fedora project to switch to APT. Of course they cannot give up their own system and use that of a competitor.
FC6 uses Metacity and Compiz. It is not enabled standardly, but the xorg.conf is ready for compiz, you have only to open the Desktop Effect Dialog and push "Enable Desktop Effect" and it works. What I did not like is that the Desktop Effect dialog of Compiz was made simplier and many features of Compiz where thrown out.
Anyway FC6 is good, I used it for days and if it would be better I would switch to it, but it was not better.

DEBIAN rules!!!

PriceChild
October 27th, 2006, 07:55 PM
Yeah i just didn't like FC6... i don't think anything will be able to sway me fromt he might that is Ubuntu :)

MedivhX
October 27th, 2006, 08:00 PM
Fedora is just RedHat beta... They use it as a testing version... A slave...

SunnyRabbiera
October 27th, 2006, 08:08 PM
Fedora is looking better and better over the years, but I still like debian based distros better... the only RPM distro I can say I like is pclinux

ZuLuuuuuu
October 28th, 2006, 12:44 PM
I decided to use Fedora until the Feisty Fawn's release. And I can say that I really like this distro. I don't understand why people always saying that YUM is slow. It is not working slow at all for me. I can even say that it feels like faster then Synaptic.

I heard some people saying that Edgy is not so stable as expected. I don't like that the developers feel the obligation to make a new release every 6 months. Fedora developers delay the release until the OS is ready to release and also they don't feel the obligation to do this until 6 months is passed. So they are more relaxed.

Anyway, I haven't seen any necessity to switch back to Ubuntu yet, I will use it until the release of Feisty Fawn. Also I like Fedora's icons better than Ubuntu's and the desktop effects are really cool :)

hey_ian
October 28th, 2006, 02:09 PM
Fedora is just RedHat beta... They use it as a testing version... A slave...

Yeah, this is the matter of fact.

SpEcIeS
October 28th, 2006, 03:11 PM
I don't understand why people always saying that YUM is slow. It is not working slow at all for me. I can even say that it feels like faster then Synaptic.
I also did not find yum to be slow either and found it to be competitive to synaptic. However, Synaptic does have more features


I heard some people saying that Edgy is not so stable as expected. I don't like that the developers feel the obligation to make a new release every 6 months. Fedora developers delay the release until the OS is ready to release and also they don't feel the obligation to do this until 6 months is passed. So they are more relaxed.
Edgy on my system seems to be just fine, but Fedora does perform better on my machine. Dapper was held back until it was sound, so I do not really believe that the team is rushing the distributions.


Anyway, I haven't seen any necessity to switch back to Ubuntu yet, I will use it until the release of Feisty Fawn. Also I like Fedora's icons better than Ubuntu's and the desktop effects are really cool :)
I think that it is really cool that the Ubuntu team release every 6 months in conjunction with new Gnome releases. A lot of distributions do not have Gnome nearly as up to date as Ubuntu.

hey_ian
October 28th, 2006, 04:10 PM
I am one of the who say that yu mis slow. Synaptic is not a competitor to yum, but a competitor to pirut. Synaptic is a graphical frontend to APT like pirut for yum. Yum is really slower than APT. When I want to install one or two progs, yum takes about one minute to resolv all dependencies, APT needs only 3 seconds and I have broadband internet.

SpEcIeS
October 28th, 2006, 04:14 PM
You are right... should have said yum is competitive to apt. :) Yum does not seem to run that slow for me though. :confused:

ComplexNumber
October 28th, 2006, 04:24 PM
You are right... should have said yum is competitive to apt. :) Yum does not seem to run that slow for me though. :confused:
its fast for me too. i don't know where on earh hey_ian is getting his figures from, but it takes about 2 seconds for yum with individual packages.

SpEcIeS
October 28th, 2006, 04:34 PM
Not only does yum work well, but the whole distribution is very snappy compared to Ubuntu. On my system Fedora is on a slower drive, 5400 20GB Maxtor, and still seems to out perform Ubuntu, which is on a 7200 80GB Maxtor drive.

I am curious about the difference in performance. What is doing it? Is it really the `DT_GNU_HASH` build? If so, maybe Ubuntu should implement the same feature.

Either case Fedora is a really nice distro. ;)

hey_ian
October 28th, 2006, 05:26 PM
I was installing several packages like audacity or anjuta from the extras repo. They are not as big, anyway yum needed actually about one minute to resolv the dependencies for each package. It was worser when I wanted to install such big packages like OO.org or when I wanted to update FC5 with yum update. I did not try to update FC6 yet, there is no sense but I have upgraded to FC6 using yum upgrade and it was indeed slower as when I am using apt-get dist-upgrade on a Debian.

raqball
October 28th, 2006, 06:10 PM
Is anyone using it on a laptop? My latop took forever to boot and shutdown, not only that, but it was very unresponsive to clicks and commands.

I am talking real slow to boot and shut down, almost Suse 10.1 slow...

Boot was probably 3 minutes compared to about 40 secods with dapper. Shutdown was very simular to these times.

givré
October 28th, 2006, 07:05 PM
What's wrong with fedora... yum.

SpEcIeS
October 28th, 2006, 07:33 PM
Here is another plus for Fedora, on my machine wine works flawlessly, but not on Ubuntu. When using Ubuntu, even compiling wine from source, or the git, wine will lock up my computer, and this includes the lastest version of wine, 0.9.24.

hey_ian
October 28th, 2006, 10:40 PM
Here is another plus for Fedora, on my machine wine works flawlessly, but not on Ubuntu. When using Ubuntu, even compiling wine from source, or the git, wine will lock up my computer, and this includes the lastest version of wine, 0.9.24.

As a matter of fact there are no big differencies between installing a precompiled Debian package and compiling the package yourself. The other way round, if you take the PKG directly from winehq.org you may get problems, so if you want to build a package from source, you apt-build.

apt-get install apt-build
If you want to install e.g. wine on your computer, use apt-build install wine and this will install wine form source.

SpEcIeS
October 29th, 2006, 06:15 AM
Normally when compiling packages from source I will just use apt-get source -b wine. Works great, but not with wine though. Wine will not work on my computer with Ubuntu. Very strange. :confused:

hey_ian
October 29th, 2006, 04:48 PM
I think apt-build is much better to compile packages from source, it is just like portage in Gentoo. Try to install Wine this way.

sherlock-holmes
October 30th, 2006, 09:10 PM
its going fine for me...except that yum is acting really slow...i use apt sometimes though.... its was a pain to install SPE (Python IDE) with all the dependencies...

ofcouse its evident that the help in this forums is second to none!

jordilin
October 30th, 2006, 09:21 PM
Fedora doesn't have the amount of software that Ubuntu has!! For me that's very important!!

hey_ian
October 30th, 2006, 09:46 PM
Fedora doesn't have the amount of software that Ubuntu has!! For me that's very important!!

Yes that is right. Anyway Debian has more software than Ubuntu, although Ubuntu is only a Debian fork. ;-)

givré
October 31st, 2006, 12:06 AM
its going fine for me...except that yum is acting really slow...i use apt sometimes though.... its was a pain to install SPE (Python IDE) with all the dependencies...

ofcouse its evident that the help in this forums is second to none!
You should use smart.
That's ******* good.

I don't know why they keep this stupid yum.

SpEcIeS
October 31st, 2006, 03:38 AM
The redhat artwork package, after converting, installed nice on Ubuntu 6.10 as well as Ubuntu 6.06, but on 6.10 the theme bluecurve controls are screwed up. Bluecurve is one of my favorite themes. Mmmmm.... Grape. 8)


Have a fix for the Bluecurve issue. After installing the redhat artwork package apply these symbolic links:

cd /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines
sudo ln -s /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/engines/libbluecurve.so libbluecurve.so
sudo ln -s /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/engines/libbluecurve.la libbluecurve.la
Using alien to convert, I used the redhat-artwork_0.241-1_i386.deb created from redhat-artwork-0.241-1.i386.rpm.

givré
October 31st, 2006, 04:17 AM
Using alien to convert, I used the redhat-artwork_0.241-1_i386.deb created from redhat-artwork-0.241-1.i386.rpm.
IMO, you can expect a lot from alien.

ComplexNumber
October 31st, 2006, 09:31 PM
you ubuntu users should use synaptic when you download FC6 because it uses apt (it has apt as a dependendency). its one of the reasons why people tend to find synaptic to be so lacking. i use smart instead.

SpEcIeS
October 31st, 2006, 10:04 PM
Wow... :confused: :confused: :confused:

I just do not get it.. someone explain that to me please.

hey_ian
November 1st, 2006, 09:08 PM
you ubuntu users should use synaptic when you download FC6 because it uses apt (it has apt as a dependendency). its one of the reasons why people tend to find synaptic to be so lacking. i use smart instead.

Ubuntu users should use APT, because it is soo lacking? Ubuntu users should use APT when downloading FC6? What is the command to download FC6 trough APT, apt-get install fedora-release? ;-)

ComplexNumber
November 1st, 2006, 09:16 PM
Ubuntu users should use APT, because it is soo lacking? Ubuntu users should use APT when downloading FC6? What is the command to download FC6 trough APT, apt-get install fedora-release? ;-)
no no no. i meant that synaptic uses apt on fedora as well as ubuntu. when i installed(and uninstalled) synaptic on fedora, apt was a dependency. i uninstalled synaptic/apt because it was so slow and it seemed to have some trouble with dependencies whereas smart doesn't. for example, synaptic sometimes installs the new version without deleting the old. it certainly performs much less well than smart.
i've just gone to install synaptic now, and this is what it gives me (note the apt dependency)

Dependencies Resolved

================================================== ===========================
Package Arch Version Repository Size
================================================== ===========================
Installing:
synaptic i386 0.57.2-5.0.fc5 extras 1.6 M
Installing for dependencies:
apt i386 0.5.15lorg3.2-7.fc5 extras 972 k
fedora-package-config-apt noarch 5-4 extras 4.2 k

Transaction Summary
================================================== ===========================
Install 3 Package(s)
Update 0 Package(s)
Remove 0 Package(s)
Total download size: 2.6 M
Is this ok [y/N]:

Chayak
November 1st, 2006, 09:41 PM
When FC6 came out I installed it on my laptop. I couldn't get their 'out of the box' effects to work and got frustrated when yum and yumex were slow in updating only to give me errors. I played with it a bit and shortly after installed Ubuntu 6.10 on my XPS which is quite happy now :)

ComplexNumber
November 1st, 2006, 09:43 PM
When FC6 came out I installed it on my laptop. I couldn't get their 'out of the box' effects to work and got frustrated when yum and yumex were slow in updating only to give me errors. I played with it a bit and shortly after installed Ubuntu 6.10 on my XPS which is quite happy now :)
hmmmm funny. it was the exact opposite for me.

hey_ian
November 1st, 2006, 10:43 PM
hmmmm funny. it was the exact opposite for me.
Perhaps APT and Synaptic do not work properly on FC6, because they were written for Debian? ;-)
The output you posted is from APT? Looks like another Yum output.

SpEcIeS
November 1st, 2006, 11:11 PM
When I used SuSE there was an apt setup for and it worked great. ;)

ComplexNumber
November 1st, 2006, 11:32 PM
Perhaps APT and Synaptic do not work properly on FC6, because they were written for Debian? ;-)
The output you posted is from APT? Looks like another Yum output.
no, the output i posted is from yum. i was just making the point that FC6 installs apt as a dependency of synaptic.

givré
November 2nd, 2006, 12:35 PM
no, the output i posted is from yum. i was just making the point that FC6 installs apt as a dependency of synaptic.
??? i want to say, of course, it is made for that...

When you use smart, you don't use yum, you use smart.
When you use synaptic, you don't use yum, you use apt.
What's wrong.

BrokeBody
November 2nd, 2006, 03:38 PM
Not only does yum work well, but the whole distribution is very snappy compared to Ubuntu. On my system Fedora is on a slower drive, 5400 20GB Maxtor, and still seems to out perform Ubuntu, which is on a 7200 80GB Maxtor drive.

Which file system you are using on Fedora?

hey_ian
November 2nd, 2006, 07:10 PM
It is not recommended to use anything than ext3 on Fedora.

neoflight
November 2nd, 2006, 10:49 PM
It is not recommended to use anything than ext3 on Fedora.

for a brief peroid of 3 days with fedora6 and yum i came back to edgy....!!! interesting....

hey_ian
November 2nd, 2006, 11:08 PM
for a brief peroid of 3 days with fedora6 and yum i came back to edgy....!!! interesting....

I think you misunderstood me, I also tried FC6 as test system for a week and removed it. I meant, if you use Fedora Core 6, you should choose ext3 as your system. Others are not recommended and not supported.

rlozano
November 5th, 2006, 07:56 AM
as far a linux is concerned, both ubuntu and fedora and doing great in their respective areas of focus.

i've been to ubuntu, and testing FC6 now, 1 thing i find nice with FC6 is that the compiz is not its deault desktop setting, so you got a little better desktop screeny that ubuntu.

in terms of ease of use, i should say ubuntu takes on fedora for this one.

in terms of speed, they are almost the same, but FC6 actually use more HD resource than ubuntu.

i believe, choosing an OS will be more on the core engine and performance, not really on the looks it gives you on the desktop. :)

but yeah, i think, FC6 have a better driver support that ubuntu at this time.

jbtito03
November 5th, 2006, 11:25 AM
Hi folks...

Well i moved from fedora to ubuntu... have to say that fedora is as kewl as ubuntu and that if it is linux I LOVE IT! Everything is tweakable anyway so it is always up to us how long we will let it bootup... Mine was quite quick (Not as quick as ubuntu Edgy with kickstart).

So... just love your linux box and work on it :D


Have a nice tux day :D

JB

givré
November 5th, 2006, 03:43 PM
but yeah, i think, FC6 have a better driver support that ubuntu at this time.
Hum, not so sure, the even don't deliver common firmware by default, i had to download it myself for my ipw2100.

chaosgeisterchen
November 5th, 2006, 06:51 PM
Driver support is very subjective. It really differs among people using different hardware.

givré
November 5th, 2006, 07:38 PM
Right, but when you don't provide any firmware at all, you forget :
- A lot's of hardware.
- A lot's of user that don't know what is a firmware.

Anyway, i still think that Fedora Core is less user friendly than ubuntu.

ComplexNumber
November 5th, 2006, 10:50 PM
Anyway, i still think that Fedora Core is less user friendly than ubuntu.
what makes you believe that when the number of ubuntu admin tools are so minimal compared to the amount in fedora?

givré
November 5th, 2006, 11:20 PM
what makes you believe that when the number of ubuntu admin tools are so minimal compared to the amount in fedora?
This is a bit exaggerate.
I don't think there is much admin tools in fedora than in ubuntu (the only one that came in mind is the X config tools, things that i don't care personnaly), they are just more complete (when you see the red-hat services admin tools compare to the g-s-t one, you see that they don't really play in the same category ;) ).

But when i say that ubuntu is more user-friendly than fedora, it's because i think that the amount of work you need to do after an install of fedora to get everything working is bigger than for fedora, IMO.

chaosgeisterchen
November 5th, 2006, 11:37 PM
So you're saying they are omitting all kinds of firmware?

ComplexNumber
November 5th, 2006, 11:56 PM
But when i say that ubuntu is more user-friendly than fedora, it's because i think that the amount of work you need to do after an install of fedora to get everything working is bigger than for fedora, IMO.highly doubtful. i'm going to be installing FC6 when Linux Format issue 88 magazine is released with FC6 on the cover. in the meatime, i am playing about with other distros. ubuntu is right at this moment on my PC, and i can categorically say that your statement couldn't be further from the truth.


the gconf-editor doesn't work in ubuntu for the panel. in fedora, when i select the top and bottom panel in gconf-editor and change the autohide deley, it responds immediately. in ubuntu, it has no effect even after a reboot. whats going on there?
apt is SLOW as heck. i mean REALLY SLOW. i had to wait 3/4 of an hour to upgrade 121 packages. i had to wait that amount of time in fedora(using smart or yum) for about 540 packages to be updated.
in fedora, the repos can be accessed stright from the box. in ubuntu, some people (eg me) have to change the DNS servers from the router to those of my ISP in order to access the repos. i had to spend quite a while to find that solution. if i were a complete linux noob, i wouldn't know what to do.
fedora contains significantly more packages by default. this is especially useful for when a persn is havign difficulty getting LAN or wireless to work.
fedora has lots of admin tools (eg the excellent network manager developed by red hat) that allow the user much more control than that offered by ubuntu.
there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for ubuntu to have any edge at all over fedora...especially for a linux noob.

givré
November 6th, 2006, 12:23 AM
So you're saying they are omitting all kinds of firmware?
On a fresh install, /lib/firmware is empty.

givré
November 6th, 2006, 12:50 AM
the gconf-editor doesn't work in ubuntu for the panel. in fedora, when i select the top and bottom panel in gconf-editor and change the autohide deley, it responds immediately. in ubuntu, it has no effect even after a reboot. whats going on there?
I didn't want to speak about bug, but if you want i can point you to some FC6 bug. But i'll not because it's stupid, my goal was to judge of the user friendliness of a distro.

apt is SLOW as heck. i mean REALLY SLOW.
??? are you kidding ?
Slower than yum ? You are not serious man.

fedora has lots of admin tools (eg the excellent network manager developed by red hat) that allow the user much more control than that offered by ubuntu.
n-m is red-hat/Novell, Red-hat start the project, but novell works also a lot on it. I don't think that it goals is to offer much control, it sometimes more the contrary (no static IP). Also that's right that n-m make setting wpa easy for user.

What make a distro user friendly is not the amount of gui control you have on your system. When you compare system-config-users and users-admin, i'm sorry but it's clear than one is more user friendly than the others, even if the other one provide more control and option.

Anyway, you seams to be a red hat fanboy, so i don't think we can really speak with you.

chaosgeisterchen
November 6th, 2006, 10:02 PM
On a fresh install, /lib/firmware is empty.

-_-

How on earth should I use my WLAN-NIC then? It uses drivers right out of this directory...

ComplexNumber
November 6th, 2006, 10:11 PM
??? are you kidding ?
Slower than yum ? You are not serious man.of course i'm serious. apt is ultra slowwww. i've been sitting here for the past 1/2 hour waiting for apt to download and install 46 packages.




Anyway, you seams to be a red hat fanboy, so i don't think we can really speak with you.
given that you have actually convinced yourself that ubuntu is more user friendly than fedora, there's no prizes for guessing what you're a fanboy of.

givré
November 6th, 2006, 11:12 PM
given that you have actually convinced yourself that ubuntu is more user friendly than fedora, there's no prizes for guessing what you're a fanboy of.
That's not totally wrong.
But anyway, we have some convictions, and nobody will make me change my mind on the apt/yum fight.

chaosgeisterchen
November 8th, 2006, 12:22 AM
And at last it depends on the internet connection speed and on the way your machine gets along with apt respectively yum.

adequate
November 14th, 2006, 11:26 PM
I could never get my NVIDIA drivers to install properly on ubuntu or kubuntu, even when I had them installed the fan on my second card would stay at full speed inside the gui and the drivers would need to be installed again on reboot. Also when I boot from the cd/dvd the installer randomly decides weather to output from my 1st or 2nc graphics card or neither.

With fc6 there was no problems with the installer and when it was installed I got the latest graphics card drivers from yum, they stay installed on reboot and the fans both slow down when entering x.

This is the only thing which meant I had to switch from ubuntu which I didn't really want to do as ubuntu has a great support community. I'm gonna wait until the next release and see if these things are fixed but loving fc6 atm, compiz is orgasmic :P.

dca
November 24th, 2006, 09:30 PM
...hmmm, virtualization went well w/ FC6 on an IBM server... The only problem I had when I installed it on my laptop was adding the ipw2200 firmware. I know it's no big deal but a pain. After installation & config if I move away from my home wireless network and connected it at work it appears to hang on start-up trying to obtain an IP it'll never get. Where as Ubuntu, just ignores and moves on...

Let's go ahead and start a war, but:


If you added the start-up time of 6.06LTS & 6.10 together you'll have a close approximation of how long FC6 takes to boot. (Only a little exaggeration).

Synaptic is much quicker on the up-take than YUM...

This is not an opinion: everyone likes browser window vs window for window in nautilus.

Too much reconfig after install for proper display screen, reconfig volume key shortcuts for laptop, etc.


However, it is very powerful and great on a server... (still, I like Ubuntu on the laptop :-D )

angryfirelord
November 25th, 2006, 12:52 AM
Yum is faster but yumex still pisses me off with its lagging. Even with using only two cds, Fedora is at least twice as slow, if not more, than Ubuntu. Wiped it and put Ubuntu Edgy Eft back on.

The one thing I liked is that if you installed the 9xxx nvidia drivers, it would have Compiz set up with an option to turn it on and off. So you could turn it on to show off and turn it off to play games.

Other than that, not missing much.

ZuLuuuuuu
November 25th, 2006, 11:58 PM
I went back to Ubuntu about 3-4 days ago. The reason is to have a lot of trouble with fonts. On Mplayer and on Firefox. I couldn't solve them. But I have trouble with Mplayer on Ubuntu now. But it is better to have problem with watching divx than having problem with Firefox which I use every second of my computer usage.

I still like Fedora's look better, so I changed all the icons on Ubuntu and also the window borders so that it looks like Fedora :D

jsusanka
November 28th, 2006, 05:16 AM
I installed FC6 final release today and after about an hour I am NOW installing Ubuntu 6.06 back on the laptop.

Boot times in FC6 are pathetic and install time is even more pathetic. Hated it so back I go to the good ol reliable 6.06.. :)

Anyone else try FC6?

I would install fc6 if it only would install - for some reason the installer bombed out after I selected the software to install - funny thing is I installed edgy on the same computer with no problems - oh well - guess I have to stick with edgy. maybe I will try fedora on another box someday when i have time.

miller0521
November 30th, 2006, 05:00 PM
I'd have to say it is a close tie between the two distro's, I personally go with Fedora, for the simple fact that I can easily remove gnome-games and all that extra stuff without worrying about updates down the road brining them back in.

And I need the latest Kdevelop, and prefer to not have to download it from www.kdevelop.org, its in Yum, sadly its not available via synaptic.

Oh and I got java sun download to install and work... I always need the latest version, so being able to just use the bin and make it work quickly, is a plus for me.

I guess Fedora seems more suited for a developer.

ComplexNumber
December 1st, 2006, 03:22 PM
I guess Fedora seems more suited for a developer.
i get the impression that its aimed more at the developer and the server.

neoflight
December 1st, 2006, 03:30 PM
i heard someone say, "i dont like deb, i like rpm...so i use fedora"...

no idea what that means ;)

ComplexNumber
December 1st, 2006, 04:04 PM
i heard someone say, "i dont like deb, i like rpm...so i use fedora"...

no idea what that means ;)
they have sense ;). it means that dpkg is too limited.