Surprised.

Lowe · #1 11th May 2005, 12:36 PM

Hey,

First off i just want to say it's great to be here! I've been using Linux for about a year now but have been struggling to find the distro that just feels right for me. I was sick and tired at the speed of ubuntu, so many people said it was a very fast and smooth distro, but well my system quite honestly hated it, it felt what's the word...sluggish? Even my mum noticed this, when she was just using openoffice to get her work done.

So i loaded up distrowatch and noticed that Fedora core 4 test 3 was just released, i've never tried anything from redhat, so i thought why not give it a go. It's been installed on my system for 2 hours now and wow i'm suprised at how fast and responsive it is, this is by far the fastest distro i've tried, so far this looks like the ideal distro for me! I'm looking forward to becoming part of the community and i really do hope fedora is the distro for me. Now i'll go and tweak things to my liking.

jtang613 · #2 11th May 2005, 02:04 PM

Welcome to the forum

I think you'll find many of us here have similar stories about choosing Fedora - I've tried / used dozen of distros since I started using Linux back in '99. But I've always found RedHat / Fedora the most well-rounded.

One thing I will mention - just to make sure you know - is that FC4T3 is still only an alpha release, used solely for testing and bug reporting. The final release of FC4 will be on June 6th, at which point all support for FC4T3 will cease.

Other than that, I've installed Test3 and found it a big improvement over the previous two releases. I'll do a little testing and file a few bugs - but I'll probably keep FC3 until I buy a new PC - then upgrade to FC5.

Cheers,
Jason

Lowe · #3 11th May 2005, 03:28 PM

June the 6th, that's quite a long while to wait. I'll download fedora core 3 right now, yet another huge download.

vinci · #4 11th May 2005, 04:00 PM

I also love FC for the most part. I also have tried other distros since 98, mainly SuSE and Debian but also Gentoo a few years ago. I must say that a test of Red Hat 8 was not that fun, especially because I was used to the comfort of updating in Debian. In FC this all is much better.

jtang613 · #5 11th May 2005, 04:04 PM

Also, after any Fedora install, it is a good idea to do a complete system update:

Code:

yum update

And there is also a really good FAQ available at: http://www.fedorafaq.org/

Jason

imdeemvp · #6 12th May 2005, 09:52 AM

I tried many distros including the latest ubuntu and believe I always come back to fedora after a week or so.

cscheng · #7 12th May 2005, 03:18 PM

I really don't understand why people would switch from Fedora to Ubuntu. Fedora just looks better overall and it feels more finished than Ubuntu. People claim that Ubuntu is more usable than any other distro, but I certainly do not agree with that. I am really looking forward to FC4.

imdeemvp · #8 12th May 2005, 07:24 PM

In my case I just like to see the differences in distro such as multimedia and speed.....

nuopus · #9 29th May 2005, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscheng

I really don't understand why people would switch from Fedora to Ubuntu. Fedora just looks better overall and it feels more finished than Ubuntu. People claim that Ubuntu is more usable than any other distro, but I certainly do not agree with that. I am really looking forward to FC4.

The only reason, IMHO, for Ubuntu's popularity are the free shipit CDs.

Ubuntu (or most Debian distros) has this stupid policy of not updating any applications in the distro until the next release. For example, Hoary comes with Firefox 1.0.2. Until Breezy comes out, they will never have 1.0.3 or even 1.0.4 in their repositories. All they will do is backport all of the new security fixes to the 1.0.2 version. In general, Hoary will always be 1.0.2 with new security fixes unless something extraordinary happens ... and this is the same with all applications in Hoary. That being said, there is the Hoary backports project which takes new packages from Breezy and backports it so you CAN get the newer apps .... BUT if you mention to use backports in any ubuntu chat or forum its like you are chastized for doing so and get messages about .. "you should stick with what is in hoary!". Hell .... mplayerplug-ins is still at 2.70 ever since Warty! lol .. I don't think they will ever update to 2.80.

Aside from their stupid policies, they have put together a nice distro though ... downside is their brown color scheme ... which, psychologically is very drab and depressing.

Artik · #10 29th May 2005, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuopus

The only reason, IMHO, for Ubuntu's popularity are the free shipit CDs.

Ubuntu (or most Debian distros) has this stupid policy of not updating any applications in the distro until the next release. For example, Hoary comes with Firefox 1.0.2. Until Breezy comes out, they will never have 1.0.3 or even 1.0.4 in their repositories. All they will do is backport all of the new security fixes to the 1.0.2 version. In general, Hoary will always be 1.0.2 with new security fixes unless something extraordinary happens ... and this is the same with all applications in Hoary. That being said, there is the Hoary backports project which takes new packages from Breezy and backports it so you CAN get the newer apps .... BUT if you mention to use backports in any ubuntu chat or forum its like you are chastized for doing so and get messages about .. "you should stick with what is in hoary!". Hell .... mplayerplug-ins is still at 2.70 ever since Warty! lol .. I don't think they will ever update to 2.80.

Aside from their stupid policies, they have put together a nice distro though ... downside is their brown color scheme ... which, psychologically is very drab and depressing.

I can't tell about Ubuntu - I use Debain Sarge...
There are three major branches in Debian Official Distributions:

Stable - system that is good for server/critical applications. I don't think that system administrator will like the idea of running "up2date" all the time on server or other kind of critical system. This is the reason the stable branch of the system gets only security updates.
Testing - system that does not have critical bugs has allmost up to date packages that had allready been tested and stable under most of conditions. This branch is very suitable for Desktop/Workstation application. And belive me it is much more stable that many other released distributions. Actually I've found that Debian Sarge has less annoying bugs then Fedora Core 3. The packages are updated all the time...
Unstable - the bleeding edge distro with most recent packages. But it might have bugs. It is suitable for not critical desktop applications or users that don't care to deal with some problems.

At every time you can upgrade your distro to other brunch running simple command "apt-get dist-upgrade" (in FC you can't upgrade FC2 to FC3 in this simple way). You also can basic system as one branch and use some packages for other, For example I use testing for allmost all packages and unstable for multimedia.

Ubuntu is based on mix of testing/unstable packages. I can't tell about older versions of Ubuntu but I allmost sure that you can allways upgrade the packages or system according to your needs and adding repositories you want.

I hadn't used Ubuntu but from all I know it is quite similar to Debian. And if you want full power of Debian - go for official one. It is great distribution that can be maintained quite easy.

Vyse · #11 29th May 2005, 09:30 PM

The one thing that has made me love FC3 is how easy it is to update. I've read articles on how RPM is doomed and how hard it is to update an RPM based distro, but I've never had a problem once with FC3. I was a Libranet 2.8.1 user and I had quite a few problems. I had to upgrade all, then upgrade distro then recompile. Maybe there was an easier way, but that's the only way I could keep X from being erased after every update. This happened to me about three times. I've never had a problem with FC3. Just works.

nuopus · #12 30th May 2005, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artik

I can't tell about Ubuntu - I use Debain Sarge...
There are three major branches in Debian Official Distributions:

Stable - system that is good for server/critical applications. I don't think that system administrator will like the idea of running "up2date" all the time on server or other kind of critical system. This is the reason the stable branch of the system gets only security updates.
Testing - system that does not have critical bugs has allmost up to date packages that had allready been tested and stable under most of conditions. This branch is very suitable for Desktop/Workstation application. And belive me it is much more stable that many other released distributions. Actually I've found that Debian Sarge has less annoying bugs then Fedora Core 3. The packages are updated all the time...
Unstable - the bleeding edge distro with most recent packages. But it might have bugs. It is suitable for not critical desktop applications or users that don't care to deal with some problems.

At every time you can upgrade your distro to other brunch running simple command "apt-get dist-upgrade" (in FC you can't upgrade FC2 to FC3 in this simple way). You also can basic system as one branch and use some packages for other, For example I use testing for allmost all packages and unstable for multimedia.

Ubuntu is based on mix of testing/unstable packages. I can't tell about older versions of Ubuntu but I allmost sure that you can allways upgrade the packages or system according to your needs and adding repositories you want.

I hadn't used Ubuntu but from all I know it is quite similar to Debian. And if you want full power of Debian - go for official one. It is great distribution that can be maintained quite easy.

Ubuntu only has (as of now ..) Hoary and Breezy. Hoary is the current version for the next 6 months (They release a new version every 6 months) and Breezy is development. Unlike testing in Debian .... Breezy is not stable at all for use. For example, the latest dist-upgrade broke X, and there are lots of posts about this ... so most people stick to Hoary. And in Hoary, you are stuck with Firefox 1.0.2 until Breezy comes out ... they will NOT update the package. You could of could of course use apt pinning to say hoary is primary and only take a few apps from Breezy.

BUT ... i'm sure you have read complaints from debian maintainers that LOTS of Ubuntu packages are no longer compatible with Debian... same with its development. You run into problems taking just 1 app from breezy straight to hoary without issues.

Artik · #13 30th May 2005, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuopus

Ubuntu only has (as of now ..) Hoary and Breezy. Hoary is the current version for the next 6 months (They release a new version every 6 months) and Breezy is development. Unlike testing in Debian .... Breezy is not stable at all for use. For example, the latest dist-upgrade broke X, and there are lots of posts about this ... so most people stick to Hoary. And in Hoary, you are stuck with Firefox 1.0.2 until Breezy comes out ... they will NOT update the package. You could of could of course use apt pinning to say hoary is primary and only take a few apps from Breezy.

BUT ... i'm sure you have read complaints from debian maintainers that LOTS of Ubuntu packages are no longer compatible with Debian... same with its development. You run into problems taking just 1 app from breezy straight to hoary without issues.

Yes, I have never used Ubuntu... I prefere official Debain that is very solid system.
If you stick with official Debian it is great distribution.

My replay was actually to this:

Quote:

Ubuntu (or most Debian distros) has this stupid policy of not updating any applications in the distro until the next release

My point is:
1. It is not true in Testing Branch of Debian Distro
2. It is reasonable for Stable branch of Debian where you do not want update your system frequently

Ubuntu... I can't tell. But for Official Debian - the claim is not correct.

That's it.

For me as user that had used Fedora Core 3 and then moved to Debian - I have to tell that administration and package management is easier then in FC. I loved FC because it had shown for me what moder Linux Distro is. But lots of little things enforced me to switch to Debian that looks for me more solid distro and I don't look back...

Optimal Aurora · #14 2nd June 2005, 04:37 AM

Yes I know but fedora on my system has some problems with play CD audio discs without having to rip the music directly to the hard drive, and I have not had many problems with nautilus... With that said I have had problems in ubuntu with installing Acrobat Reader 7 and Realplayer and a few other programs and getting it to print in open office... So I am constantly going back and forth, and I hate to say it but the last few days I have been using Windows XP SP2 and not messing with linux...

Optimal Aurora · #15 2nd June 2005, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artik

Ubuntu... I can't tell. But for Official Debian - the claim is not correct.

That's it.

For me as user that had used Fedora Core 3 and then moved to Debian - I have to tell that administration and package management is easier then in FC. I loved FC because it had shown for me what moder Linux Distro is. But lots of little things enforced me to switch to Debian that looks for me more solid distro and I don't look back...

Ubuntu is good.. But unlike the here is how you can configure your systems in fedora attitude, debian especially ubuntu is more hands on... I had learnt fedora first, but the first linux I messed with was Lindows but fedora is a little more in depth than lindows but Debian is a whole lot more developer friendly like for me...