×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Fedora Core 6 Review

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the doing-shiny-before-function dept.

205

luna6 writes to tell us that they have posted a pretty thorough review of Fedora Core 6 with the installation procedure and even a few work arounds for the couple of bugs encountered during the process to help users get up and running smoothly. From the article: "To sum up Fedora Core 6, I will say that once you have it set up properly FC 6 runs very impressively. I had the impression that FC 6 may have been rushed, just because of the handful of minor bugs that appeared. The mixup of arches, i586 & i686 was weird and the first system update having a update conflict was a glaring error, even though it was easy to fix. Setting up the Nvidia drivers was way more problematic than it should have been. I should also note that Mandriva 2007 worked from the start with AIGLX and their 3D drake worked flawlessly. With that stated once the minor problems were fixed, Fedora Core 6 worked as well as any Linux distro I have tried and the visuals were second to none. Well except the default icons...but we have something to look forward to in FC 7 now don't we?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Can I upgrade without reinstalling (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583888)

If the answer's no, I'm sticking with Debian that had this ability for almost a decade

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583958)

yes. Stick the CD in, reboot and select "Upgrade".

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (5, Funny)

drooling-dog (189103) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584024)

yes. Stick the CD in, reboot and select "Upgrade".

Sorry, that's too complicated. I need a CD that sticks itself in the slot.

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (5, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584466)

I need a CD that sticks itself in the slot.

And I supose you're going to be fussy about which slot, ain'cha?

KFG

Feature creepy (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584606)

Sorry, that's too complicated. I need a CD that sticks itself in the slot.

That was one of the features cut from Vista - it was a little too careless about which slots it sought.

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584176)

What if you don't have a CD? In debian you can just change your sources.list and type apt-get dist-upgrade.

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (3, Funny)

pyros (61399) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584824)

What if you don't have a CD? In debian you can just change your sources.list and type apt-get dist-upgrade.

man, that sounds yummy.

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583978)

debian rules

Re:Can I upgrade without reinstalling (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16585392)

If it's a contest for ridiculously (and needlessly) ugly installer, then you're right. Debian rules.

I just installed Debian stable (sarge) for the first time. The partitioning portion of the install went fine. But, the part where you actually choose _what_ will be installed was UGLY. And, when the install was finished, I was left with a non-functioning X environment. Running startx brought me to an X screen with an error something like, "No window manager detected. No .Xsession or .xsession file detected..."

So, I just had to know to run "apt-get install kde" to actually get a functioning X system? What kind of stupid installer selects and installs the X server but no window manager? Hell, RH 4.1 (not RHEL) "Vanderbildt" had a better installer ten years ago. Idiotic.

Oh, also, if you're looking for a distro that's only compiled for i386 and nothing higher on the x86 platform (i586, i686, amd64, etc.) then Debian is your guy.

IMHO, aside from being the OSS purist distro, Debian is for people who need that little ego boost for having installed and configured a distro by hand -- but aren't willing to go the gentoo route.

I'll save you some time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583906)

It sucks.

Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (2, Insightful)

Rob Simpson (533360) | more than 8 years ago | (#16583956)

SUSE does, Ubuntu does not. SUSE only requires a couple clicks and entering the network ID/password, while even the instructions for getting WPA running on Ubuntu are daunting [ubuntu.com] . How does Fedora compare?

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584146)

FC5 ships with network manager which supports WPA-PSK (as well as a 802.11x) authentication out of the box. The user interface is vaguely simmlar to Window's wireless support.. but except even less power-user friendly (You can't prefer some SSIDs over others for example), yet another casualty of the Gnome usability studies.

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584760)

Don't blame Gnome usability. NetworkManager is still under active development. It's a matter of first things first. Nice-to-haves come later.

I can also confirm that in FC5 NetworkManager does WPA-PSK just fine. It uses wpa_supplicant under the hood, so if wpa_supplicant handles WPA-PSK with your card/driver, NetworkManager will too.

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584150)

Which is nice, but when I installed SUSE 10.1 the package manager didn't even work, and I couldn't install updates [linuxforums.org] . I'd rather have working package manager than WPA-PSK. Yes, I know it's fixed, but how do you put out a .1 release that doesn't even have the package manager working properly?

I dunno, but the current version works fine (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584642)

At least they fixed it. Being able access the internet kinda takes priority, since it is difficult to download updates without a connection.

Re:I dunno, but the current version works fine (1)

Sillygates (967271) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584992)

Works fine? All of the official fedora core 5 yum repositories have been offline since the release of FC6

Re:I dunno, but the current version works fine (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585044)

I meant SUSE 10.1 Reloade^H^H^H^H^H^H^H "Remastered". I haven't tried Fedora, yet.

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584356)

WPA works great. I couldn't get it to work with NetworkManager and FC5, but with FC6 it "just worked."

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

Erwos (553607) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584578)

It _should_. Fedora Core 5 did, but I never got it working, due to the weirdness of the Broadcom drivers.

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (3, Informative)

pyros (61399) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584612)

That Ubuntu Wiki makes it look a lot harder than it really is. The wiki doesn't make it obvious that the paragraph after the first three apt-get commands is where the process ends for 95% of users. In most cases (if your wifi chip is already recognized and working) you can install network-manager-[kde|gnome], start the Notification Area applet, select your network from the list, enter the credentials, and you're done. The rest of the page is for manually setting up all the wpa stuff that Network Manager handles for you.

That's not so bad then, but (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584864)

Does that mean it uses apt-get to download and install the network manager?

Re:That's not so bad then, but (1)

pyros (61399) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585338)

Does that mean it uses apt-get to download and install the network manager?

yeah. It's not installed by default because it doesn't work in 100% of the conceivable situations (static IP, you want a network connection before you log in). I think it should be installed but disabled by default, but I'm not in charge.

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

aodash (776554) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584852)

come on, how hard is it? If wireless is working, it is as simple as: apt-get install wpasupplicant vim wpa_supplicant.conf

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

PygmySurfer (442860) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585432)

That's handy. Too bad I can't get online because my network requires WPA!

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

MicrosoftRepresentit (1002310) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584910)

And what about audio? I was tinkering with this earlier today and was soooo close to deciding that it was better then Windows Vista RC2, when the audio suddenly cut out! So I went looking around the system and read the logs, and I saw the following entry:

Oct 25 20:42:43 msrep-dev01 kernel[0]: Jazz-pipes have become clogged

Now I'm the first to admit I'm not a Linux power user but I assume that this is the cause? I heard sometimes the kernel gets garbage collected, is this a symptom?

Re:Does it support WPA-PSK out of the box? (1)

miro f (944325) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585228)

sudo apt-get install network-manager-gnome doesn't seem too daunting to me

if you don't like the command line you can even install it through synaptic

Can I use my digital camera with it ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583974)

Because I haven't been able to with linux.

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584082)

Most distros have had great support for cameras for some time now. I'm quite sure the entire Fedora series has had "out of the box" support for cameras. I know Ubuntu has, from the start. I'm quite sure that Debian has had it for some time too. Suse has had it since 9.2? or was it only in 10?

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (1)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585116)

I'm quite sure the entire Fedora series has had "out of the box" support for cameras. I know Ubuntu has, from the start.

Unfortunately, all I've see so far, both from Fedora and Ubuntu, is "read-only" support for cameras. You can plug the camera in and transfer your pictures from the camera to the computer, but you can't transfer pictures from the computer to the camera (which is very useful when trying to fill up a flash card to bring to the store to have them printed). I never figured which device to mount to get write access to my camera.

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585144)

gphoto's been in RH since version 6 at least.

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584100)

Heh, thats a good one. You may want to leave the make/model next time. Better yet, ask somewhere where it would be appropriate.

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (1)

Robot Randy (982296) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584810)

Since WinXP and OSX do not need drivers for most USB cameras, I was guessing that the parent was asking about similar compatibility. (Access like a USB drive for most cameras...)

Yes more info might have been helpful, but not absolutely needed for a general answer.

Re:Can I use my digital camera with it ? (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585222)

And what camera might that be?

My Olympus Camedia has worked with Linux fine since the day I bought it 3(?) years ago. It's one of those that just uses the standard USB mass-storage drivers, so you plug it in and it appears as a drive. Those will work on any modern OS with no trouble.

Presumably yours needs a specific driver, which means that no one will be able to answer your question without knowing which camera you have.

Reviewer = idiot (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583992)

For example he complained that a package conflict he saw "totem-xine conflicts with totem." was an example of the distro being rushed out... He missed the fact that totem-xine is a non-free package (patented codecs) distributed by a third party repository which he manually configured.

In other words, a new linux distro has failed to prevent someone with the root password from shooting themselves in the foot. NEWS AT 11.

Totem-xine? wtf? (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584624)

xmms-mp3 and things like that make sense to me. But in my experience (on FC5) totem and xine fight like three-year-olds. What does the totem-xine package do?

Re:Totem-xine? wtf? (3, Funny)

forrestt (267374) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584896)

Fights like a schizophrenic 3 year old.

Re:Totem-xine? wtf? (1)

Nothinman (22765) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584930)

In Debian there's 2 packages, totem-gstreamer and totem-xine. Whichever you install determines which backend totem uses for it's codecs, I would assume that FC does something similar and that's why one conflicts with the other.

Re:Reviewer = idiot (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585048)

In other words, a new linux distro has failed to prevent someone with the root password from shooting themselves in the foot. NEWS AT 11

I'm freaking out, man! News at 11, news at 11. Everybody points to the news at 11, but where are they!? WHERE! I feel so desperately uninformed and news-deprived :(

running it now and... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16583996)

its pretty darn good. there's only the occational...[carrier lost]

Slashdotted Already (0, Offtopic)

jazman_777 (44742) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584042)

Even before the first post.

Re:Slashdotted Already (1)

SoapDish (971052) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584080)

It's almost like people are planning to RTFA before posting, but this is /. so there must be some other explanation.

Re:Slashdotted Already (2, Funny)

jazman_777 (44742) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584124)

Maybe the hamster powering his server is taking a break.

Re:Slashdotted Already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16585010)

nahh, its just running the new realease

Re:Slashdotted Already (1)

jwocky (900748) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584094)

Just like http://fedora.redhat.com/ [redhat.com]

is it just me or does it seem odd to have a "pretty thorough review" considering it's only been released for an hour?

Re:Slashdotted Already (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584214)

Would OSS software still be OSS if it's not updated every 10 minutes? In the typical lifespan of OSS software, Fedora 6 is already middle aged, it seems.

What ever happened to all of the older, wiser Unix geeks that would install a piece of software, and run it indefinitely, so long as it worked?

Lawn (1)

benhocking (724439) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584580)

You kids get off my lawn!

Re:Slashdotted Already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584862)

...As opposed to certain OS vendors who introduce new software no more than twice per decade, but then use their update mechanism to modify the EULA and copy-protection schemes every 10 minutes.

Re:Slashdotted Already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584856)

That URL no longer has the most up-to-date information. Please use a URL from the community site fedoraproject.org like http://fedoraproject.org/static-tmp/ [fedoraproject.org] .

That is a static page that should load faster than the usual wiki page.

Setting up the Nvidia drivers (4, Funny)

wsanders (114993) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584050)

>> Setting up the Nvidia drivers was way more problematic than it should have been

And yea verily as the sun shall rise in the East and the Pope is Catholic and bears crap in the woods, yea verily the setting up of the Nvidia drivers shall be way more problematic than it should be, thus is it written, amen.

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584246)

Ha, true true.

Meanwhile, in the world of the normals, Vista RC2 somehow or another figures out how to run my NVidia card without any such problematics.

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1)

businessnerd (1009815) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584390)

Actually, it seems the sun rises in the west for Ubuntu. I was a Fedora fan boy being my first linux distro ever was FC2. I used Fedora personally up to FC4, put FC5 on the gf's laptop without a problem (any points for converting her?) but when I put it on my desktop, I had some weird sound issues never before encountered. Granted, sound was the biggest pain in my ass out of all of the new to linux issues back in FC2, but FC4 seemed better than windows in that respect. This frustration led me to give Ubuntu a whirl. Sound issue and overall the OS seemed more complete and polished and more to what a former windows user might expect out of their operating system. Back on topic, Nvidia drivers. I used to go through the hassle of downloading the drivers from nvidia and running the script in runlevel 3 every time I upgraded my kernel. In ubuntu, not only is software updates a lot faster, more stable and in the end easier, but I can choose to use a kernel module that includes nvidia as well as atheros drivers (wireless) that automatically updates and compiles with the new kernels. The only thing I don't like about using Ubuntu, is that it is so easy and user friendly, that I feel like a pussy using it. There is just something about working from a commmand line and manually doing a lot of the maintnance and setup that the inner geek craves. I'm tempted to give the GF Ubuntu and try out FC6 (or maybe something like gentoo or slackware for a true uber-geek OS experienc).

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (2, Insightful)

coaxial (28297) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585264)

There is just something about working from a commmand line and manually doing a lot of the maintnance and setup that the inner geek craves.

I understand how you want to Know every bit of your machine, but frankly there's better things to do. Like actually working on cool stuff. These problems are solved. Don't go and reinvent the wheel and spend your time fiddling with trival things. There aren't enough hours in the day to spend so many doing that.

I'm tempted to give the GF Ubuntu and try out FC6 (or maybe something like gentoo or slackware for a true uber-geek OS experienc).

I used slackware Back in The Day(tm), I can't comment on it 10 years later. Gentoo always struck me as the ultimate loser distro. You know like the losers who stick neonlights underneath their honda civic and then proudly display kanji stickers on their rearwindow upside down, because kanji is k3w1, but they don't know what it is. There's no point to compiling everything from source. All you're doing is putting your machine in an usuable state for a long time. The benfit is nonexistent and negligable at best. Unless you're installing on ancient or esoteric hardware what's the point. There's no real difference between your P4 and some other guy's P4, or hell even a third guy's athlon.

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1)

Misch (158807) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585318)

put FC5 on the gf's laptop without a problem (any points for converting her?)

Can I get points for coveting her?

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1)

freg (859413) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584462)

I realize it makes people warm and fuzzy inside to use an OS that is entirely free and open, but this Nvidia driver installation has been annoying me for the last 8 installs of Linux I've tried. Could some enthusiastic young hacker out there make this a little easier for us older less initiated folks. How many of us are running nvidia graphics cards again? like 80%? I actually tried a version of Kororaa a while back that worked with Nvidia right out of the box, only to find out later it was a terrible mistake on their part and was quickly "resolved" and the nvidia drivers removed. Someone help us...

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1)

markdavis (642305) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584786)

With the non-free version of Mandriva, NVidia is always setup automatically and works out of the box with no effort. I believe that is also true of the non-free SuSe. The problem is that free distros (Free Mandriva, *buntu, Fedora, Debian, etc) can't do that, because the redistribution is not allowed that way by NVidia (unless I am wrong on that, and someone would care to elaborate). However... it is entirely possible that free distros can arrange a "click on this" and it is downloaded on the fly and configured correctly. And, to point out an error in the article... Yes, Mandriva 2007 will also set up and use AIGLX, BUT NOT FOR NVIDIA CARDS, because the stable driver does not support all the necessary AIGLX extentions necessary to fully run compiz. The beta version on the website does, but I have yet to get it to install cleanly and work with compiz... it is just a little too soon to expect it all to "just work" with compiz.

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585324)

Well, since TFA is slashdotted, I can't tell whether it mentioned this already. There is a well-known third-party yum repository at rpm.livna.org [livna.org] which provides packages for those highly-demanded but legally/philosophically rejected packages, like MP3 and NTFS support (patents), NVIDIA Drivers (closed-source), etc.

With livna added to your yum config, installing the drivers is as easy as yum install kmod-nvidia and restarting X.

Of course, you might want to wait until the root exploit in NVIDIA's driver [slashdot.org] is fixed in a non-beta release.

Re:Setting up the Nvidia drivers (1, Offtopic)

yo_tuco (795102) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585388)

"...bears crap in the woods..."

Uh, Polar Bears don't.

Talk About Irony... (1)

Einstein_101 (966708) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584074)

The problems I encountered with Fedora Core 6 were not huge issues, but there were enough smaller bugs that made me wonder if this release was rushed.
Then the author goes on to the statement:

Since their primary "business" (they are a none profit group) is to write software, particularly stabile operating systems it certainly doesn't reflect postively on them to have their website go down on the day of release.

You mean "rushed" like being in too much of a hurry to proof read your article? It was in the second paragraph sheesh...

Re:Talk About Irony... (1)

SoapDish (971052) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584296)

That has to be the first time I've seen someone say Fedora is supposed to "write software, particularly stabile [sic] operating systems."

I've always been told, particularly on slashdot that Fedora is essentially a Beta-test for RHEL.

PS. I use FC5 right now, and can't wait until I have time to install FC6.

Re:Talk About Irony... (1)

Who235 (959706) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585236)

I have to agree that the article is poorly written, but it's nothing a good proofreading would be able to fix. The entire thing reads like a fourteen-year old wrote it in five minutes.

From the embarrassing lack of agreement between nouns and their modifiers all the way to "on accident" and the previously mentioned spelling errors, this review was garbage.

I'm not trying to be a dick here, but sometimes I think it's important to point out the more obvious pitfalls of "user generated content".

Why linux sucks on desktops.... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584102)

1. Fonts. Linux weenies delude themselves that fonts under Xorg are just fine nowadays. BZZT. Compared to XP with cleartype the quality of font rendering in Xorg is laughable. Importing the XP fonts into a Linux system makes no difference, because they just do not look as good.

2. Klunky UI's. Both Gnome and KDE are horrible in terms of wasting screen space. Also the UI's just don#t look as clean and polished as XP. I see rough edges on widgets, and various other things that makes UI's look cheap.

If they ever get resolved then things might be different.

Feeding the Troll (3, Insightful)

Einstein_101 (966708) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584258)

1) Actually, I run KDE with nVidia drivers installed, and I made it a point to ask people how the fonts look (since it used to be such a big issue with Linux newbies. When asked, numerous Windows users either said they looked nice, or they looked better than Windows.

2) KDE can easily be changed to take us less screen space. If you ever decide to give up your career in trolling and start using computer software, I recommend you try DesktopBSD [desktopbsd.net] . By default, they size down the KDE taskbar, making it the same size as Windows XP.

If they ever get things "resolved", then people like you would be crying that they're trying to look too much like Windows.

Re:Feeding the Troll (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584338)

Ok smartass, show me a screenshot of a linux setup with fonts that look as good as can bwe acheived on Windows XP.

Re:Feeding the Troll (1)

Einstein_101 (966708) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584468)

You can't be serous.

First of all, "good" or "better" is strictly a matter of preference. I personally prefer the fonts in Linux, but maybe you're looking for some kind of font eye candy that I've never noticed. Most recent distros have good fonts, and SUSE has had them for years now. All distros are capable of having beautiful fonts, some of them just don't configure the settings by default.

Secondly, If you've used a computer for more than 5 minutes, you know screenshots mean absolutely dick. It isn't my job to convince idiots like you. How about you be an adult and try something out for yourself before you go off broadcasting your uninformed opinions.

Re:Feeding the Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584524)

Post the screenshot in a lossless format and it is a perfectly resonable metric for judging font output.

Re:Feeding the Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16585106)

Post the screenshot in a lossless format and it is a perfectly resonable metric for judging font output.

Actually, not without qualification. Lately systems are using sub-pixel rendering techniques optimized for your type of display. CRT vs. LCD, primarily, and I think there are a very varieties of LCD display. So a screenshot of a system A running with monitor type A won't necessarily look right on monitor type B, and that doesn't mean anything's wrong with system A.

Re:Feeding the Troll (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584492)

No problem just post me your email address I and will send you one.

Re:Feeding the Troll (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584566)

As least with RH/FC systems, when Bitstream donated fonts in 2003, they have been just as good as any Mac where as Mac > Windows with regards to fonts.
Before that, they were horrible.

http://linux.softpedia.com/screenshots//Fedora-Cor e_2.jpg [softpedia.com]

Re:Feeding the Troll (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585026)

I hope the text in that screenshot is not meant to be an example of how text is supposed to look. The letter spacing is all wrong. I don't know what you've done to achieve that, since FreeType is generally pretty good even if you compile it without hinting support (to avoid Apple's patent, if you live somewhere where it is valid).

The anti-aliasing on the larger fonts was okay; about the standard I've seen with Windows, but not as good as the sub-pixel AA enabled by default with OS X.

Re:Feeding the Troll (0, Troll)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585032)

How about not using a taskbar in the first place? Why do people accept these obvious clones of Microsoft interfaces?

Not X's fault... The font hinting VM is patented. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584320)

See http://freetype.sourceforge.net/patents.html [sourceforge.net]

Apple has several patents covering the bytecode interpreter for executing the hinting programs included in most truetype fonts. The freetype library has support for this patented tech, but it is disabled by default in many Linux distributions for obvious legal reasons.

It would be possible to invent a new hinting system, but such a system would be incompatible with existing fonts.

Thus the patent system has made sure that it is impossible for someone without a large patent portfolio (for mutually insured destruction style protection) to have rendering of TTF equal to that of Windows and MacOS.

It's quite possible to recompile freetype with the patented software enabled and many people do... However, if you do so you'll probably run into a number of other bugs (pango rendering, etc) because most of the rest of your system is not well tested against freetype with the full hinter vm enabled.

BTW- Freetype 2 includes a built in auto-hinting which is really impressive tech.. Most people will agree that it's often almost as good as hand hinting, and some (myself included) find it preferable to the hinting in many of the fonts and thus consider the patent issue fairly moot.

Re:Why linux sucks on desktops.... (5, Informative)

MobyTurbo (537363) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584446)

1. Fonts. Linux weenies delude themselves that fonts under Xorg are just fine nowadays. BZZT. Compared to XP with cleartype the quality of font rendering in Xorg is laughable. Importing the XP fonts into a Linux system makes no difference, because they just do not look as good.
That's because the freetype library cannot use patented algorithms that are used by Windows and Macs. Recompile your freetype library with the patented stuff enabled and you can get it to look identical. Incidentally, I don't find the usual auto-hinting that is in most distros all that bad - so that's what I use nowadays. The Deja fonts now included with many distros are excellent actually, I like them better than MS core fonts.

2. Klunky UI's. Both Gnome and KDE are horrible in terms of wasting screen space. Also the UI's just don#t look as clean and polished as XP. I see rough edges on widgets, and various other things that makes UI's look cheap.
That problem is because you are using environments that imitate Windows, if you want something that doesn't use much screen space by default the *box wms such as fluxbox (I don't use 'em, but you might like them) use much less screen space than Windows and Mac, and actually look pretty nice. Another you might want to look at is fvwm-crystal, that's the coolest theme I've seen for fvwm - and it doesn't at all look like plain fvwm, transparency and decent performance at the same time!

If they ever get resolved then things might be different.
I have the feeling that nothing will satisfy you except for bug-compatible Windows emulation, and even then you'd find something to critique.

Why ACs suck on dicktops.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584472)

Because they can't fit the whole thing in their prissy little mouths, that's why.

Fonts (1)

Rob Simpson (533360) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584990)

1. Fonts. Linux weenies delude themselves that fonts under Xorg are just fine nowadays. BZZT. Compared to XP with cleartype the quality of font rendering in Xorg is laughable. Importing the XP fonts into a Linux system makes no difference, because they just do not look as good.

You're joking, right? Cleartype looks blurry and awful. I've yet to see a Linux distro that has fonts as painful to read as "Cleartype", just as I've yet to see a Linux distro with fonts as sharp and clear as the standard Windows font smoothing/fonts out of the box. This tutorial helped me enormously, though. [opensuse.org]

Have they fixed this issue yet? (-1, Troll)

The_Abortionist (930834) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584164)

There is a nasty bug in Linux that makes the computer reboot every 49.7 days. The worst part is that this bug has been around for more than 10 years...

What good is a million eyes looking at the code if they are attached to half a million idiots?

I guess most people don't realize this because they need to recompile their kernel every other week, or they use Linux only to boot into illegal copies of Windows.

Re:Have they fixed this issue yet? (2, Funny)

QuesarVII (904243) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584316)

I'd say so...

warden root # uptime
16:00:49 up 532 days

Re:Have they fixed this issue yet? (1)

Twanfox (185252) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584464)

Don't know what the hell you're talking about. I've never had this issue and I've been running Linux systems of various flavors (RH v5.0+, Fedora Core 4+ primarily) for years now. I have not had these 'scheduled reboots' at 49.7 days on any of these systems, and up until the latest ones, these have been shitty systems or substandard by most comparisons, especially for the duty of a file server and windows domain controller. The only reason my system comes down is for power outages, and that's only because I cannot afford a UPS.

Ditto for Debian (1)

benhocking (724439) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584702)

We have a whole slew of Debian PCs in our lab, and for the most part they run fine. One of our newer clusters just experienced some weirdness, but we tracked that down to my jobs (I'm creating hordes of minions in an attempt to develop artificial consciousness so that they'll write my dissertation for me) overheating the CPU. The solution, of course, was to edit the BIOS to raise the maximum allowable operating temperature... :)

P.S.: It wasn't my detective work that figured out the problem. Thanks Andrew!

Re:Have they fixed this issue yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584706)

You've been trolled [microsoft.com] .

Re:Have they fixed this issue yet? (5, Informative)

tyler_larson (558763) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585190)

There is a nasty bug in Linux that makes the computer reboot every 49.7 days. The worst part is that this bug has been around for more than 10 years...

You're think about Windows 95 and NT, not Linux. Windows drivers used the number of milliseconds since boot as the primary timekeeping mechanism. When that wrapped around to zero, some drivers crashed. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/216641 [microsoft.com] for more information on this bug.

Even though all of Microsoft's own code now properly handles the 49-day boundary, third-party code is still a problem on Windows systems. Most programs still use GetTickCount() as their primary sub-second timer, which returns that 32-bit milliseconds since boot. In fact, it was this very thing that shut down the LA air traffic control center some months back.

This has never been a problem with Linux. Linux doesn't use milliseconds as any internal time representation. Instead, it uses either the timeval structure, or jiffies. Jiffies are 100ths of a second, whereas a timeval is a set of two numbers representing both seconds since 1970, and nanoseconds in the current second.

Note that jiffies (in 32-bits) wrap around after 497 days, which used to cause a benign bug where the uptime display would wrap around to zero after that time period. No crash, though.

What good is a million eyes looking at the code if they are attached to half a million idiots?

I dare say they're not the idiots, here, sir.

/. Effect (1)

wolf369T (951405) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584228)

Ouch... The reviewer's site has been badly slashdoted...

I don't suppose... (1)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584310)

Anyone cached a copy before it died a slashdot death?

I had the same experience (0, Troll)

williambbertram (958094) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584322)

After spending days fixing broken crap and searching for missing .rpm's Red Hat Core was fantastic! Except for the fact that it didn't detect my wireless LAN adapter, but hey, a little bit of fantastic goes a long way right?

Fortunately Ubuntu practically installs itself and works without any fixing, so I was able to roll back to a working OS in about 30 minutes.

Re:I had the same experience (1)

chill (34294) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584442)

That's funny, because Ubuntu/Kubuntu don't support WPA-PSK out of the box, so I had no luck getting it installed and connected to my home network.

Fortunately, it was a LiveCD and I could roll back to a stable, working system just by ejecting the CD and throwing it in the trash. Maybe next upgrade cycle Ubuntu will be usable...

Re:I had the same experience (1)

williambbertram (958094) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584684)

You'll probably be getting a thank you card from your garbage man any day now.

Re:I had the same experience (1)

postmortem (906676) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584762)

Yes, it works well for installing any package that are part of repository. Package not on repository? Tough luck - no native rpm support, no RPM builds for Ubuntu. Good example of this case is Acrobat Reader, or IBM Java RPMs.

So yes, Ubuntu might work well in many cases, but it doesn't work well in all.

Re:I had the same experience (1)

williambbertram (958094) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584912)

Yes some work better than others. I have tried deploying Red Hat Core and Ubuntu to non-tech users. Ubuntu has worked out much better for them and me. The Java and Acrobat can be easily installed with "Easy Ubuntu" ( http://easyubuntu.freecontrib.org/ [freecontrib.org] ). No rpm needed. I do apologize if that came off as a flame. I agree that Red Hat Core is an excellent distro.

Reviewer Idiot II (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#16584576)

Wow, the 3D stuff gave good visuals dude. That is what makes an awesome distro man.

Go back to Windows or even the f'in Mac.

Posting this from FC6 (3, Informative)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584586)

Looks pretty nice; the startup screens are whizzy, Rails and PostgreSQL and Eclipse run fine, everything seems snappy. Besides:

$ uname -r
2.6.18-1.2798.fc6PAE

w00t!

Re:Posting this from FC6 (2, Informative)

Erwos (553607) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584690)

I'm also running FC6 on my home print/storage server. I wish I had something to cry joyously about in this area, but it's more of the same - which I think is a good thing. My firewire RAID transferred flawlessly over, and once I figured out that, yet again, SELinux and Samba don't play nicely together, sharing was a breeze. I keep wishing I had one of those fancy VT/Pacifica chips so that I could experiment with the virtualization tools, which look particularly nice. I never really understood the hate some people have towards Fedora - other than a little bit of oddness with the graphical installer, it configured perfectly.

I'm sure I'll have something much more interesting to say once I've had a chance to put it on my laptop, which is primary "user machine".

Article Summary (2, Funny)

StormReaver (59959) | more than 8 years ago | (#16584732)

I can give you the article summary, and you can save yourself a click:

"Error establishing a database connection"

FC6 -- slowest torrent ever? (1)

schwaang (667808) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585000)

For the FC6 DVD, I've been getting about 20KB/s download with only very occasional short spikes of 50-100. Over the course of 8 hours, my sharing ratio varies between .5 and 1.0. So far this is the slowest major distro torrent ever.

I don't know the cause, but I kinda wish they had a separate trackers for the US, Europe, and Asia at least.

Re:FC6 -- slowest torrent ever? (1)

Kelson (129150) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585402)

Odd -- I was getting ~70KB/s when I left for work this morning. This was on the i386 DVD torrent.

Almost Done Downloading (1)

NoCorR (929702) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585092)

I'm almost done downloading the FC6 DVD ISO. I decided to download it when the yum command stopped working on my FC4 installation. I figured it was because of the Fc6 release yesterday. Reading that their entire site went down the day of the release doesn't make me feel any better about upgrading. But it has to be done. XGL ftw. :D

Wow, not a front page item?! (1)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 8 years ago | (#16585202)

What were the editors thinking?! I'm flabbergasted that this didn't make the front page. It certainly deserved the space more than the gaim article.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?