Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Linux Guru jmadero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007

    Fedora vs. Ubuntu And Why I Am Still A Skeptic

    Hi All,

    First off let me say that this small rant will come after 24 hours of installs, removes, reinstalls, upgrades, formats, etc...and still a system that isn't completely up. So here it goes, I'm wanting to be convinced that I should ditch Ubuntu (or at least not use it as primary distro) because I am struggling with some of the recent changes in Ubuntu and think that these changes are going to continue happening over in Canonical land.

    My experience starting yesterday:

    Installed Fedora 14, flawless only thing had to do was install broadcom wireless driver.

    Decide to upgrade using the preupgrade package, huge mistake. I couldn't log in after the update, would take me to the login screen, I'd put in my password, would start to load, then would flicker and go back to login screen. After investigating seemed like my home folder was deleted.


    Installed Fedora 14, tried upgrading via yum, failed, found error online, no solutions given other then "use preupgrade"


    Downloaded Fedora 16 DVD

    Installed, running now, problems remaining:

    Fedora install didn't detect my Ubuntu partition, so grub doesn't list it, going to have to manually alter a config file that I really hate dealing with.

    Some packages have been purged in Fedora before the right time (most notably HAL), too many things depend on HAL, there should have been a transition period. One example is XBMC, want to compile and so far no luck.

    Rhyhtmbox (seriously still using this??) This hasn't been supported in ages, I know of a few basic features which it doesn't have. I know installing another player is easy enough but I don't get the choice of sticking with a non supported package

    LightDM missing? I mean, if you're going to be cutting edge, LightDM is the choice to make

    So there's my rant, still no XBMC, trying to decide on a media player -- all of them suck in one way or another, basic features that I've seen missing in almost all (other than Amarok 1.4 but a change right before they switched to Amarok 2 screwed it up pretty bad). Media players don't support transferring playlist to MP3 players (no clue why not), are too bulky (banshee supporting video and music is unnecessary), have horrible podcast support/setups, etc...

    I'm looking forward to reading the "attacks" (those critical of Ubuntu I'm sure will have plenty to say). Ultimately in Ubuntu, I install and almost completely things just work. Like I said recent changes (ie. Unity interface, a bug that freezes the mouse routinely but can't be pinpointed, etc...) are forcing me to consider other options, I want to be sold on fedora because that's where I began my linux adventures.

    Thanks all
    Bodhi 1.3 & Bodhi 1.4 using E17
    Dell Studio 17, Intel Graphics card, 4 gigs of RAM, E17

    "The beauty in life can only be found by moving past the materialism which defines human nature and into the higher realm of thought and knowledge"

  2. #2
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Tucson AZ
    Fedora doesn't usually detect other Linux systems from all the reading I've done about it. I believe it is running Grub2 now so logging in as root and running update-grub, or possibly os-prober and then update-grub will solve the problem. Simplest possible solution, if it works. I haven't installed Fedora since Core 6 so...?

  3. #3
    First off let me say that this small rant will come after 24 hours of installs, removes, reinstalls, upgrades, formats, etc..
    Been there done that back when Madriva was at version 10 I think. Cured me of rpm distros.

    Ubuntu and me may part ways also later when my 10.04 LTS install runs out of support.

    Also, any dual boot installs I use use grub legacy or grub4dos. Though I don't dual boot as much as I used to. Puppy usb or cd works for me as a rescue tool.

    Most everything I have is AntiX installed (Debian testing and Debian Unstable).

    I guess Debian Based distros like Semplice,AntiX are going to be my future full installs. Crunchbang looks pretty cool also. If I was into using Arch Linux. Archbang looks cool. If I ever get brave enough.

    CruxEX 2011 Linux LiveCD | Exton's International Blog
    I refuse to let fear and fear of others rule my life. It puts my humanity at risk.
    Accepting Death is the only way to stay alive.

  4. $spacer_open
  5. #4
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    I don't know, i am skeptical about both! They both have their problems, i found Fedora 14 did jmadero said "upgrade with yum and the next time you reboot it doesn't log in", i also found Fedora 16 a little annoying, it very buggy!
    It's really up to you dude, both are the latest and greatest, so they are going to be a little buggy here an there! If it was me i probably wouldn't run either! I am not a fan of Fedora it doesn't intrigue me, and Ubuntu i may consider re-installing it at a later date when the Unity Desktop is more developed.
    I would lean more towards Scientific Linux or Oracle Linux instead of Fedora. Mint or Mint Debian, and possibly Bio-Linux or Elementary (Very MacOSX like appearance) instead of Ubuntu.

    Oracle Linux is a set-it up yourself, as in you have to add the repos once the basic desktop is installed. Once thats done its very stable and fast, and easy to maintain.

  6. #5
    Penguin of trust elija's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Either at home or at work or down the pub
    The incident that cured me of rpm distros was when a brand new install of Fedora offered several hundred updates but descended into dependency hell! (Package A depends Package B depends Package A) which is bad enough when installing an obscure piece of software but when doing the OS upgrade after an install?

    I do still mess around with Scientific Linux as I need to be familiar with RHEL for work and to be fair, it is pretty good and may have made me a convert, it not for the above.

    I think the best distro I have used is LMDE with XFCE as the desktop environment with #! running a fairly close second. Slackware would be number 3 on my list.

    I seem to avoid all the problems others seem to have which means I'm either super leet*, super lucky or have always and by chance bought the right hardware. On one hand it's great as stuff just works reliably but on the other hand, you don't learn as much.

    * I wish!
    Should you be sitting wondering,
    Which Batman is the best,
    There's only one true answer my friend,
    It's Adam Bloody West!

    The Fifth Continent

  7. #6
    The first Linux distro I used was Lycoris, not sure if anyone has heard of it as I think it was pretty obscure but it came on a CD in a PC magazine so I thought I'd check it out. Installed it over Windows and then my worst nightmare occurred: It couldn't find or install drivers for my NVIDIA card nor my NIC. So, here I was with no internet and a crapy graphics and unable to do anything remotely useful with it. Uninstalled it almost immediately.

    The next distro that pretty much made Linux worth installing for me (or perhaps Linux had matured by that point in general?) was Ubuntu. Since I moved to place where I was stuck with 56k for quite a while, the free CDs were quite an incentive, I don't know how many people I gave the CDs away to but I know at least a few people who are now far more proficient with Linux than I am thanks to those CDs.

    Other than my initial encounter, I've had relatively good luck with Linux, especially now since I have current/bleeding edge hardware. Not to mention that I run my distros off VMware Workstation except for my server which is running Linux Mint at the moment. Not for long though as despite my relatively good luck all these years, my network connectivity keeps dropping out on the machine, despite working fine previously with Windows 7.

    Anyways, I'm not particularly attached to any distro, though after all these years I'm most used to Ubuntu. As soon as one started getting flaky, I'd move to something else. I'm messing around with CentOS at the moment and it seems to be fine, though I haven't installed it on my actual machine though. I like the fact that it "just works" and I don't have to fiddle with it. Though, as elija said, you don't learn as much. I learned vim like the back of my hand when I first attempted to dual boot Windows and Ubuntu due to editing GRUB boot loader and to get mp3 player support by enabling (I think it was/is called) the universal repository.

  8. #7
    No comment on fedora except that your four points about fedora 16 seem somewhat trivial.

    As for ubuntu, I'm sure it's possible for you to get rid of unity and switch to using a different window manager or DE? Or you could switch to Linux Mint, LMDE or Aptosid or just Debian Unstable itself. The main advantage there is that those are quite obviously all debian based, so familiar territory, rather than making the jump to a red hat based distro. Regardless if you're going to switch distro, expect some teething problems - especially if you're going to opt for one with was released about 3 days ago.

  9. #8
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    I tend to create problems, because i like to install new OS's every so often in the available free space on my hard disk. So if i screw up, it tends to force me to run a live CD of another distro and work within the constraints of the live CD, also its usually a booting problem or something that requires terminal. Although i don't distro-hop in the sense of changing the main OS, i always have Oracle Linux and Win 7 installed i just at times will install extras. The most recent was Solaris 11 (not express). So i am probably the opposite, i find throwing urself in the deep-end to be a great learning experience, despite the fact at the time it annoys the hell out of me, when i can't boot into anything or the filesystem has become corrupt or hidden.

    Caravel is probably right, you don't need to change to Red Hat to get rid of the Unity Desktop. But at the same time changing package managers is really a big deal other than familiarity.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts