------------I agree. There's nothing explicitely *wrong* with Fedora.All Linux distros are pretty much the same once you get past the default backgrounds and the different icons.They all use the same kernel, run most of the same apps and utilise the same libraries.-----------agree .. distros are juz different set of applications put together in an easy to use packaging ..
"It IS considered by most to be the most stable operating system to date."No, it's not. How about Cisco's IOS or HPUX and what about the NonStop Kernel and AIX and on and on and on.
"I can say with full confidence that RPM is broken mess."Ok, go look at the RHEL rpm tree and show me a broken dependency please. Even better, show me a broken dep in the FC6 tree.I run a handful of FC servers and don't have a single issue with RPM. Now, yum on the other hand, could definitely use some work.
I tried opensuse, but I just couldn't make myself like it. Plus, it didn't have any better hardware support than Fedora, and I loved RedHat back in the day, so I got Fedora.
I dumped RedHat years ago. I have tried Fedora, and it's installation (Anaconda) is in the dark ages, and its update is so slow that I could roll my own distro from scratch waiting for it to complete. Fedora is the perfect distration for Windows fanboys who think they're cool now that they've switched to Linux. RedHat (and Fedora by proxy) is the Microsoft of Linux. Any engineer worth his salary uses something based on Debian (or perhaps Gentoo...or Suse at a long stretch). The rest might as well be MSCE's...no one ever got fired for buying Microsoft...or RedHat.
1) I made a bad comment there, I admit. RedHat engineers are pretty damn good. But that doesn't mean that they have distributed a great product. There might be some nice stuff under the hood, but it's the driving experience that counts. 2) It is arguable whether Windows fanboys gravitate more toward Fedora or Ubuntu. Let's just call it a draw there.3) I haven't looked at the Anaconda code, but I stand by my dark ages comment. You gotta have plenty of spare time on your hands to install RedHat or Fedora. The only thing worse in my experience is Solaris, which is like getting a root canal. I've seen people shy away from trying Linux because of the Fedora installation process. It looks friendly at first, then you are trapped. Have you installed MEPIS or PCLinuxOS? 10 minutes, tops, to a beautifully configured desktop with everything you need all installed off of ONE LIVE CD!!! RedHat/Fedora are most certainly in the dark ages when it comes to packaging and installation...they are stuck in a paradigm they created just like Microsoft is stuck in theirs.4) Perhaps the reason that they have top stats on kernel contributions it that they have the most money to PAY kernel developers. Their kernel contributions say NOTHING about their distribution. No one is arguing against RedHat's commitment to Open Source.5) I am NOT a l33t Debian/Ubuntu user (but have you seen the stats on Distrowatch)? I am an EX RedHat user. From your tone YOU seem to be a l33t RedHat/Fedora evangelist. I am pretty much distro neutral, but in my 9 years of experience as a Linux user I have found APT package management and the repositories of Debian and its derived distributions to be superior to anything else available.6) I don't use Ubuntu, but I do use some Ubuntu repositories. However, it clear that it has more momentum and potential than any other distribution. The fact that so many Debian and RedHat l33ts and purists vehemently hate Ubuntu/Canonical is proof that they are a real threat to the old paradigm. RedHat has carved a niche in the enterprise market with RHEL and that is where it will stay...they have absolutely no momentum in the desktop arena. Still, that is not a criticism of their contributions to Open Source.
kagesenshiFeb 22, 2007
------------I agree. There's nothing explicitely *wrong* with Fedora.All Linux distros are pretty much the same once you get past the default backgrounds and the different icons.They all use the same kernel, run most of the same apps and utilise the same libraries.-----------agree .. distros are juz different set of applications put together in an easy to use packaging ..
jon3kFeb 22, 2007
"It IS considered by most to be the most stable operating system to date."No, it's not. How about Cisco's IOS or HPUX and what about the NonStop Kernel and AIX and on and on and on.
jon3kFeb 22, 2007
"I can say with full confidence that RPM is broken mess."Ok, go look at the RHEL rpm tree and show me a broken dependency please. Even better, show me a broken dep in the FC6 tree.I run a handful of FC servers and don't have a single issue with RPM. Now, yum on the other hand, could definitely use some work.
thewhitefedoraFeb 23, 2007
I tried opensuse, but I just couldn't make myself like it. Plus, it didn't have any better hardware support than Fedora, and I loved RedHat back in the day, so I got Fedora.
tomaroccoFeb 23, 2007
I dumped RedHat years ago. I have tried Fedora, and it's installation (Anaconda) is in the dark ages, and its update is so slow that I could roll my own distro from scratch waiting for it to complete. Fedora is the perfect distration for Windows fanboys who think they're cool now that they've switched to Linux. RedHat (and Fedora by proxy) is the Microsoft of Linux. Any engineer worth his salary uses something based on Debian (or perhaps Gentoo...or Suse at a long stretch). The rest might as well be MSCE's...no one ever got fired for buying Microsoft...or RedHat.
tomaroccoMar 13, 2007
1) I made a bad comment there, I admit. RedHat engineers are pretty damn good. But that doesn't mean that they have distributed a great product. There might be some nice stuff under the hood, but it's the driving experience that counts. 2) It is arguable whether Windows fanboys gravitate more toward Fedora or Ubuntu. Let's just call it a draw there.3) I haven't looked at the Anaconda code, but I stand by my dark ages comment. You gotta have plenty of spare time on your hands to install RedHat or Fedora. The only thing worse in my experience is Solaris, which is like getting a root canal. I've seen people shy away from trying Linux because of the Fedora installation process. It looks friendly at first, then you are trapped. Have you installed MEPIS or PCLinuxOS? 10 minutes, tops, to a beautifully configured desktop with everything you need all installed off of ONE LIVE CD!!! RedHat/Fedora are most certainly in the dark ages when it comes to packaging and installation...they are stuck in a paradigm they created just like Microsoft is stuck in theirs.4) Perhaps the reason that they have top stats on kernel contributions it that they have the most money to PAY kernel developers. Their kernel contributions say NOTHING about their distribution. No one is arguing against RedHat's commitment to Open Source.5) I am NOT a l33t Debian/Ubuntu user (but have you seen the stats on Distrowatch)? I am an EX RedHat user. From your tone YOU seem to be a l33t RedHat/Fedora evangelist. I am pretty much distro neutral, but in my 9 years of experience as a Linux user I have found APT package management and the repositories of Debian and its derived distributions to be superior to anything else available.6) I don't use Ubuntu, but I do use some Ubuntu repositories. However, it clear that it has more momentum and potential than any other distribution. The fact that so many Debian and RedHat l33ts and purists vehemently hate Ubuntu/Canonical is proof that they are a real threat to the old paradigm. RedHat has carved a niche in the enterprise market with RHEL and that is where it will stay...they have absolutely no momentum in the desktop arena. Still, that is not a criticism of their contributions to Open Source.