Fedora Core 2: Making it Work

Joe Barr writes "Linux.com is running a followup article by Ken Barber to his initial review of Fedora 2. This time he explains how to tame the GNOME and Fedora 2 problems he noted the first time around and get them both in working shape.."

Comments

Very Cool

[XeRXeS-TCN]

That is the best way to do things imo. Don't just complain about the problems that you encounter, like it's some sort of major flaw in the system, which discourages people from adopting it. Instead, work through your problems, and let people know that there are ways around the issues that you encountered. Every system has problems, but it is reassuring to people to know that many/most/all can be fixed, and that there are resources available to help.

Kudos to Ken Barber for writing this follow-up.

Re:Very Cool

[mccalli]

Instead, work through your problems, and let people know that there are ways around the issues that you encountered.

Most particularly, make sure you let the maintainers of the relevant package know your problems and also the solution if you found one. That way, the next iteration of the system might well have these problems sorted.

I've been taking that approach in a number of projects I submit feedback to, not all of them open source, and it seems to work well.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Very Cool

[the_crowbar]

Do you honestly expect Joe Sixpack to install Linux? I think the problem is not that we need to make Linux installable by Joe Sixpack, but rather that we need to get OEMs to install and configure Linux.

Have you ever met a "normal" user who could install Windows? Most installs of Windows are done by OEMs or from a specially tailored OEM install disc. If users had a special install of Linux that included support for all of their OEM hardware do you think they could install it?

I think a more widespread adoption of Linux will start with business. You will have IT depts that start using it and eventually replacing Windows with it. Once the more technically inclined start to use it at work they try it at home. There will be problems, but who cares? As more people start to use Linux the answers to their questions will be posted to forums, discussion sites, usenet, whatever. The same way that Windows help has become so common.

One last question: Why is there an impression that Windows is easier to install/fix than Linux?

My opinion is that most users know how to speak "Microsoft". i.e. They know how to formulate questions that are worded in the common language used to describe the Windows environment. Back when I worked on a HelpDesk and fixed 100% Windows machines I was able to quickly locate answers to my technical questions. Forward 6 years to today: I still occassionally fix Windows PCs, but the majority of my work is on Linux. I can fix problems in Linux because I know how to speak the "Linux" language. I can do a Google search and get productive results because I know how to search for Linux specific answers.(I know Google has a Linux Specific search, but s/Linux/MacOS X/ and the point still stands)

In conclusion, I don't think we need to make Linux so easy to install that Joe Sixpack can do it (he can already _use_ Linux), I think we need business to start adopting it. The masses will follow.

Cheers,
the_crowbar

Re:Very Cool

[geomon]

Have you ever met a "normal" user who could install Windows?

Nope. As the parent poster points out, most users get their OS installed at the time of purchase. Less than 1% of the non-research staff at a national laboratory in the US installs their own OS.

That means that probably a smaller percentage than that install their own OS at home. I get quite a few requests from colleagues to help rebuild their home machines (and I get nice presents at Xmas time as a result).

Getting it to work?

[blanks]

"This time he explains how to tame the GNOME and Fedora 2 problems he noted the first time around and get them both in working shape"

Am I the only person who dosen't want to "get them working" and just want them to work out of the box?

Re:Getting it to work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Notice, that "getting it working" primarily were about selecting his preferences instead of the system preferences. KDE instead of Gnome, "Windows explorer"-mode instead of spatial.

In this sense, Windows doesn't "work out of the box" for me either. It needs just as much selecting my preferences instead of the system ones as any Linux system does. Like changing the stupid explorer.exe to open new windows when I double-click on an icon, instead of overwriting the current one. Like changing the colors, damn I hate that blue screen.

Re:Getting it to work?

[FlyGirl]

About the only company that does this is Apple

Yeah, but to be fair, it's comparitivly easy to get software to work out of the box when you pretty much control all the hardware as well.

Not to say that that isn't a valid business plan, just wanted to be sure we're not attacking the fedora people compared to the apple people for failing to succeed at what is clearly a more difficult job.

Re:Getting it to work?

[jav1231]

Especially since Fedora is the bone thrown to those of us who used to pay RH for a desktop distro! So much for being "behind the product." But then again, it's not really "product" is it? So who really cares if it works? RH calls it "bleeding edge" obfiscating them of any real liability for a working distro. "Hey, we told you it's development. Want a working distro? Buy our Enterprise-because-the-little-end-user-doesn't-hav e-deep-enough-pockets Workstation Edition."

The problem being?

[lachlan76]

So....If I understand the article right, to make Fedora Core 2 good, you need to install packages, change some gettings for gnome, and adjust the sound properties? If you use Linux, you have to expect that you'll need to add programs, and change settings, just the same as windows.

On the topic of out of the box

[emo boy]

I would like a partition manager built-in like Mandrake and Suse. Is that too much to ask?

Re:wow, quite a statement

[ajs]

Indeed, but I'm starting to see the wisdom in this. Keeping KDE around is good for the user, but it's also good for Gnome. KDE came first, and from day one has always pushed Gnome to BE and to BE BETTER.

I like Gnome a lot, but I really hope KDE sticks around for the forseeable future.

Re:wow, quite a statement

[YankeeInExile]

I think it was a pretty low-level barb at the GNOME community from someone who prefers the "other" religion. And his quote, "I find myself far more productive in KDE than in GNOME these days." makes me think that he might actually move back and forth between the two camps based on the current feature-to-wart ratio.

Neither GNOME nor KDE are perfect. You pick the featureset that coincides with your personal philosophy or needs or free help-desk fount.

For years, when Unix newbies asked me, "What should I run, *BSD, or Linux, or ... " I would always answer the same: "Find a nearby knowledgable friend, and run what s/he is running. The ability to get advice from someone who has done it is orders of magnitude more significant than the fine details of OS internals.

Re:Relativity

[transient]

in an organization that will not pay for disk imaging software or an in-house Windows Update server

His complaints should be directed at this organization, not Windows. Switching operating systems will not fix their support tech's apparent inability to present a cogent argument to his budget people.

Ill give you another problem

[TheRealMindChild]

... how about Fdora Core 2's boot disk image is 6MB... how the HELL am I going to fit that on a floppy?

I bet I pulled in a few "Floppy's are useless" goers... I have a couple of PPro machines that neither have USB or can boot from a cdrom. Thanks.

Re:Ill give you another problem

[ThisNukes4u]

The solution is slackware.

Re:MP3 support

[Extrema Type]

If I am not mistaken, OGG support is default on installation. RedHat isn't afrait of the RIIA, only of the MP3 patent holders.

Desktop readyness?

[IamTheRealMike]

More like, how to get FC2 to the state this particular individual prefers it. Certainly some of the stuff in there is little more than personal taste and is definitely not a reflection on Fedora or Gnome.

I quite like spatial mode, for instance. I actually use graphical file managers now. Before with non-spatial Nautilus and Konqueror, I thought they were cute but never actually used them. The command line was far faster.

Re:Desktop readyness?

[nonmaskable]

I quite like spatial mode

Me too - the first thing from Gnome that I've ever liked. It's even better than my memories of the MacOS 8.6 finder (Spatial Nautilus' inspiration, I assume).

From what I have read elsewhere and this article, I suspect that anyone imprinted on the MS explorer browser-style navigation will hate it and find it hard to use with the deeply nested directory structure they are used to.

review? what review?

[doktorstop]

First and foremost, I am totally in favour of review, comparisons or anything that gives an insight into the different distros, compares them of just plain discusses them. With this said, does any half-page with a couple of screenshots deserves to be called a "review" and being widely advertized on Slashdot? Dont's think so. The author took the time to install FC" (great!), had a couple of problems (dont we all), did not even test anything else than Gnome and made this into an article? Now give me a break! Mentionning NVidia drivers was nice... a couple of allegetly missing programs - great! And ... that is all? I teach 7,8 and 9 grade students... any of them could write something like that, and to be fair, they wouldnt get more than "good" for this. For an article in LinuxMagasine.. this is a disgrace. "This time he explains how to tame the GNOME and Fedora 2 problems he noted the first time around and get them both in working shape.." (from Slashdot)... where are the explanations? Ask ten "Joe SixPacks" to install FC2 and run it for half-a-day.. you will get a noce combination of non professional users opinions... summarise the discussion going on on FC2 newsgroups.. you will get a long list of problems, complains and solutions.. but, for God's sake, don't just post a page of non-interesting, plain stupid "experiences" and call this a review! "

I have one beef with big distros these days

[zaqattack911]

It would be really nice if all of these 5cd linux distros agreed to make sure a "minimum" but useful install can be had if one were to only download the first bootable CD.

I'm not interested in downloading every single linux app that was ever conceived. Christ... look at knoppix! Pretty much has everything I need, on one CD. If I were to install linux for the purpose of being a production server, i'd be sure to download and compile everything from source anyways.

Love,
Zaq

What? You Were Expecting It to Work?

[jcwinnie]

There was a recent burst of bug reports about the Gnome Control Center under Fedora Core 2, to include this statement, which is absent from the Front Page of fedora.redhat.com:

Fedora Core is intended for enthusiasts, hobbiests and developers, and should not ever be used in a production environment. If you require a solution which is intended for production environment I recommend contacting Red Hat sales to inquire about Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and a Red Hat Network subscription. Fedora Core is a development platform which is bleeding edge, and tracks technology advances. It is not ever intended to be used in business production environments.

Would it be more honest to include the above disclaimer at the Fedora site and when announcing any distribution of Fedora Core?

Re:MP3 support

[Pros_n_Cons]

I understand the reasons they do it

Then why complain? Windows users up until windowsXP (or was it 2k?) had to actually get on the internet and get winzip. And to this day people still have to download software they want like codecs! oh the humanity! Making poor users type words in search engines. I would rather have users jump though the hoop of typing yum install xmms-mp3 than one day read the slashdot thread "fedora has been sued by company who made recent deal with MS".
For all the hundreds of applications Fedora comes with by default that MS doesn't provide by default can't we allow them to not include about 4 or 5 things?

Re:Relativity

[slash-tard]

Anyone can manage a network poorly.

The in house windows update server should be free. Microsoft doesnt charge for it, its not very resource intensive and works pretty well.

Disk Imaging is not just a Windows problem, regarless of OS I would want a standard image in any environment I worked in.

MS Office can easily be scripted to install off of a network share.

Printer drivers should be setup on the print server, then the client just selects the server and printer and they are set.

Windows has a lot of flaws but bashing it for this poor management on these simple problems is stupid. It would be like someone bashing linux because you couldnt script changes to multiple machines (duh, shell script).

Not all windows admins are cram school dummies, just like not all linux admins are leet hackers who know everything.

Sucky review

[Brian Kendig]

Man, what a sucky review of FC2.

First off, his original review of it links to a "scathing criticism of Gnome 2.6" which says that Gnome 2.6 blows because:

• it opens folders into new windows, instead of reusing the current window
  
• there's no way to change individual colors in desktop themes

... and that's it. Two pages of a "scathing criticism" of Gnome 2.6, and that's the best the author could come up with.

Then the FC2 review says that FC2's "admirable qualities cannot save it from its congenital defects." What defects? Well, he doesn't like a bug in the 2.6 kernel's ALSA drivers, a bug in OpenOffice.org 1.1.1, the fact that Gimp 2.0 is missing color management... hey wait, these are all complaints about the open-source software that's included with FC2. Where are the complaints specific to FC2? He doesn't have any.

Then I'm amused that his latest article says that to "fix" FC2, install KDE instead of Gnome. Gee, that sounds more like Gnome-bashing than a constructive review...

Guess what? I *like* FC2. It's much more up-to-date than other Linux distros like SuSE, and package management (especially with the automatic updater) is much easier than with other distros such as Debian (for whom "stable" is ancient, "testing" is fairly outdated, and "unstable" sometimes means "not backwards-compatible with the old version"). I want to be able to run the latest code without fears of hosing my system. Fedora Core lets me.

And I like Gnome, too. It has a much more professional look than KDE, and its settings are much more streamlined as well. KDE suffers from feature bloat and an overabundance of options to configure even the most trivial aspects of the user interface. I don't want to be able to tweak everything; I want to be given an interface which looks sharp without *requiring* me to tweak anything.