Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Ubuntu 9.04 vs Fedora 11: A lot can change in one month!

The excitement has already started in anticipation of Q2 2009 l distro releases. As usual, the big names are Ubuntu 9.04 (a.ka. Jaunty Jackalope) and Fedora 11 (Leonidas). It's time for a straight off comparison on the upcoming features of these two distros.

I have not mentioned minor version numbers of most packages, since it is subject to change in the final release.

Fedora 11

Ubuntu 9.04
  • Code named Jaunty Jackalope
  • Scheduled Release Date: April 23, 2009
  • Current Status: Alpha 6, Beta to be released on March 26 2009
  • Current Status: Beta, Release candidate on April 16th
  • Release Schedule

Linux Kernel
Ubuntu - 2.6.28
Fedora - 2.6.29

The latest kernel 2.6.29 has already been released. Seriously, I really wonder why it hasn't been included in Ubuntu. For example, the Fedora guys released alphas with the development version of 2.6.29 kernel, whereas the Ubuntu alphas are all stable 2.6.28 kernels!!! That's a bit of a under-utilization of alphas...

(Edit: Clarification: It is rather common for alphas to include development versions (like Gnome 2.25), or kernel -rcs. If the alphas for ubuntu had carried the -rc versions of the kernel (like in the 8.04 release), the beta would have carried the stable 2.6.29 version now)

The 2.6.29 kernel comes with a lot of improvements, the most important being Kernel modesetting support for flicker free graphics, better memory management, WiMAX, etc and is a worthy upgrade.

Advantage: Fedora

Window Managers

Both Ubuntu and Fedora
ship with the latest versions of Gnome 2.26, KDE 4.2 (in Kubuntu) and XFCE 4.6 (in Xubuntu).

Advantage: None

Ubuntu - 3.0
Fedora - 3.1

I've been using Firefox 3.1 beta on my laptop, and it feels better than Firefox 3.0. Though there are no visible differences in terms of GUI features, there are a lot of under-the-hood enhancements like HTML 5 Video tag support, CSS 3 support, TraceMonkey JIT for better javascript performance, etc.

Advantage: Fedora


Ubuntu - 2.0
Fedora - 3.0

Fedora again leads the pack. Thunderbird 3.0 now mainly has tabbed messages, folders and calendars, which definitely gives a cool look. Other than that, there are improvements in the address book, addon management, message reading and IMAP handling.

Advantage: Fedora

Ubuntu - 3.0
Fedora - 3.1

Fedora's affinity for cutting edge seems to reflect here as wel
l. OpenOffice 3.1 mainly has better anti-aliasing for text and images, various appearance improvements, accepting or rejecting recorded changes in revisioned documents, various performance improvements and bug fixes.

Ubuntu already showed a little neglect for OpenOffice in its previous Intrepid release, by packaging an older 2.4 version instead of the newly released 3.0 version. Now it is playing catch up, and is bundling the 3.0 version. Anyways, OpenOffice 3.1 Release Schedule is later than Ubuntu's, and probably just in time for Fedora.

Advantage: Fedora, by pure timing

Default File System
Ubuntu - default ext3
Fedora - default ext4

Although both distributions support ext3, ext4 and the developmental btrfs and squashfs, I'm still quite afraid of ext4 - the newcomer - specially because of a lot of developers are still arguing on how to handle data corruption. Even Linus himself seems to be at a disarray in this. By making ext4 as the default, Fedora is certainly risking a lot.

Advantage: Ubuntu

Boot Process
Ubuntu - usplash
Fedora - plymouth

After experimenting without major problems with the Plymouth project in the last release, Fedora 11 is now starting to mature in this area by developing more boot plugins. Plymouth offers a flicker free boot process, with no blanking of screen between the boot splash and the GDM Login Screen.

Ubuntu is still sticking with usplash, but pimping it up with a new boot splash animation. They will upgrade to Plymouth in the 9.10 Karmic Koala release.

Advantage: Fedora

Package Management

Ubuntu - APT, Synaptic
Fedora - Yum, Synaptic, Packagekit + Delta RPMs support

PackageKit is a new, distribution independent package manager available for Gnome and KDE. The most important features are, the ability to install and maintain multiple versions of the same software without disturbing existing versions, integration with policykit so that normal users can run it without requiring admin privileges, ability to create custom service packs, window manager independent, disabling when running on battery, etc. You can see some screenshots of PackageKit here.

Synaptic is the rock-solid package management solution as of today. But the problem is it exists only for Gnome, and looks plain ugly in KDE.

Fedora has added another small twist here: Delta RPMs. Previously when you are upgrading a package, say the linux kernel from version to - you had to download the full new package and it's dependencies, which easily amounts to nearly 50 MB. The actual changed code between the two versions might have been only 5 MB! Delta RPMs now allow you to download only the changed code (or delta), so you can save a dozen on your time and bandwidth. Lesser staring at the "Downloading updates" screen for the masses!

Advantage: Fedora

Notification Handling
Ubuntu - New notify-osd
Fedora - Default

Ubuntu has implemented a bold new notification handler, detailed in Mark Shuttleworth's blog. Instead of notification handling, they prefer to call it "attention management". The notifications will not be persisted, nor will have a dismiss button, nor any action buttons.

I'm two minds on this. Until today I've clicked on the "Read" button on my mail notifications to load up my GMail. Now all I get is just a snazzy animated notification which doesn't stick in my desktop. If I'm chatting with my co-worker (which I do most of the time), then chances are I'll be a lot less productive with my mails.

Fedora lets the window manager take care. Nothing radical.

Advantage: Ubuntu
(You can take a look at a screencast of Ubuntu notifications, and decide for yourself whether it will suit you or not. I think it is a matter of personal choice, but I'm giving the advantage to Ubuntu for thinking differently and being bold)

Volume Control
Ubuntu - gnome-media
Fedora - gnome-media

Now it's Fedora's turn to be daring. It has implemented a new volume control called gnome-media, but the main difference here is that, instead of simplifying things, it has offered more options. All of you who have used gnome-volume-control are sure to tell tales of its usability. The new volume control has more features to talk about, can control audio for individual applications, integrated sound themes, and nice segregation into four tabs.

Ubuntu sticks with the default gnome-volume-control.
Fedora's work has landed upstream and has been merged with Ubuntu alphas. Thanks to RalfN for pointing it out

Advantage: Both
(You can take a look at the screenshots of Fedora Volume Control and decide for yourself whether it will suit you or not. I think it is a matter of personal choice)

Although the 2.6.29 kernel holds a lot of new features like KMS, there is still a lot of talks and rumors of regression - which means the performance may actually go down instead of up because of newly introduced features. Specially with KMS, a lot of people are reporting lesser frame rates and slower desktop effects. Whether this is true or not - can only be verified after the release. KMS also supports only Intel drivers as of now, although Fedora is planning to include patches for NVidia's new Noveau driver. ATI has pulled itself out of the game by delaying release of new drivers and phasing out old drivers.

Fedora has already worked to improve boot time in Fedora 10, in the name of "30 second boot". Now they are working to further shorten it as "20 second boot". The progress has been good, and you can take a look at the test results with various system configurations.

Ubuntu, not to be left behind, is working to have "blazingly fast" boot time, and the alphas have reported positive results.

Advantage: Ubuntu
In this situation, I'm giving advantage to Ubuntu, purely due to the probability of regressions in Fedora's kernel. I'll make a new post when the two distros release)

Common Software
Samba, NetworkManager, HAL, DeviceKit, X.Org, have all been updated to the latest versions in both distros.

Developer Specific
Fedora has updated GCC to version 4.4. It has also included latest versions of NetBeans and Eclipse tools. A more radical change is that it has included cross-compiler tools for Windows programs - namely MinGW.

Fedora is also packaging the latest version of Mono 2.4, whereas Ubuntu has thus far settled with Mono 2.0.

You can take a look at the screenshots of Fedora 11 Alpha and
Ubuntu 9.04 Beta. Ubuntu sticks with the gorgeous brown Human theme, and Fedora's alphas have retained the futuristic blue Solar theme. It seems Canonical has decided to bundle four more additional themes to please the Ubuntu users.

Update: New artwork for Fedora 11 has landed in rawhide. Thanks nicu!

For many years including the release of Fedora 10, I have always noted that Fedora gives a "something missing" feeling when used. It may be a small glitch in one of their cutting edge features, or a small regression here and there, or a small unfinished piece of software (think pup or pirut), etc. But it has always been uncomfortable, or rather unsettling, when using Fedora.

With the way in which things are proceeding, I still doubt whether the unsettledness will be resolved in Fedora 11. But this is a rather important duty Fedora 11 is fulfilling, by providing a cutting edge distribution which slowly paves way for distros like Ubuntu to build upon.

Ubuntu, as usual, has been rock stable for me. That's why I still use it in my laptop without even thinking of re-installing for 6 months. And I know that the 9.04 release will also be stable.

But considering the differences - Fedora 11 seems to be a full 6 months ahead of Ubuntu. Most of the features included in Fedora 11 now (gnome-media, faster boot, KMS, Plymouth, Firefox 3.1, Thunderbird 3, OpenOffice 3.1, etc) are planned only in Ubuntu 9.10.

Ubuntu sure has some catching up to do. When Ubuntu 9.10 releases, I can't even begin to imagine how far ahead Fedora 12 will be!


  1. Fedora is a (stupidly) aggressive development distro which regularly causes major malfunctions to all it's rawhide users as well as it's more 'conservative' users. Ubuntu is a regularly released stable distro that actually care that things shouldn't break.
    Your comparison is weak.

  2. Inconsiderate Clod: After spending 15 minutes with Fedora most experienced users can realize that it is very bleeding edge. Still, the users of Fedora stick with it and solve problems. Ubuntu and its packages would not be as stable without Fedora. New packages need a way for the public to fix them, just as Ubuntu does unintentionally for Debian.

  3. You sir, are an idiot.

    Firefox 3.1 isn't stable yet. OpenOffice 3.1 isn't stable yet. Plymouth only works with Intel hardware, Ubuntu too will use gnome-media, Thunderbird 3 isn't stable yet.

    You think that if on monday a new kernel, openoffice and firefox is released, they can ship a stable distro using those versions.

    Well fedora tries that everytime. And they keep proving you can't.

    The development of each Ubuntu version lasts 6 months. In those months, they lock down the version and keep fighting bugs until the deadline.

    That's why people can actually _use_ Ubuntu. Fedora is more like 'what's next?'

    Also, you give the advantage to Fedora for having a newer packaging system. But that seems unfair. Package-kit is desperately needed for the RPM-infected distro's, but it's gui tools don't hold a candle compared to the tools for APT. Don't get me wrong: the RPM base system (and yum) have been fine for years now. But they didn't have a proper tools my mom could use to install a scrabble game. Package kit's related tools are making the first steps in that direction, but they are still not copying the ubuntu GUI's perfectly.

    >Ubuntu sure has some catching up to do. When Ubuntu 9.10 releases, I can't even begin to imagine how far ahead Fedora 12 will be!

    About 3 months. Just like this time. Just like the time before that. 3 months. And you pay for that with instability.

    Off course red hat wants it like that. Because if fedora was too stable and user-friendly, who would buy their Red Hat Enterprise Linux?

  4. Tyler: Agreed the world should be happy and thankful with all the Fedora users who unwittingly offer themselves up to be ginny pigs for the greater good of FOSS. That is not the argument, the argument is whether it's useful to compare apples with oranges.

    Personally I'm a OS agnostic, I hate all equally.
    (no, that is a lie, i love amiga os 3.1)

  5. Oh, on the topic of Fedora developers. I find them to be a joke when it comes to picking up serious bugs and fixing them ASAP. Unless a problem can be passed on upstream or shifted to a external package maintainer they won't lift a finger. Fedora 10 broke SCSI on all my HP wx9300 workstations when a SATA drive has the OS. Though widely reported the merry Fedora devs decided that this change was so neat that they'd backport it to Fedora 9. Thanks a fucking bunch.

  6. That's the problems: as previously explained both are weak for nearly opposite reasons!

    -> please, when compare e.g. (packagekit to synaptic) start from the beginning. Packagekit is an intermediate between a simple ubuntu installer and synaptic. Consequently... It will be good one day, but is currently not so simple and not so powerfull. An user can not undo!!! can not cancel (don't work)!!! multiple selections is a pain!!! none possiblity to filter to kde or gnome package!!! inadequate selection of mirrors (but anyway slow mirrors) resulting in slow (<10ko/sec) download if you live outside north rich world (whatever the yum tweak)...

    Effectively Fedora could be better, unfortunately it seems even not their goals! They look like guys showing their big muscles but unable to compete in real performance life. It is a real pity, we need an Ubuntu alternative that is serious... And please don't prove time after time that windows is a better OS because it launches the last debugged version of software while we have the old one bugged (and yes new version brings bugs but also corrects bugs of the older one) and features limited.

  7. Hi,

    OO.o is releasing between ubuntu and fedora, so it should be stable in Fedora. Kernel has released more than a full month ahead of Ubuntu. Fedora's advantage in package management was for Delta RPMs as well.

    When Ubuntu chose to bundle Firefox 3.0 - I welcomed, because the release schedule of Firefox was so near. They decided to bundle the beta and then normal updates would take care of installing the stable release. But now when they choose to stick with FF 3.0, it becomes a problem for normal users to install through PPAs.

    It is normal for an alpha to have development versions of packages, like the Gnome 2.25.x series, or the kernel -rcs. If they had included the proper -rcs beginning with the alphas, Alpha 6 would have had the 2.6.29 stable kernel. I'm no guy to give recommendations, but what I see is what I get.

    I'm no Fedora fanboy, but doesn't mean I can't give Fedora due credit where deserved. Whenever I go distro jumping, I always end up with ubuntu. It's like ubuntu is your wife, and fedora is the neighbor you dote...

    Yeah, and lastly, regarding apples and oranges. Both ubuntu and fedora are linux distros, with 90% same core software stack. It's normal to compare them, for all they are common in. Just because a line in their philosophy changes, they suddenly don't become apples and oranges. If you consider that, how can you ever compare ubuntu/linux and windows?

    PS: I updated the post with RalfN's gnome-media point. Thanks!

  8. Ralf is the idiot. Ubuntu releases their LTS release with with Firefox Beta and he is complaining that a Fedora Alpha release has Beta software.

    Second, Plymouth works on more then Intel software so learn what's up before you speak.

    Come on Ralf, wake up to some reality here. More people _use_ Fedora then Ubuntu, (By Ubuntu's own numbers) so this usability question argument is absurd.

  9. Ubuntu Alpha 3 ??
    Ubuntu Alpha 6 is out for quite a while and today, March 26, the beta is out! So the article uses somewhat outdated screenshots and info.

  10. Plymouth and KMS work with ATI and Intel graphic chips. I know this for a fact as my work desktop uses an ATI 2400HD, my laptop uses an Intel integrated chip, and my home desktop has an ATI 3750. All three machines have Plymouth and KMS enabled and working in Fedora 10.

  11. No! You don't compare apples and oranges as the same thing. Just like you don't compare microwave ovens and bicycles (oh look, they're both made out of metal and can be "useful"). If you desperately want to make that comparison then you really should clearly define that their objective and use are very very different. When you don't, you are misleading.

  12. No need to get emotional here. We are not comparing an oven and a bicycle here. We're comparing two linux distros. There's nothing wrong in it. If you think it is wrong to compare two linux distros, then get over with it.

  13. both contain Networkmanager? Ok, so both are not for me and my EeePC 901 and my Samsung F480, I prefer configuring wvdial over hacking networkmanager sources to add two or three AT commands.

  14. Agreed, networkmanager 0.7 was still new for mobile broadband... Both disros are now packaging networkmanager 0.7.1 - which is supposed to have bluetooth GPRS connectivity and some bug fixes. If that solves things, then well and good...

    A small doubt: couldn't you have just disabled networkmanager and reverted to the old ifconfig/wvdial?

  15. I would also remember that Ubuntu 9.04 will be an LTS release. I think it is very smart to only include the really safe stuff. I personally rely on these releases for production servers for that reason.

    Not to discount fedora at all but look at the purpose of the two releases.

  16. Robert,
    Are you sure 9.04 is an LTS? My understanding is the next LTS is scheduled to be 10.04


  17. 9.04 is NOT an LTS , LTS's are every 2 years the last one was 8.04, the next is 10.04 .

  18. About the Fedora artwork, it should be noted that the Alpha usually has graphics from the old release, since the new artwork is in a too early state.
    A first draft of the new artwork has landed in Rawhide a couple of weeks ago, in due time for the Beta. Have a sneak peek at (but it will change a lot until the final release)

  19. Fedora has never positioned itself to be an "everybody's Linux desktop" and focuses on integrating the latest stuff, no matter how scary it will be.

    Ubuntu on the other hand focusses more on the end user (and noobs) and making sure that everything works.

    While there are many cool things in OO.o 3.1, TB 3.0 and FF 3.1, the question is, does it warrant the upgrade just to get the latest version?

    Of course if you are using it for yourself and have the time to spare (and enjoy) to troubleshoot any gotchas, hey by all means live on the bleeding edge.

    If you are like me who needs to earn his paycheque on a working (and reliable Linux) desktop, then I guess, having the more tried and tested version will be better.

    I like Ubuntu and Fedora equally. If I want a no-brainer working desktop or notebook, I will go Ubuntu. If I feel like having the latest stuff running will satisfy my inner geek, then I'll just boot into Fedora.

    No one is better that the other. However, Fedora is currently my choice as it works effortlessly with my 3G USB Modem, just plug and play.

    I know of wvdial, but sometimes I just want to get work done and not spend time fiddling on the computer to make it work.

    However I am intrigued by the Delta RPMs first introduced by Mandriva and now used by OpenSUSE.

  20. Although Fedora is doing great work which strengths overall Linux ecosystem, it is only acting as testbed for Red Hat Enterprise. How else would one explain for the regressions here and regression there while using cutting edge unstable stuff. I used to like it when it used to be Red Hat 8 and 9.

  21. jsmidt,
    Actually you are an Idiot, not RalfN. Take care not to go personal next time.

    The above explanation is completely bullshit! I was never able to understand all the days what why do all Fedora lovers hate Ubuntu. Jealous?? I hardly see Ubuntu people bashing other distros. They just project Ubuntu as a good distro. I too say Ubuntu is good, but desist from bashing other distros unless I land up on such blog posts like this written by retards.

    Why include all bleeding edge softwares in a release. Don't forget that these can cause more problem that it solves. Bleeding edge softwares are like blobs except that fact that former's bugs can be tracked.

    APT is stronger than YUM. No need to take offence.Synaptic looks ugly in KDE? So, what's the problem? It doesn't work in KDE? As long as it works fine, there is no problem. The look factor is ultimate bullshit. OTOH Fedora's was not even consistent in YUm frontend. Finally it settled for PackageKit

    "but I'm giving the advantage to Ubuntu for thinking differently and being bold"
    So taking side of Ubuntu requires so much of boldness. If this is your definition of boldness, what is actual boldness?

  22. --> Although Fedora is doing great work which strengths overall Linux ecosystem, it is only acting as testbed for Red Hat Enterprise.

    No different than Debian is a testbed on other distributions including Ubuntu itself. Trying to portrait the meaning as negative is getting tiresome because a cuttier-edge disto like Fedora benefits not only for Red Hat but all other distributions.

    --> How else would one explain for the regressions here and regression there while using cutting edge unstable stuff. I used to like it when it used to be Red Hat 8 and 9.

    Did you actually report issue through bugzilla. Plain complain won't help that much.

  23. 9.10 will have Plymouth. I expect 9.04 to have Firefox 3.1 later on. As for 3.1 then that could be later on or a PPA. They did however release Firefox 3.0 beta 5 in 8.04 which is an LTS release. 9.10 will have either the 2.6.30 or 2.6.31. The 2.6.28 kernel in 9.04 will have hand selected fixes from 2.6.29. There is a PPA for 9.04 with Plymouth packages. I'm currently using Jaunty Jackalope Beta and it's great except for my printer. Still hoping for a fix on that.

  24. I'm a Red Hat / Fedora fanboy. I'm glad Ubuntu exists and I hope Ubuntu fanboys are glad Fedora exists. These two distros give each other a lot of competition and both are better for it... as is the whole of the Linux world.

    To me, nothing can possibly be stable and maintain a 6 month release cycle. I think Ubuntu has tried to slow down some by lagging behind in the version numbers... that's ok.

    The way Fedora works is that not only do you have a 6 month release cycle to finish something but you have the whole lifecycle of the release... which is usually about 14-ish months. Fedora 9 went from KDE 4.0.1 (I can't remember) and upgraded every release KDE had. Now it is at 4.2.1 as is Fedora 10.

    If a particular software package release isn't 100% mature upon its initial production version release... or a distros building of it, updates are released. The package can mature. I think both Fedora and Ubuntu do a good job of fixing bugs.

    Are there some nagging bugs and a few regressions that crop up from time to time? Yes.

    Can a distro fix every bug that gets reported? Unlikely to never.

    Sorry to hear about the issue with "SCSI on all my HP wx9300 workstations when a SATA drive has the OS". That is unfortunate.

    Linux distros... choose the one that you prefer... there are plenty out there. Me? As I said at the beginning, I prefer Fedora. I don't begrudge anyone who prefers something else. There is no best... and better is subjective.

  25. @Manish ubuntu boldy experiments with a new UI for notifications that would actually be less useful than the previous...

  26. Ubuntu sometimes is just a pile of shit all together, and sometimes (like Dapper Drake) is the best distro of the moment (getting back to 2006). Usually Fedora is one release a pile of shit and the other a beautiful work.

    Fedora 11 is the second one, so...

  27. Guys come on Fedora and Ubuntu are both solid distribution and probably the two most popular community driven distributions out. I give Fedora credit in the areas of cutting edge but Ubuntu does have some major advantages such as hardware just working with little tweaking.

    Lets not let there be a line drawn in the sand and say "Ok Linux is not big enough for the both of us Fedora users on this side and Ubuntu users on that side of the line!"

    I will continue to use both distributions and have Fedora as my main. Why Fedora as my main? For the simple reason that it was the first distro i tried and thus the most comfortable to me. Ubuntu will pull through as will Fedora and ethier way both user bases will be happy and co-exist so stop the distro wars and just use what your comfortable using.

  28. I'm a long term Fedora user starting with Fedora Core 2 (migrating then from Red Hat 9). I followed each and every release until Fedora 10. 10 was SOOO BAD, that I skipped it entirely and am still on Fedora 9. I suppose by now 10 has all the kinks worked out. I still haven't decided to jump on 11 when it comes out or slide over to 10 when 9 goes EOL...

  29. I started experimenting with Linux when RedHat 4 came out (I preferred Caldera at the time), but didn't actually make the fulltime switch until I tried Mandrake 8. I thought urpmi was a great package manager, but today I learned that it's not, because although it worked well, it was based on RedHat's RPM rather than Debian's apt. More recently, I approached Mandriva about support for my business and they were completely unreceptive, so I switched to Suse. I'll concede that I didn't really care for Suse's package management. After a Suse developer told me that I should expect any decent package manager to take a few minutes to start up, I told him Zypper can kiss my Yast, and evaluated other distros. I fought through Suse 10.3 and 11.0 (where the "speedup" of zypper was the big feature) until I tested Fedora out of desperation. Fedora had always seemed like an unusable joke to me, making even simple network configuration a chore. But Fedora 10 was different. Everything just worked (with the limitation of proprietary software like media codecs being unavailabe). I didn't have to compile audio drivers like I needed to in Ubuntu (I had to do a google search just to find the damn compiler in Ubuntu). While system management tools for things like NFS, storage volumes and joining domains are primative in Fedora compared to Suse or Mandriva, they're better than Ubuntu's tools, which amount to your choice of vi or emacs, if you can find them. I was a little slow on the uptake to figure out that "Add/Remove Software" in Ubuntu is just a decoy, and you're actually supposed to use Synaptic to find much of the software available, which is burried in the menu. At least vi and emacs are installable by apt, which probably make them better than easier-to-use tools installed by yum. And who cares if Debian and its derivatives like Ubuntu caused the biggest security flaw (SSL weak keys fiasco) ever in Linux thanks to a Debian patch not endorsed by the upstream project. At least the software used to generate those defective keys were installed by apt, which probably makes it better than the uncompromised software installed by yum/urpmi/yast/emerge/pacman/everyone else. Everyone likes to berate Windows for its weak security, but until its recent adoption of Novell's AppArmor (which in my opinion is inferior to Red Hat's SELinux, but that's another debate), Ubuntu didn't really concern itself with security. Even firewall control is relatively new in Ubuntu, and lets face it, gufw falls short when it comes to masquerading/forwarding, etc. Another minor annoyance is having to type sudo before every command in Ubuntu. I finally gave up on "the Ubuntu way" and just did "sudo su".

    Red Hat of course uses Fedora to push a lot of development upstream, as does Novell with openSUSE. Suse's buildservice is great. Red Hat's cooperation with CentOS is admirable. What has Canonical given the development community other than promises?

    What advantage does Ubuntu hold over other distros other than making it dead-easy to install proprietary software? I guess that might be a good thing for Windows refugees, but it's not good for software. Thankfully we have distros like Fedora to show hardware manufacturers that its worth opening their drivers. I'll glady accept a distro with a few bugs since it gives me an opportunity to contribute back to the community (yes, software has bugs that someone has to fix, but why shouldn't that someone be you and me?). Unfortunately the excellent Fedora 10 release denied me that opportunity. Here's hoping for Fedora 11.

  30. As I write this from a F10 desktop. Just use whatever the hell you want to and everyone stop trying to distro bash each other....

    I am a distro slut - ill take anything and Ive found all distros to have exceptional releases and poor ones. I usually use ubuntu but wanted some features it didn't have so now am on Fedora.

    I will say though that you should try an ubuntu alpha vs Fedora. Ubuntu builds on prior distros so is often quite useable at about alpha 4, where Fedora cannot even be contemplated at alpha stage or Beta. This has to imply more stability upon final release if that's what you want.

    Again I find if funny that many people who swear Ubuntu or Fedora has better hardware support etc.. don't even realise that some distros will work better/better support on your combination of hardware than others.

  31. I tried both O.S and i believe fedora is way better.

  32. I am new to Linux. But I have found Ubuntu more user-friendly than Fedora. Now i am eager to try out the new Fedora. Currently facing difficulties with Ubuntu 9.04 due NVIDIA graphic card issue

  33. Hey Guys,
    I have used both ubuntu and fedora...I am Fedora fan.guys when u enter virtual terminal from ubuntu n then log in to it and then do exit,the virtual terminal should be their the control is sent back to gui?also when i tried to install kubuntu on my system it just couldn't adjust with my Nvidia 6200 Card and it just showed half blue screen on my monitor(after booting with Ubuntu 8.10 Kubuntu KDE thing)whereas when i used my fedora 10 kde it detected all of my hardware and Nvidia Card.
    Also if u say abt being at the Cutting edge I accept it.ubuntu has got a lot of developers n lot of packages tht is true,but then fedora has also got it.Ubuntu is looking to capture the Desktop market which it will.But I like Fedora, i donno why but i think ubuntu is moving a bit closer to desktop edition in each of its release to bit Windows XP...
    if i am wrong correct me....Thnks for the above comments!!!

  34. It baffles me the idiocy of these "fix it" morons... like the same morons who blame MS for releasing buggy versions of Windows. Betas aside, a final release should be virtually as bug free as posible. Anything else is crap.

    Not all Linux users have a masters degree in computer programming. Nor should all users be required to have such. When a distro is released, it should be usable and useful. Unless your hobby is fixing OS bugs, why would it make sense to turn people off with shit that doesn't work?!

    This of course does not apply to Linux developers/programmers that do live for building and fixing Linux. I respect the effort and work involved.

    For me, I just want an OS that works and doesn't waste my time with fruitless and unnecessary effort. For example, I've built Nagios boxes in less time than say... making more simple things like Flash work (with and in earlier versions).

    Bottom line: Microsoft won the market on the desktop efforts. Maybe more effort should be spent on the newbie in newer releases.

  35. i really like ubuntu, because its very easy to use and really stable. but i love fedora for what it is... it shows you the future of linux and runs (at least on my laptop) better (faster) then ubuntu.

    sure, fedora isnt that stable, so if you want to use it for your company, use ubuntu, if you want to play around and just have fun, use fedora.

  36. hey u all me using fedora since fedora 7 , i recommend ubuntu to all my friends qho are beginners and advice them to change to fedora after settling their hands on it to get more edge by tweaking fedora here n there than ubuntu.
    Ubuntu is so much user friendly that for geeks like us it make us to ignore little tweaks we could do unlike fedora for blazing performance.
    So my verdict is try ubuntu if you are beginner and not a geek, otherwise try fedora for better performance.

  37. I was an ubuntu user for years, but now I am distro hunting because ubuntu broke networking in 9.04. When I set up my aDSL connection, it doesn't always stay connected. Sometimes, it will break the connection and I have to restart it. That's annoying if you are downloading a large file and you go to bed, only to find that a little bit of the file downloaded because the connection broke 30 minutes after you went to sleep.

    Right now I am trying out Fedora 11. Connection doesn't break, but the gtk package management leaves a lot to be desired.

  38. I am a noob to linux, I still use Windows because i am not sure where to really start, i tried unbuntu, in a VPC...probably not the best start, but i want to try something...less invasive and propriety :D These type of comparisons is really what is getting me to look at all options. It just seems that even in the open source realm, there is a battle between which is better, I am more looking into functionality, performance, usability, and gaming options. I am currently running unbuntu 9.04, so far seems promissing to start my linux journey, only issues really is display and the occasional black screen issue. which i have now learned the use of the sudo command and using the "noreplace-paravirt vga=791" switches (thanks to all of the faqs/help sites) This was the only site that really mentioned Unbuntu 9.04 that did some comparing for the all of the linux distro's other just stated that "this" distro is best with no real comparison. This one seems to be kinda biased really and really did not truely answer some of the questions i had/have. I am just looking for a good starting point on which linux distro would be suit me as i am totally a n00b.

  39. I have tried both ubuntu 9.04 and Fedora 11, I like both ubuntu and fedora for promotion of free software. I think world wide campaign should be launched for implementation of free software.

    Well then comparing both of them I think ubuntu has little advantage and works very well with newb's. In fedora u have pain in configuring the distro. But graphics are more superior in fedora. Debian is other distro of choice for me, but issues remain such as getting the dvd download can be pain. Further configuring the distro from small image can be pain ful to newb's.

  40. as a guy trying to learn and decide which route to go, this whole conversation(minus the personal attacks) has been very enlightening. Thanks!

  41. Fedora 11 beats ubuntu if you compare responivness on aged hardware.

  42. Bradley: I TOTALLY AGREE!!! I'm just getting into this whole "Linux OS" thing... very confussing, but very exciting! Can't wait to hear more responses not conected with emotion, just facts with specific examples for those of us that would benefit :)

  43. I was able to load Fedora on an old 32bit machine which wouldn't install Ubuntu. I like them both for many different reasons.

  44. 1) fedora rocks!, ubuntu sucks. kile + okular combination is excellent in fedroa. which is by the way badly broken in ubuntu.
    2)fedora boots much faster.
    3) many things are more or less same. however various small bugs with kde4 etc seems to be handled better in fedora.
    4) both uses pulseaudio which seems to be pretty buggy at this moment.

  45. I have no idea about ubuntu. I have always used fedora and no other distro. Thats because I get to choose the software and not be restricted to what the packagers think best for me. thats the power I need. I did decide to try ubuntu once and then opted out because of the limited software. beside fedora bundles the absolute latest software. why should I wait 6 months or 1 year to try them. I use fedora 12 now.

    Fedora has come a long way and is very user friendly but yes sometimes the changes between versions confuse mean and after digging deeper, I understand linux much better this way.

    so fedora is my choice all the way. no offence to ubuntu users.

  46. Well you need to do what I did with 2 PCs. One has Ubunti 9.10, the other has Fedora 11 and I play with both.

  47. sorry my 3 mile wide paw should have typed 'Ubuntu'

  48. Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.............................................

  49. 向著星球長驅直進的人,反比踟躕在峽路上的人,更容易達到目的。 ..................................................

  50. 旁觀自己的悲傷是解脫,主觀自己的悲傷是更加悲傷 ..................................................

  51. 生存乃是不斷地在內心與靈魂交戰;寫作是坐著審判自己。.................................................................                           

  52. 如果相遇.你會感到相知.那麼.有一種習慣叫做陪伴;如果陪伴.你會感到珍惜.那麼.有一種甜蜜叫做存在!..................................................................

  53. 夜光杯中飲美酒 蝸牛牆邊爬上架 新疆醉人馬奶子 青鳥銜之上金井............................................................

  54. 一個人的價值,應該看他貢獻了什麼,而不是他取得了什麼.................................................................

  55. 噴泉的高度,不會超過它的源頭。一個人的事業也是如此,它的成就絕不會超過自己的信念。........................................ ........................

  56. Joy often comes after sorrow, like morning after night.. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  57. 知識可以傳授,智慧卻不行。每個人必須成為他自己。. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .