On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 02:02 -0500, Patrick wrote: > I'm sure things evolve and improve along the way. > > But in my opinion it (FC) starts to grow into a dummy-proof OS. Up to > FC4 you could tweak things in order to get what you want(ed), but with > the out-of-the-box package you almost had it (and I'm not speaking > about the always present things everyone uses differently). > > For example, my dad is using FC4 for a couple of months now (coming > from Windows). Should I consider upgrading him to FC5 would mean I > have to tweak a lot in order to give him a similar system and/or > options. > > Am I wrong in thinking that with every release, not only the system > get upgraded, but also the whole look and feel gets "improved" ?? > > Don't get me wrong, I've been using FC1 up to FC4. And FC5 should be > next as far as I am concerned. But why does every new release mean > such trouble (FC3: 8k.stack, FC4: dev/udev, FC5: ....) ? ---- because Fedora is a 'cutting edge' release along basic concepts of release early and often. There are 'stable' releases such as RHEL or the 're-spins' of RHEL like CentOS. If you choose Fedora, you get the good with the bad. The good being the close to the edge latest versions of things which sometimes is the bad. It is how the envelope gets pushed as there are more people using it in different ways, reporting their problems so the maintainers fix the problems. Craig ps - please use plain text format for your messages rather than the html format.
