Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Chat about Linux in general

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby IceCrystal on Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:09 pm

FedoraRefugee wrote:I would actually say it is not as hardcore as most think. It is really pretty easy. The key is you cannot be afraid of the command line though, and you need to have a good understanding of the different components in a Linux distro and know what you personally want. You should know ahead of time what bootloader you want to use. What audio, terminal, DE/WM, text editor, graphic viewer...You have to hand pick all your components. It is not a beginner's distro, but if you can follow the instructions it is not hard either. I would rate it much easier than Gentoo. Once you get X installed you can make it as automatic as you want. It can all be point and click if you wish. I strongly suggest the experience just for the confidence it builds. Another plus is Arch has some of the best documentation in the Linux world. Most basic things can be found here:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Main_Page

But you would be amazed what you get with Google just by appending "arch" at the end of the search.



Ok.
Well, im happy with Linux Mint. It works just fine for me, i want it simple and easy.
Im not afraid to use the terminal at all hehe, i use it sometimes to install and so and i have used it to other stuff to... not just to install a whole system tho.
Like sometimes i use the terminal and some times i "click and go" so to say.
IceCrystal
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 11:51 am
Location: Sweden

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby jasperlotus on Sat Sep 12, 2009 1:54 pm

rhY wrote:Opera isn't open source. Wherever possible I ONLY use open source. It's a philosophical and political choice that very, VERY often has real world benefits.

When I set up a Windows machine using all FOSS apps, I think that is arguably one of the most efficient, powerful combinations existent today. I still love mint though, and not just for compiz, though that is a big one!

That's your choice. Opera handles fonts much better than Firefox, feeds and emails just great. It has a compact layout, I can show or hide the menu by just a click, and the startup time is much shorter than Firefox.
jasperlotus
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby mcash454 on Sat Sep 12, 2009 2:37 pm

FedoraRefugee wrote:
IceCrystal wrote:I tried Fedora a couple of times but i dont get the point wih Fedora, the distro seemed good but :?

One cool thing would be to do a distro based on Fedora with a new community if you know what i mean?
Instead of have a "test distro" for Red Hat that they use to test Red Hat software in.


Yeah, I have an idea for sort of a "fedora mint." A distro that is based off of Fedora but has the same goals as mint. Maybe even with mint tools ported for rpm. It would essentially be an rpm mint. It could be staggered against the fedora release cycle allowing the fedora release to mature 3-4 months before the fedora-mint distro was released. This is the time it takes for the fedora release to become stable. The goal, like mint, would be to not update but instead to just use the iso for the 6 months until the new release. Of course it would have its own repo and have an update system like Mint where updates are rated according to level. Needless to say neither fedora or mint branding would be used, it would be its own distro.

Just a pipe dream really, I do not have the talent or interest myself. Kind of a flight of fancy...

BTW, the point of Fedora is to be bleeding edge, not so much with the apps but with the structure. It is a great distro, it will always be my first love. I just feel that the developers are running it into the ground at the moment. It is suffering an identity crises.


I have only really been using Linux for about 2 years, but it seems that the idea of a "_____ mint" release has a lot of potential. I think people that want to see Linux grow in users and mainstream-ability are trying to add a new layer of refinement for people that want it to 'just work'. I am an engineer, but not some great programmer. I like to tinker, and customize various things, but I'm unlikely to really try anything super-unique. If I can find a forum that explains how to do something, I'll try it. Beyond that I'm not very bold, or capable.

My first linux experience was on my Aspire One, and this guy (Macles) made it a good experience. Without expert help, non-programmers need refined distributions like Mint. (And even then, the expert help is GREATLY appreciated...)

http://macles.blogspot.com/
Helena Main Edition desktop user
former Gloria x64 desktop user
mcash454
Level 2
Level 2
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:49 am
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby hinto on Sat Sep 12, 2009 7:19 pm

Maybe even with mint tools ported for rpm

That's my problem with Fedora... Playing "Find the rpm" isn't my cup of tea. Debian mirrors are really a fantastic concept.
I've always said, when you choose a distro you also choose a repository. Since I don't regularly build from source, manually resolve dependencies, etc... The Debian distros and repositories fit the bill for me.
-H
What brought me to Debian was one-stop shopping.
What brought me to SID was apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade.
User avatar
hinto
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:32 pm
Location: Cary NC, USA

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sat Sep 12, 2009 11:04 pm

hinto wrote:Ubuntu takes a 6 month snapshot of Testing and runs it through it's own test cycles, fixes, etc. Mint and SimplyMepis (and a few others) come from here

Hmm, about Ubuntu you are sure it's not rather a snapshot of Sid? And about Mepis it is based on Debian Stable ("SimplyMEPIS 8.0 is based on Debian Lenny", "The most popular MEPIS distribution is SimplyMEPIS, which is based primarily on Debian stable.")... :roll:

FedoraRefugee wrote:The problem is the bugs are never fully worked out and as soon as the version is released the attention of the developers is diverted to rawhide, which is the next release.

This is unfortunately the case of several/many things in the Linux ecosystem, e.g. Gnome, Ubuntu... etc to quote just two.

FedoraRefugee wrote:I suppose that the final 6 months of a release's life can be equated to this. The release goes six months until the next release is released, then it lasts a final six months in conjunction with the new release. After this time it reaches end of life and is no longer supported through the repos. You can still run it but you no longer have a repo or updates. This last six months is usually problem free, it still has bugs, but they are minor and have been worked around. I would consider this to be enterprise class stable, but with the understanding that it is not 100% solid. It is too bad someone does not make a distro out of this. A rolling release that just continues the security updates.

Six months release is bad, 6 months is not enough to have a really good, well tested and bug-free thing... Rolling release, an always moving and may-break-on-every-update target, is not the good solution too. Rather the ideal, the "perfect" thing, would be a little stable base system with all this system which stays unchanged or almost and the supplementary apps and their librairies which are grafted on top and which evolve according to their development, a support for several years and support for old version(s) even if newer versions come out (an enterprise-like grade support like Windows or enterprise distros as Red Hat and clones for example:

"Each CentOS version is supported for 7 years (by means of security updates). A new CentOS version is released every 2 years and each CentOS version is regularly updated (every 6 months) to support newer hardware. This results in a secure, low-maintenance, reliable, predictable and reproducible environment." For example:

CentOS 2 (2002-05-17/2004-05-14): CentOS-2 updates until May 31 2009

CentOS 3 (2003-10-23/2004-03-19): CentOS-3 updates until Oct 31, 2010

CentOS 4 (2005-02-14/2005-03-09): CentOS-4 updates until Feb 29, 2012

CentOS 5 (2007-03-14/2007-04-12): CentOS-5 updates until Mar 31, 2014



(the first date is for the release of RHEL, the second for the release of CentOS)

Yes, Red Hat will continue to offer Enterprise Linux 5 (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.9.1, 5.9.2, etc.) for a long time, possibly even beyond 2014 and they continue the support for older versions until 2010 and 2012! :!: )

But this is impossible in the Linux ecosystem . Windows (e.g. XP) CAN do all of these, but unfortunately Linux is unable (at least for now) :twisted:
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 9:56 am

linuxviolin wrote:Six months release is bad, 6 months is not enough to have a really good, well tested and bug-free thing... Rolling release, an always moving and may-break-on-every-update target, is not the good solution too. Rather the ideal, the "perfect" thing, would be a stable base system with all the system which stays unchanged or almost and the supplementary apps and their librairies which are grafted on top and which evolve according to their development, a support for several years and support for old version(s) even if newer versions come out (an enterprise-like grade support like Windows or enterprise distros as Red Hat and clones for example:

"Each CentOS version is supported for 7 years (by means of security updates). A new CentOS version is released every 2 years and each CentOS version is regularly updated (every 6 months) to support newer hardware. This results in a secure, low-maintenance, reliable, predictable and reproducible environment." For example:

CentOS 2 (2002-05-17/2004-05-14): CentOS-2 updates until May 31 2009

CentOS 3 (2003-10-23/2004-03-19): CentOS-3 updates until Oct 31, 2010

CentOS 4 (2005-02-14/2005-03-09): CentOS-4 updates until Feb 29, 2012

CentOS 5 (2007-03-14/2007-04-12): CentOS-5 updates until Mar 31, 2014



(the first date is for the release of RHEL, the second for the release of CentOS)

Yes, Red Hat will continue to offer Enterprise Linux 5 (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.9.1, 5.9.2, etc.) for a long time, possibly even beyond 2014 and they continue the support for older versions until 2010 and 2012! :!: )

But this is impossible in the Linux ecosystem . Windows (e.g. XP) CAN do all of these, but unfortunately Linux is unable (at least for now) :twisted:


Woah Nelly, hold the phone! What distro do YOU use? You say the perfect solution is a distro that stays unchanged. Many agree and they do use distros like CentOS for their desktop. Have you ever used CentOS or debian stable (Lenny ATM)? They are great distros but the packages are so old you want to cry! Especially for someone like me who was riding the ragged edge of Fedora! Perfect for some maybe, but not perfect for all!

Six months release is bad, 6 months is not enough to have a really good, well tested and bug-free thing...


Bad for who? Mint? Ubuntu? Many distros use this cycle. Bad is simply a matter of opinion! First off, the goal of Fedora is not to be a well tested bug free distro. It is to showcase the leading edge of Linux technology. It is designed to be the first in line that can actually be used as a stable distro and not just a test bed like sid that falls apart with every update. Is Fedora rock stable? No. But it is a lot more stable and dependable than people often give it credit for. Does it break? Sure, but really not too often. And the fix is usually very quick. It is more than usuable for anyone that knows even a little about Linux and some even use it for business purposes, especially if they dont jump on new updates but wait a week to see what happens to others.

Be careful about blanket statements, what is great for some actually sucks for others. Many of us in the Fedora forum use Mint and support it and promote it to newcomers in that forum. But there is a segment over there that finds Mint to be a noob distro, too simple, too limited, not "pure FOSS" and just plain boring to use. Are they wrong? No, they just see things differently is all.
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 10:44 am

FedoraRefugee wrote:But there is a segment over there that finds Mint to be a noob distro, too simple, too limited, not "pure FOSS" and just plain boring to use.

I have never said this, I guess :shock:

FedoraRefugee wrote:Have you ever used CentOS or debian stable (Lenny ATM)?

Yes. By the way, I write this post from CentOS 5.3 :wink:

FedoraRefugee wrote:Perfect for some maybe, but not perfect for all!

Probably... :D But I have not said that CentOS is perfect...

About the packages, yes they are a little old, but not all. This is why I said: "a little stable base system with all the system which stays unchanged or almost and the supplementary apps and their libraries which are grafted on top and which evolve according to their development". In Windows XP for example, even if it's old now and not a "modern" system (now it's Vista or even Windows 7, right?), you can use any version of any software, even the latest version, without problem even now, despite its age... And it is still supported.

The "long" support of Windows or Red Hat for example and "a little stable system" etc... à la Windows with apps which update/evolve according their development would be the "perfect" distro, if the perfection can exit... :lol: But I think it should be possible to approach it

FedoraRefugee wrote:the goal of Fedora is not to be a well tested bug free distro. It is to showcase the leading edge of Linux technology. (...)

Ok yes, for developers or testers or people who like unstable things but for the "normal, classic", or whatever else as you call him/her, user (btw, probably (s)he is the majority of the computer users...), I think (s)he will prefer what I say above rather something which can "explode" in his/her face regularly or a permanent testing thing etc. lol And I maintain that 6 months is a too short cycle to do something of real quality...

P.S.= I am not sure to be very clear in my purpose here, in what I want to say. My English is a little "short" today... :roll:
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby hinto on Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:47 pm

Six months release is bad, 6 months...

The snapshot is every 6 months, that's not necessarily when they release, but they try. That doesn't mean that the packages don't change for 6 months.
6 months is for a new version.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_(operating_system) and http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/Debian
It does look like it now comes from unstable so it doesn't exclude packages that failed to make it to testing, if they provided a good feature (and was needed).
In reality, it looks like a mixture of testing and unstable. (but it is also known as a fork)

www.mepis.org forums mention that Mepis went from Debian Testing to Ubuntu then back to Testing, but it's probably mixed, too.

But in either case, whether SID, Testing, or Stable, all of the packages are contained in a Debain mirror. The one stop shopping.
What brought me to Debian was one-stop shopping.
What brought me to SID was apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade.
User avatar
hinto
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1273
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:32 pm
Location: Cary NC, USA

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:16 pm

hinto wrote:http://www.mepis.org forums mention that Mepis went from Debian Testing to Ubuntu then back to Testing, but it's probably mixed, too.

The quotes in my previous was from some sources but if you read well on the front page of the Mepis site (mepis.org) you read:

SimplyMEPIS 8.0 arrives with a complete choice of the best of programs necessary for most people's pleasure and productivity, all delivered on top of a Debian 5 stable core using the 2.6.27 Linux kernel.

So, I think we can say it is based on Stable, right? :wink:

But yes, there was a release based on Ubuntu, but they are quickly came back to Debian.

About Ubuntu, they have *always* say it is based on a "freezed" snapshot of Sid. Even in the two links you give we read:

Ubuntu packages are based on packages from Debian's unstable branch

so Sid. Also:

we "freeze" a snapshot of Debian's development archive. We start from the development version in order to give ourselves the freedom to make our own decisions with regard to release management...

"Development version" is Sid.
Last edited by linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:18 pm

linuxviolin wrote:
FedoraRefugee wrote:the goal of Fedora is not to be a well tested bug free distro. It is to showcase the leading edge of Linux technology. (...)

Ok yes, for developers or testers or people who like unstable things but for the "normal, classic", or whatever else as you call him/her, user (btw, probably (s)he is the majority of the computer users...), I think (s)he will prefer what I say above rather something which can "explode" in his/her face regularly or a permanent testing thing etc. lol And I maintain that 6 months is a too short cycle to do something of real quality...

P.S.= I am not sure to be very clear in my purpose here, in what I want to say. My English is a little "short" today... :roll:


My initial impulse would be to agree here, after all, logic would dictate that a distro that occasionally "blows up" in a user's face and that was an acknowledged test bed would not fare so well. But having used Fedora since FC4 the actuality would argue this point. Check this out for some interesting reading:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics

The truth is Fedora is one of the most popular Linux distros, many even claim users even surpass Ubuntu! I wouldnt argue that myself, but the current numbers suggest around 17 MILLION users of Fedora all versions. Now, these are all projections, there is no way to measure actual usage. The site I linked explains this and explains how these numbers are projected. One thing is sure, they are much more accurate than distrowatch "hits" which only prove how many times a particular distro is "looked at" on distrowatch. That said, Fedora is usually in the top 3 on distrowatch too. Not that this is a popularity contest or that more users makes a distro "worth" more. What it does suggest though is that users are looking for a more cutting edge distro that is on the leading edge and they are willing to make concessions in stability. This is why the Fedora team is split and why half the developers are trying to make it more user friendly and stable...more ubuntu-like. My position is this is backwards, Fedora has achieved all this success because of what it was, why try and change it?
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 1:44 pm

FedoraRefugee, it's always a pleasure to talk with you even if we do not always agree. You are always reasonable, objective etc in your words (I say this in relation to "Linux evangelists" as you said :wink:) :D

Your post is good but do you really think users have the choice? Not Sure... Between Windows and the "most Linux distros are buggy at best" as you said somewhere or enterprise distros like Red Hat and its clones, more/very stable but "that is so dated it will bring you to tears" (your words again. Sorry to quote you :) )... Not a real choice, rather a compromise, if you see what I want to say.
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:05 pm

linuxviolin wrote:FedoraRefugee, it's always a pleasure to talk with you even if we do not always agree. You are always reasonable, objective etc in your words (I say this in relation to "Linux evangelists" as you said :wink:) :D

Your post is good but do you really think users have the choice? Not Sure... Between Windows and the "most Linux distros are buggy at best" as you said somewhere or enterprise distros like Red Hat and its clones, more/very stable but "that is so dated it will bring you to tears" (your words again. Sorry to quote you :) )... Not a real choice, rather a compromise, if you see what I want to say.


Interesting thoughts. Yeah, I think you have something. Linux is always going to be a compromise because of the choice available. You simply cant have all things in one distro, something it seems the Fedora developers are trying to do. I think this is what makes Linux so attractive to people like us but also a part of what keeps Linux from becoming adopted by the masses. People generally do not like too much choice, they are most comfortable with one or two main options. A good case is seen with Vista's marketing. 7 options of Vista is really a handicap, not an advantage. People do not want to have to study these differences, they want an easy choice like "home OS" or "business OS." They want their OS to do everything, they do not want to think, "If I pick this one with all the newest components it will be sleek and modern but it wont be stable." Or, "If I pick this distro that is well tested and bug free and enterprise stable it will never crash and will last forever, but all these new packages will not work on it because the kernel is too old and the deps are outdated." BTW, you mention this in an earlier post, a stable structure with newer apps. But there is a problem with this, I have tried this with Mint 5. I wanted the newest Compiz-Fusion, the newest OO.o, and several other packages. I had to install many Ubuntu libs as deps. I ended up running Ubuntu and not Mint. It was doable, but it changed that stable base to a testing distro. Back to square one.

Anyway, yeah, it is a compromise. And in my experience most home desktop users want quick changes and cutting edge. I know very few Linux users who are content to just install a distro and use it unchanged for 3 years. Most people I know of like to play, they are constantly installing apps, removing apps, changing things, installing new distros...Especially Fedora people. It is a joke over there about going to Mint or Ubuntu that everyone will respond, "You will be back in 3 weeks, you will get bored." And it is usually true. Fedora users just cant sit still, they are always looking forward to the next release.

There are very stable Linux distros that are problem free. CentOS is a great example. debian Lenny is another. Yet no one uses these distros! Why? They are totally bug free and run circles around Windows. They are also not unduly hard to use, a little more involved than Mint but not much. I wonder this too, I wonder why I am running Arch and not Lenny. The answer is Linux users are in it for the fun and we dont like to sit still. This is why Fedora is so popular.
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:37 pm

Yes yes yes... :wink: But:

FedoraRefugee wrote:Linux is always going to be a compromise because of the choice available. (...) People generally do not like too much choice, they are most comfortable with one or two main options.

Maybe but have they a *real* good choice? I don't think. Too many choices but no real good one.


FedoraRefugee wrote:something it seems the Fedora developers are trying to do.

Ah? Really? For me, nothing really good with a 6 months cycle and a "testing" base...

FedoraRefugee wrote:I have tried this with Mint 5. I wanted the newest Compiz-Fusion, the newest OO.o, and several other packages. I had to install many Ubuntu libs as deps. I ended up running Ubuntu and not Mint. It was doable, but it changed that stable base to a testing distro. Back to square one.

Yes, it's why I said this would have to be "the ideal, the "perfect" thing" but Linux "unable (at least for now)", unfortunately, but Windows can do it! So why would it not possible to do this in Linux too?

FedoraRefugee wrote:And in my experience most home desktop users want quick changes and cutting edge.

I am sick by this but you are perhaps/probably right about people but people have not always common sense, at the contrary, and often unfortunately they are rather a little silly (without offense to someone) :D

FedoraRefugee wrote:Most people I know of like to play...

Ok, then use a game console! :lol: Computer is not and should not be a game station! This is probably one of the reasons why I hate e.g Compiz, 3-D Desktop, Plasma etc all these stupid and useless things, I'm sorry. But probably I dream of an ancient bygone time, unfortunately... :(
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby emorrp1 on Sun Sep 13, 2009 3:50 pm

Wow, this thread just keeps getting better! There's far to many points and counter points here to give a full response, so here's the quick version (with paraphrasing):

1) "Linux is a compromise" - I would modify this to "pre-built Linux distros make compromises" - You could in theory roll your own which is precisely what you always dreamed, and you'll find you'll have to compromise (e.g. bleeding-edge features vs. rock-solid stability) too, the only difference is that you get to define the precise balances and you can change your mind over time. Oh, and Windows makes compromises too, see (3b).

2) "No one uses stable distros" - In this case I reckon it's true that you'd actually never know, because they just install and setup once and forget about it, they would be using their Computer as a pure tool. Once you introduce the possibility of bugs, you raise the volume of the community.

3) "Windows can run some legacy and some modern apps side-by-side quite happily" - There's a couple of different reasons for this (compromises all round):
a) Society: XP was the only desktop OS that M$ released over a whole 6 years. Therefore, any windows apps have to be able to run on XP to be successful in order to reach the largest market.
b) Tech: Windows apps are completely self-contained, which make them both gargantuan and independent. Linux apps are modular, which makes them tiny but interdependent. Again it's a matter of choice since you can package linux apps in the windows way yourself if you wish, and then you could boast the same "features". I believe this is the way proprietary linux game companies work, they provide their own versions of the libs that they can guarantee work with their game.

4) "Computers are tools" - For some, probably even most computer users, this is true. However for some, probably even most of us early linux adopters, this is false. To me my computer is a tool, games console, teacher and fun. You never hear windows described as "fun" which means it's getting out of your way and letting you use the computer as a tool (or it's getting in your way in a bad way :-) ).

That'll do for now I suppose.
If you have a question that has been answered and solved, then please edit your original post and put a [SOLVED] at the end of your subject header
Hint - use a google search including the search term site:forums.linuxmint.com
emorrp1
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:58 pm

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 4:10 pm

emorrp1 wrote:2) "No one uses stable distros" -...


Hmmm...I was gonna post that I never said this! But I guess I kinda did here:

There are very stable Linux distros that are problem free. CentOS is a great example. debian Lenny is another. Yet no one uses these distros! Why?


Kinda taken out of context though because certainly people do use these distros. LinuxViolin says he uses CentOS. I know a few Lenny users. My point was these users are quiet and go unnoticed. Yet look at the numbers we get in all our forums crying that Linux is buggy and that it will never take over from windows because...Even long term Linux users complain about how flaky Linux can be, yet why do they not go over to one of these uber-stable distros? I suspect because it would take the fun and challenge out of things. Even today I find that most of the people using Linux (not trying to make a blanket statement certainly not ALL people using Linux) are in it for more than just a windows alternative, more than just a tool. I suspect those who stick with Linux do so because they do find it fun, a hobby, interesting, or are curious about it. That is not to say that there is not a large segment of serious Linux users that do use their computer as a tool and do require a super stable OS. It is just funny that this side of Linux is rarely shown.
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 4:34 pm

FedoraRefugee wrote:
emorrp1 wrote:2) "No one uses stable distros" -...


Hmmm...I was gonna post that I never said this! But I guess I kinda did here:

There are very stable Linux distros that are problem free. CentOS is a great example. debian Lenny is another. Yet no one uses these distros! Why?


Kinda taken out of context though because certainly people do use these distros. LinuxViolin says he uses CentOS. I know a few Lenny users. My point was these users are quiet and go unnoticed. Yet look at the numbers we get in all our forums crying that Linux is buggy and that it will never take over from windows because...Even long term Linux users complain about how flaky Linux can be, yet why do they not go over to one of these uber-stable distros? I suspect because it would take the fun and challenge out of things. Even today I find that most of the people using Linux (not trying to make a blanket statement certainly not ALL people using Linux) are in it for more than just a windows alternative, more than just a tool. I suspect those who stick with Linux do so because they do find it fun, a hobby, interesting, or are curious about it. That is not to say that there is not a large segment of serious Linux users that do use their computer as a tool and do require a super stable OS. It is just funny that this side of Linux is rarely shown.

I guess you are right. Whether we be happy or unhappy, you are probably right with this "analysis".
Last edited by linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby emorrp1 on Sun Sep 13, 2009 4:40 pm

Well, boring as it is, we seem to have all reached an agreement about the current state of Linux, even if we still have vastly different views as to what would make the perfect distro!
If you have a question that has been answered and solved, then please edit your original post and put a [SOLVED] at the end of your subject header
Hint - use a google search including the search term site:forums.linuxmint.com
emorrp1
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:58 pm

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:16 pm

Theoretically, I think I can agree with Linuxviolon that the "perfect" distro, or even OS is the OS that you never see. The one you do not know is even there. The computer just knows how to do everything intuitively and never makes a wrong choice. An OS is just the thing that controls the programs you use, it should not get in your way.

Boy does this sound boring to me! I like playing with apps, but even more I am a fan of the OS. I like playing with the OS. The desktop environment/ window manager really fascinates me. It is amazing how even in the same distro the DE/WM can make such a change in the feel. I currently use fluxbox and my latest area of intrigue is why people need a full fledged environment like Gnome. What can they do that I cant and what makes fluxbox "harder" to use. How do we solve this yet still retain the simplicity and lack of bloat?

Anyway, there is no "perfect" distro just as there is no "perfect" woman. Some men like women who stay quiet and submissive and walk five feet behind them and never argue or even make eye contact. I say bull to that, my wife is a firebrand! I allow her to think she wears the pants and in return when the chips are down she allows me the final say. She is capable, smart, and is a great partner, not a quiet servant. I kind of like an OS that is the same way. Different strokes for different folks, that is what makes Linux, and life, so interesting. :)
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby linuxviolin on Sun Sep 13, 2009 6:01 pm

FedoraRefugee wrote:The computer just knows how to do everything intuitively and never makes a wrong choice.

It's not exactly what I said. :wink:

Your metaphor with women is a little daring. An OS is not a woman, the first can be a tool but not a woman, but you make what you want with who you want! :lol: :mrgreen:

FedoraRefugee wrote:Boy does this sound boring to me! I like playing with apps, but even more I am a fan of the OS. I like playing with the OS. The desktop environment/ window manager really fascinates me.

Well, this was fun at first but not really now. But I think I have a problem with the direction taken by the development of Linux and other apps, of the IT... I'm not either satisfied with Windows for now and since "some time/years" now, and a short/quick test of BSD (maybe I should re-try it. E.g. there is something which can be interesting in the future: Desktop NetBSD But no, I don't like PCBSD, I would prefer DesktopBSD, unfortunately they are with KDE - 4 for PCBSD and 3.5.10 (better) for DesktopBSD) I use (almost) only Linux (nonetheless, there still have a partition with XP somewhere on a PC for now) But this is another subject.
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
User avatar
linuxviolin
Level 8
Level 8
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: France

Re: Distrowatch Mint vs. Fedora

Postby FedoraRefugee on Sun Sep 13, 2009 8:18 pm

linuxviolin wrote:...An OS is not a woman...


True. I have never slept with my OS... :shock: :lol: :roll:
FedoraRefugee
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:25 am

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 
PreviousNext

Return to Chat about Linux

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests