Fedora 8: An Assault On Ubuntu

I'm sure it's just a matter of personal experience, but since I moved from Windows to Linux, some three years ago, the three easiest distros for me have been OpenSUSE, Mandriva and Fedora. All RPM based distros. I've not played much with Ubuntu, as I prefer KDE desktop, but have tried Kubuntu several times during that three years, always with minimal success.

My wireless hardware, both on the desktop and the laptop, just work in seconds with Mandriva. Same with all the functions in my HP multi-function printer. Widescreen monitor, Nvidia video card....the works. Pretty much the same with OpenSUSE, except for the wireless....that takes a bit of work. Fedora is a bit more complicated to configure, in some respects, for a newbie, but not impossible.

In all three RPM based distros, there are certainly more than enough packages available to download and install. Installation has never been that much of a issue, either. Debian based distros, for me, have just been something I don't seem to understand.

I think that's one of the great features of all Linux distros....there's a great selection available and just about anyone can find something that just works for them.

@zenarcher

That is what .deb / apt people call anything having to do with RPM :-)

It comes from a time (around RH-9, FC-1) when yum was non existent or in it's infancy.

Nowadays, one can argue that they like one format better than the other ...BUT... both apt (or synaptic)/.deb and yum(or yumex)/.rpm formats work fine for dependency resolution and udpates/installs. It is now more of a matter of taste than one of functionality.

This is now more of a religious issue, like Gnome/KDE, vi/emacs and the rest.

Just so I can make it interesting ... Gnome / vi / RPMS rule ( - :

Don't forget Slackware, which is neither RPM nor DEB.

@hughesjr

From your explanation on the historical aspect, I'd say that the deb/apt argument would be a bit like the Windows people who complain that you can't get hardware to work with Linux. Generally, when I see that statement, I know it's based on what someone experienced five years ago or so, when their early Linux attempt went bad. In other words, a premise that no longer is really valid.

@gus3:

Sorry there, I haven't tried Slackware. Forgot all about it when I wrote that! I do realize there are many users.

Slack was my 2nd distro ever (after sls) and the distro where I first started gaming with doom back in the 90s, and where I learned system administration (bind, sendmail, ftp, nis, nfs, automount, apache, samba...)

Slackware to this day has a loyal following, and some commercial appliances (e.g. appliansys dnsbox) are based on it.

Slack forever dude! All props to Bob Dobbs! (and his capable lieutenant Pat Volkerding)

I did not, and will not, read the dommed article, so I may be totally off-base here. Fedora and Ubuntu target similar audiences, but Ubuntu is considerably more polished and friendly, and has a more useful default set of packages for desktop users, and better-organized menus. FC8 is typical Fedora: lots of bleeding edges and weird glitches. Some call it Red Hat's testbed, and I suppose that could be true. I like it for its SELinux implementation, and unwavering devotion to Free Software. Neither one will upgrade to a new release reliably, though with Ubuntu your odds are better. Any talk of Fedora beating up Ubuntu is absurd- there is plenty of room for both.

One area where Fedora beats Ubuntu by a couple of thousand country miles is in its documentation. It has actual release notes and detailed howtos on everything under the sun, unlike Ubuntu which suffers from a severely obese hype budget, and severe famine for the documentation team.

Quoting:Ubuntu which suffers from a severely obese hype budget, and severe famine for the documentation team.

Haha, well said.

I'm on board with your comments - I see fedora as something you might slap together as a "proof of concept" server, or a quick generic unix server of the kmart variety, if those deploying it are familiar enough with its quirks not to be stumped by them.

OTOH ubuntu has much better prospects on the desktop. Not perfect by any means, but it's got a lot of "traction" to borrow a nerdy and slightly annoying microsoft marketing expression.