Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 14:29 -0500, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Timothy Murphy <gayleard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mike Bird wrote:
My loyalty is to keeping my systems secure and my users productive.
It's hard to believe that Red Hat would ship KDE 4.1 in F10, but if
it does KDE users will just choose another distro and install it.
Speak for yourself.
I doubt if you speak for anyone else.
You certainly don't speak for this KDE user.
--
He is speaking for me. I was a RedHat / Fedora user 10 years, 1 month
ago, I became an Ubuntu user.
Being a beta tester for RedHat is OK as a way of life, but the other
companies for which I test stuff give me free samples :)
It never came clear to me until I read Ann Wilson's post in this
thread: "We should always remember that Fedora
does not set out to be the stable desktop required in most production
situations. You use it at your peril, The fact that it actually
works in most situations is a bonus."
It never really struck me that way: if you use Fedora, you don't have
a reason to expect that your PC will actually work. Well, I do need
it to start up sometimes so I can read this group.
----
I wouldn't recommend using Anne's comments as a barometer for your
decision but rather your own expectations.
It is true that Fedora, since it's inception, chooses to be a leading
edge of development and yes, there is some stability that is sacrificed
for that goal. There are a number of 'stable' versions of Linux
including RHEL/RHWS/CentOS/Scientific Linux all based off RHEL or the
various Debian variations including Ubuntu/Kubuntu and SuSE, Mandriva
and so on. It never hurts to be familiar with all of the various Linux
distributions and evaluate whether one of the others meets your
expectations more than Fedora. My experience is that each Linux
distribution has its own strengths and weaknesses and that all Linux
users benefit from having options.
Generally, the notion of release early/often - even if all the features
are fully implemented is a philosophy that has served Linux and all the
packages on Linux well. In fact, it's clear that Microsoft and Apple
release their new versions of their OS with many known bugs so I see a
parallel there. When new versions of packages are incorporated, it
hopefully garners a lot of attention, useful bug reporting by users and
things are fixed over time. I actually appreciate being part of the
process and have learned that software perfection never really exists.
The best you ever get is that it performs to your expectations and I
guess I always want more.
Those on Fedora who use KDE and want everything to be perfect should
probably still be on Fedora 8 though I really have few complaints with
KDE and Fedora 9 these days...it does however suffer from feature
regression. I appreciate that this is just a temporary condition and
that many are working on rectifying these shortcomings.
By the way...I've never experienced a Fedora (i386, x86_64 or ppc)
installation that didn't work...so yeah, I actually expect it to work
and it has always met that expectation.
A very clear, well thought out response, Craig. Thank you for echoing
my feelings exactly (well, I don't use KDE. but...).
I am still on F8 for the "important" stuff, although I just set up an
F9 system because a package I needed required Tomcat6/JRE6. I am in no
way a Tomcat or Java maven and didn't want (read "didn't have time") to
try to install from tarballs. The only distro I saw with it was F9, so
it got used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer rps2@xxxxxxxx -
- Hosting Consulting, Inc. -
- -
- I.R.S.: We've got what it takes to take what you've got! -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
