Re:Abrupt....
by
__aaclcg7560
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No... The story title and summary are redundant. A better title and summary would be:
The Fedora Core 5 Install Experience
A detailed image gallery walks the reader through.
Now that's concise, especially if you leave the link out.:P
Full Text, In case of Slashdotting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Today saw the release of the latest and greatest version of the Lunix
operating system, Lunix Fedora Core 5. Although "alternative" operating
systems are not usually of interest to ZDNet's readership, who prefer to
trust user-friendly commercial software, this release is noteworthy. For the
release of Lunix Fedora Core 5, aggressively timed to coincide with the UK
launch of Microsoft's much vaunted X Box, marks the start of the final
battle for domination of the computer industry. Make no mistake, the next
few months will either see Microsoft tighten its stranglehold on the
marketplace or will be a coming of age for the upstart Lunix operating
system.
Considering the enormous significance of this release, we at ZDNet are
proud to bring you the first ever review of Lunix Fedora Core 5.
The Lunix operating system was born in 1991 and was created by one man, a
Finnish student named Axl Torvalds. Since these humble beginnings, a
multi-million dollar industry has sprung up to exploit the commercial
potential of Lunix, but until recently Lunix has eluded mainstream
acceptance. However, due to the recent economic downturn together with
uncertainty over changes to Microsoft's pricing policy, Lunix is now being
touted as a serious contender to Microsoft Windows. While there are many
other alternatives to Windows, including BSD which is based on Sun's
server-grade Solaris operating system, none have commanded the same level of
media attention as Lunix.
Lunix Fedora Core is just the latest in a long line of quirkily christened
versions of Lunix. Previous versions of Lunix have been named Red Hat, Slack
Ware, Storm and Coral. In stark contrast to the mundane names such as 98, ME
or NT preferred by Microsoft, the crazy names of each Lunix release hint at
its renegade nature.
My foray into the world of Lunix began by downloading a "CD image" from the
Lunix web site. But don't worry, this isn't software piracy, it's perfectly
legal! Lunix is shareware, meaning that it can be freely redistributed
without fear of a visit by the Business Software Alliance. The free
availability of Lunix is a major reason for its popularity among
cash-strapped students, criminals and self-styled anti-capitalist
hackers.
Before installing new software, it is always advisable to read the
documentation. Unfortunately, an unpleasant surprise was in store for me in
the "required configuration" section of the manual. I was shocked to learn
that Lunix Fedora Core only runs on Pentium processors, meaning that my
hopes of testing the water with my old Gateway 486 were dashed. Furthermore,
a whopping 32 megabytes of memory are required to run Lunix! Although the
advocates of Lunix self-righteously boast the efficiency of their chosen
operating system and deride the "bloatware" produced by Microsoft, it
appears that their claims are blatantly incorrect. Although my humble 486
will happily run Windows 95, it seems that Lunix requires far more powerful,
and more expensive, computer hardware. Is this really a sign of a lean, mean
operating system? Of course not.
Sadly, not even being able to install Lunix is just the first of my many
complaints about Lunix. A brief perusal of the features of Lunix Fedora Core
reveals that Lunix is sorely lacking many crucial productivity applications.
For example, why isn't the industry standard web browser, Internet Explorer,
included with Lunix? Despite the best efforts of the experts at the Internet
Engineering Task Force to encourage adoption of the Internet Explorer
standard, the creators of Lunix seem to think that they know better. By
refusing to adhere to recognised standards, Lunix is simply undermining its
own credibility.
Similarly, almost all of the world's most popular and widely used software
is completely incompatible with Lunix! It may surprise you to learn that
your copy of Microsoft Office, Outlook Express or Lotus Notes will not work
under Lunix. Those who wish to use their computer for recreational purposes
are also out of luck, for almost all of the most popular
Re:Full Text, In case of Slashdotting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dude, I think ZDNet can handle the traffic.
Re:Full Text, In case of Slashdotting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dude, I think you have been trolled;)
Re:Full Text, In case of Slashdotting
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
(Score:0,Adequate)
Re:Full Text, In case of Slashdotting
by
dhasenan
·
· Score: 1
No matter; it's still amusing either way.
I was looking at the images...
by
dietrollemdefender
·
· Score: 2, Funny
and they seem like any RH/Fedora install.
What are we supposed to look for?
BTW, "The Fedora Core 5 Install Experience" sounds like a Fusion group's name. It probably work geat in Silicon Valley!
The ??? step *SOLVED*!
by
WedgeTalon
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Make a 32 page image gallery with ads on every page
???*POST TO SLASHDOT*
PROFFIT!
Re:The ??? step *SOLVED*!
by
MassOutput
·
· Score: 1
Is proffit anything like profit?
-- Somewhere in all of the brain farts, lies a rosy bouquet.
I've been running Fedora Core 5 x86 AMD 64 on my laptop since March 20th IIRC?
Looks good to me. I'm a little bummed they removed the right click option for terminal shell and it seems that whenever I do a view details of the boot process my video is hosed once the desktop comes up (ATI 200M).
The add/remove programs only seems to work when connected to the web.
Install was smooth and easy, better driver support than windows XP Pro 64-bit edition (thanks for nothing HP, broadcom, ATI & conexant).
Holy crap! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! Seriously. I wound up just tossing a terminal in my top bar and clicking on that, but I really missed my right click. Regards, Steve
What the hell kind of desktop environment requires the installation of a package just to make a simple change to the right-click menu?
One where they thought the MS Windows registry was a good thing to emulate - only you get to have one for every seperate user and you can't migrate it to a different machine. Gconf unfortunately still lurks at the heart of gnome way back from the days when it was a politically motivated project by people unfamiliar with *nix or the concept of a multiuser environment connected to a network. Eventually gconf will go away or the sabayon configuration project will solve most of the problems.
Various newbies will tell me that it isn't so and I suggest they try the following quick exercise. Attempt to copy the gpanel configuration from one user to another on the same host and attempt to change the appropriate gconf keys by gconf tools or by editing the configuration files.
Anyway, remember that a lot of window managers out there support the behaviour of gnome applications - you don't have to use the gnome desktop even if you want to use the gnome panel.
My Fedora Core 5 Install Experience.
by
Avillia
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Insert disc. Do full media check. Reburn Disc 3 due to corruption. Reboot. Insert disc. Do full media check. Install. Freeze at selecting time zone. Reboot. Select packages. Computer restarts at Disc 2. Reboot. Computer gets to the end, Disc 5, 99%, and gives corrupt file error. Will not allow you to recheck the file in case of a bad read. Take discs, smash, shred, and burn. Install Debian.
Word! My first successful Fedora Core install was with FC5, and only after much tweaking. Every time I've tried it before, Anaconda (the installer) has bollocksed up.
This time, I got it installed, and was impressed with what felt like a speed improvement (I'm guessing GCC 4.0 is to blame) but good lord, KDE. Ick.
I reinstalled Ubuntu the next day.
-- Software is like a goldfish - it'll grow to fit the size of it's bowl...
Have they taken care of the 'updatability' deal with their network based install yet? One of my biggest pet peeves with RH/Fedora and Mandwhatevertheycallitthisweek was when doing a net install, you installed from their static set of packages, _then_ updates were done. The needless redundancy of installing 200+ megs of packages, then having to install the updates to those packages seems a bit ridiculous, IMO. That's one of my biggest joys of doing a Debian install; you set up your sources, and the packages you install right then and there are the updated packages... no needless re-downloading of a couple hundred megs of packahges you just installed a few minutes earlier.
-- ...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
I had a simmilar one. -Download ISOs -Check md5sum -Burn ISOs -Run Media Check -Disk 1, Pass -Disk 2, Fail -Disk 3, Fail -Disk 4, Fail -Disk 5, Pass -Reburn Disk 2,3,4 -Run Media Check -Disk 2, Fail -Disk 3, Pass -Disk 4, Fail -Install Slackware -Get some tea to put on new collection of coasters
God, you two guys must be total fucktards when it comes to computers... You guys should both probably just go buy macs. Even then, I'd suggest you just lock your comps in the closet.
I am also confused as to why you installed Fedora and used KDE... and then went to Ubuntu... are you stupid? Yes, I think you are.
The real problem is with the media check. I swear sometimes you get media check failed not when the media is bad but when there's a problem with the check itself.
I used to get this all the time, and proceed with the install anyway. Never had a problem. Now I just skip the media check as an uneccessary waste of time.
Well, Anonymous Cornhole, you're right-- I was combining two installs in my head. FC5 did default to GNOME. It was when I tried out something else recently (I've since forgotten) that it defaulted to KDE and I was so terribly nonplussed.
FC5 just felt too overblown for my needs. And I've acclimatized myself to Ubuntu over the last couple of years, so it's gotten to where anything else feels a little foreign.
As for your general comments, I'll not dignify them.
-- Software is like a goldfish - it'll grow to fit the size of it's bowl...
It's just kind of arrogance, presumption of universal infinite bandwidth, that has finally consumed FC5 like so many other linux distros. FC4 could at least use its own distro CDs to resolve dependencies when adding RPMs post-install. FC5 can't do anything without contacting the mothership.
What the idiots have taken it upon themself to download is a guarded secret, but they have no problem with saturating a connection for hours on end, puking when the connection drops, or throwing away 10 hours of work and starting over.
This is the fncking USA! Damn elitist foreigners and their cheap DSL.
Have they taken care of the 'updatability' deal with their network based install yet?
They are working on it. In Fedora Core 5, much infrastructure work is in place since the installer now uses yum to install packages. What you ask for is planned for inclusion in FC6.
FC4 could at least use its own distro CDs to resolve dependencies when adding RPMs post-install. FC5 can't do anything without contacting the mothership.
This is because FC5 uses a brand-new graphical package management tool, Pirut, for this purpose. They are working to add this functionality to Pirut, and my guess is that it will be ready in time for FC6.
As a workaround, you can create a local repository with the contents of the CDs/DVD, and add it to the yum configuration.
I prefer Stanton Finley's RH/Fedora websites
by
rdoherty
·
· Score: 5, Informative
There's not much of a need for ZDNet's Fedora Core 5 install photos..
For all of my RH/Fedora installations, including Fedora Core 5 (over a month ago), I used Stanton Finley's site... His site is much more informative:
http://www.stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_5_instal lation_notes.html
The Fedora Core 5 Install Experience?
by
Quirk
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
uhm... no, this would be a representation of the FC5 install experience. The install experience would, you know, be the install experience. And how many/.ers need such an elementary introduction? It's nice that it's being done, maybe the FC community have taken notice of the Ubuntu user friendly experience and are trying to ease new users into a babystep by babystep install?
I couldn't shake Jimi Hendrix doing are you experienced as an interior sound track.:)
-- "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature." Cohen
It would have been a lot funnier had you linked to 14 different articles doing the same thing rather than 14 different slides from one article.
Worst Slashdot post in ages
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is perhaps the worst Slashdot post ever. Let's see:
- Basic screenshot show that has been linked on the articles some dozen times already - Trolling about how some ancient crap hardware no one should be using ever anywhere anymore can't run FC5 - Most of the text is in blog article that requires registration
There's no point of releasing this sort of news. If this sort of "quality" posts keep getting on front page I will leave and never come back again. I am sure I am not the only one.
Re:Worst Slashdot post in ages
by
tomhudson
·
· Score: 1
This is perhaps the worst Slashdot post ever. Let's see:
- Basic screenshot show that has been linked on the articles some dozen times already
- Trolling about how some ancient crap hardware no one should be using ever anywhere anymore can't run FC5
- Most of the text is in blog article that requires registration
One user comment - mentioning a link to www.zdnet.com.au.
14 submitted stories accepted - all with one or more links to www.zdnet.com.au
No friends, fans, foes or freaks
Looks like a shill account to pimp zdnet.com.au, doesn't it?
Re:Worst Slashdot post in ages
by
d3matt
·
· Score: 1
While I don't usally agree with the moaning and groaning about slashdot articles. I swear I've read this exact post before. Come on! FC5 has been out for awhile now (and the install hasn't really changed either).
Re:Worst Slashdot post in ages
by
zerblat
·
· Score: 1
It does seem like every article daria42 submits here att Slashdot or at Digg.com links to zdnet.com.au. It would be nice if (s)he would be a bit more upfront about that, but there's nothing inherently wrong about it. Anyone can submit anything. It's the editors' job to decide which stories get posted.
If we really want to get newbies interested in Linux, we need more video tutorial. A picture might be a thousand words, but a video gives a lot more confidence to people who wants try new things.
I really like the new ASP.Net HOWTO video series. I found it to be very effective to give new web developers head start with the IDE.
I'm posting this even though I moderated, just because the story really really is in need of help. (translation, you get two fp trolls)
The "story" is just a bunch of screenshots, and a link to a blog on techrepublic.com.com that you need to register to see. Once I got into the blog, it wasn't even on the page, because this was posted there April 20th with the following "content":
Fedora Core 5 Installed.....Next Stop, XenSource
Tags: open source, linux, virtualization, the hot button, steven s. warren, xen
I just finished my installation of Fedora Core 5. It was a painless installation. I will be concentrating next on getting XenSource installed using Fedora Core 5. The IT grapevine says it is easier to install Xen on FC5 than FC4.
Has anyone out there installed Xen on FC5 yet? If so, I would like to be able to pick your brain if I stumble and trust me I will stumble. Xen seems really difficult to install from the initial reading I have done. I have a sneaking suspicion it is going to be painful. We shall see.
Click the link to view my FC5 Installation Gallery.
Note: You can also see my other Installation Galleries that I have done by reading the following blogs:
Note: Here is my installation gallery for Linspire Five-O
That was it, just a "have you done it?" and photos, on flickr no less. It was done by Steven S. Warren though, who was the contributer to zdnet, so it wasn't out and out theft, just quite dumb. As someone previous said, looks like they just posted it to display all the ads on each page. But if you want to see that, there is allways the Printable Version with only 1 ad.
The install is very clean and polished, but lacking applications and driver support. Its a great desktop for bare bones web browsing, but daily use needs lots of configuration.
Applications you use daily are not included in Fedora 1. so you have to add the 3rd party rpm repositories. 2. Then if you have the built in firewall turned on you have to add rules for bittorrent, etc. 3. Want to play video games? Have to install nvidia/ati drivers. 4. Want divx or mp3 codecs? Not installed. 5. Java or macromedia support for firefox? Not installed again. 6. NTFS support not installed, mp3s are prob on a NTFS parition. 7. Tweak away, ms fonts, VLC, x11 setup, etc.
Really, fedora isnt the best choice for a linux desktop for a beginner, you have too much configuration. Its a nice polished server OS, or bare basic workstation, but its limited due to licensing.
I'd recommend SuSE professional for a more complete install that you dont have to manually tweak. Ubuntu has the same problems as Fedora, applications/codecs are not included. There are 3rd party applications that close the loophole for ubuntu.
I stopped using Mandriva the last couple releases due to error prone installs if you dont use the default settings. It includes more of the applications you need, but you have to pay for support.
Download ISO, ISO download failed at 100% (This is why I use Firefox and not Opera now), downloaded ISO again, burned ISO, booted CD, ran install, rebooted an hour later, wondered why the fuck the "much faster" GNOME 2.14 was running so slowly then 2 hours later removed it and put Debian on.
-- By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
wondered why the fuck the "much faster" GNOME 2.14 was running so slowly
Did you run with SELinux enabled? Rumor is that SELinux almost entirely cancels out the speed increase by Gnome 2.14. I run with SELinux disabled and I'd say that FC5 is much faster than FC4.
Same here, and I'm a RedHat Fan!
by
drewzhrodague
·
· Score: 1
That same kinda thing happened here for me. I downloaded the images, and burned them to CD, with the intent of using it on my old Dell C640 laptop. Guess what? I couldn't get past the LILO part.
I have been a RedHat fan since 4.2, followed them right through Fedora. *Never* had a problems installing RedHat on any system, unless it had bad hardware, or badly burned disks. In the case with FC5, I was stumped. Seriously stumped. What did they do?
Fedora's version of KDE is broken
by
billybob2
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
KDE is broken in the latest Fedora release, which doesn't really surprise me given the fact that Red Hat has always had abyssmal support for KDE.
I think applications like Konqueror File Manager, K3B for burning CDs and DVDs, AmaroK for listening to music, Kaffeine for watching movies, etc are a must for a desktop computer. It's a shame that Red Hat doesn't put more resources into ensuring KDE is usable on their systems.
Anyway, I'll stick with ArkLinux, Kubuntu and openSUSE since KDE actually works on those distros.
Re:Fedora's version of KDE is broken
by
pipacs
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The kde-redhat guys do a great job keeping KDE up to date on Fedora.
Re:Fedora's version of KDE is broken
by
suitepotato
·
· Score: 1
KDE is broken in the latest Fedora release, which doesn't really surprise me given the fact that Red Hat has always had abyssmal support for KDE.
Odd. In the last couple updates, xcompmgr started working perfectly with KDE on FC5. I take that as a very high water mark of... "non-brokenness".
-- If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
Umm, OK.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Is that good? It looks like the Ubuntu installer. And let's face it, text-mode installers are scary for newbies. How hard is it to make a simple graphical installer front-end?
Honestly, I think the Mandrake installer looked quite good already back in 2002. I wonder why no decent distribution adopted it.
Of Course The Install Is Easy
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I swear I've seen two dozen of these image slideshows put up by different people for different distributions. It's the same frikkin' thing. Keyboard layout, international characters, hard drive, install. No one cares. The install is made to be easy and I did it without any documentation.
How about we have a pretty picture slideshow about hoe if you want to use ndiswrapper on Fedora Core 5 you have to literally create by hand the configuration files you need so that you can still use the interface in Fedora Core's pretty GUI network manager, since ndiswrapper uses wlan0 as an interface device and the pretty GUI network manager doesn't recognize anything that doesn't begin with eth?
Same here, I completely ignore the media check part now. I installed fine when they said the ISOs were bad (note: haven't gone to 5, I skip every other fedora release now, once a year is way more than enough). I don't trust the media checker thingee.
Simply Mepis has vids, courtesy of Roblimo and his "point and click linux" book. You get the Mepis OS, a DVD video disk and a dead trees manual. A noob kit in other words. About as noob friendly as possible, you can be watching the vid he made on the TV and doing stuff on the computer, just follow along with it.
I am a regular with this linux-noob where my mate has been doing walkthrough screenshots for a while. He has managed to get FC1-5, Smoothwall3, Suse OSS 10 and some RH shots too (not all are install shots!).
I really enjoy seeing these, its always helpful to show a new user, you say "see its this easy and here is the outcome".
-- BOO
my 4 year old son liked it
by
ZXSpectrum42
·
· Score: 2, Funny
You missed the point of the article. With a little help from me, my 4 year old son who cannot read or write, managed to install successfully fedora core 5 with the help of this 'picture book'.
Now i am trying to find another 'picture book' for him because he is bored with FC5 after installing it 5 times a day for a week. I think he needs a new game. For the moment we are waiting for the release of FC6 picture book and the new Harry Potter Comic book.
Slashdot Mirror
Shortest, most concise article summary ever?
Considering the enormous significance of this release, we at ZDNet are proud to bring you the first ever review of Lunix Fedora Core 5.
The Lunix operating system was born in 1991 and was created by one man, a Finnish student named Axl Torvalds. Since these humble beginnings, a multi-million dollar industry has sprung up to exploit the commercial potential of Lunix, but until recently Lunix has eluded mainstream acceptance. However, due to the recent economic downturn together with uncertainty over changes to Microsoft's pricing policy, Lunix is now being touted as a serious contender to Microsoft Windows. While there are many other alternatives to Windows, including BSD which is based on Sun's server-grade Solaris operating system, none have commanded the same level of media attention as Lunix.
Lunix Fedora Core is just the latest in a long line of quirkily christened versions of Lunix. Previous versions of Lunix have been named Red Hat, Slack Ware, Storm and Coral. In stark contrast to the mundane names such as 98, ME or NT preferred by Microsoft, the crazy names of each Lunix release hint at its renegade nature.
My foray into the world of Lunix began by downloading a "CD image" from the Lunix web site. But don't worry, this isn't software piracy, it's perfectly legal! Lunix is shareware, meaning that it can be freely redistributed without fear of a visit by the Business Software Alliance. The free availability of Lunix is a major reason for its popularity among cash-strapped students, criminals and self-styled anti-capitalist hackers.
Before installing new software, it is always advisable to read the documentation. Unfortunately, an unpleasant surprise was in store for me in the "required configuration" section of the manual. I was shocked to learn that Lunix Fedora Core only runs on Pentium processors, meaning that my hopes of testing the water with my old Gateway 486 were dashed. Furthermore, a whopping 32 megabytes of memory are required to run Lunix! Although the advocates of Lunix self-righteously boast the efficiency of their chosen operating system and deride the "bloatware" produced by Microsoft, it appears that their claims are blatantly incorrect. Although my humble 486 will happily run Windows 95, it seems that Lunix requires far more powerful, and more expensive, computer hardware. Is this really a sign of a lean, mean operating system? Of course not.
Sadly, not even being able to install Lunix is just the first of my many complaints about Lunix. A brief perusal of the features of Lunix Fedora Core reveals that Lunix is sorely lacking many crucial productivity applications. For example, why isn't the industry standard web browser, Internet Explorer, included with Lunix? Despite the best efforts of the experts at the Internet Engineering Task Force to encourage adoption of the Internet Explorer standard, the creators of Lunix seem to think that they know better. By refusing to adhere to recognised standards, Lunix is simply undermining its own credibility.
Similarly, almost all of the world's most popular and widely used software is completely incompatible with Lunix! It may surprise you to learn that your copy of Microsoft Office, Outlook Express or Lotus Notes will not work under Lunix. Those who wish to use their computer for recreational purposes are also out of luck, for almost all of the most popular
What are we supposed to look for?
BTW, "The Fedora Core 5 Install Experience" sounds like a Fusion group's name. It probably work geat in Silicon Valley!
I've been running Fedora Core 5 x86 AMD 64 on my laptop since March 20th IIRC?
Looks good to me. I'm a little bummed they removed the right click option for terminal shell and it seems that whenever I do a view details of the boot process my video is hosed once the desktop comes up (ATI 200M).
The add/remove programs only seems to work when connected to the web.
Install was smooth and easy, better driver support than windows XP Pro 64-bit edition (thanks for nothing HP, broadcom, ATI & conexant).
Who will guard the guards?
Insert disc.
Do full media check.
Reburn Disc 3 due to corruption.
Reboot.
Insert disc.
Do full media check.
Install.
Freeze at selecting time zone.
Reboot.
Select packages.
Computer restarts at Disc 2.
Reboot.
Computer gets to the end, Disc 5, 99%, and gives corrupt file error. Will not allow you to recheck the file in case of a bad read.
Take discs, smash, shred, and burn.
Install Debian.
-What I did.
There's not much of a need for ZDNet's Fedora Core 5 install photos.. For all of my RH/Fedora installations, including Fedora Core 5 (over a month ago), I used Stanton Finley's site... His site is much more informative: http://www.stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_5_instal lation_notes.html
I couldn't shake Jimi Hendrix doing are you experienced as an interior sound track. :)
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
It was about time someone did something like this. We needed something like this!
This is perhaps the worst Slashdot post ever. Let's see:
- Basic screenshot show that has been linked on the articles some dozen times already
- Trolling about how some ancient crap hardware no one should be using ever anywhere anymore can't run FC5
- Most of the text is in blog article that requires registration
There's no point of releasing this sort of news. If this sort of "quality" posts keep getting on front page I will leave and never come back again. I am sure I am not the only one.
If we really want to get newbies interested in Linux, we need more video tutorial. A picture might be a thousand words, but a video gives a lot more confidence to people who wants try new things.
I really like the new ASP.Net HOWTO video series. I found it to be very effective to give new web developers head start with the IDE.
I'm posting this even though I moderated, just because the story really really is in need of help. (translation, you get two fp trolls)
The "story" is just a bunch of screenshots, and a link to a blog on techrepublic.com.com that you need to register to see. Once I got into the blog, it wasn't even on the page, because this was posted there April 20th with the following "content":
Fedora Core 5 Installed.....Next Stop, XenSourceTags: open source, linux, virtualization, the hot button, steven s. warren, xen
I just finished my installation of Fedora Core 5. It was a painless installation. I will be concentrating next on getting XenSource installed using Fedora Core 5. The IT grapevine says it is easier to install Xen on FC5 than FC4.
Has anyone out there installed Xen on FC5 yet? If so, I would like to be able to pick your brain if I stumble and trust me I will stumble. Xen seems really difficult to install from the initial reading I have done. I have a sneaking suspicion it is going to be painful. We shall see.
Click the link to view my FC5 Installation Gallery.
Note: You can also see my other Installation Galleries that I have done by reading the following blogs:Note: Here is my installation gallery for Linspire Five-O
That was it, just a "have you done it?" and photos, on flickr no less. It was done by Steven S. Warren though, who was the contributer to zdnet, so it wasn't out and out theft, just quite dumb. As someone previous said, looks like they just posted it to display all the ads on each page. But if you want to see that, there is allways the Printable Version with only 1 ad.
My other sig is just as lame
Just how hard is it?
The install is very clean and polished, but lacking applications and driver support. Its a great desktop for bare bones web browsing, but daily use needs lots of configuration.
Applications you use daily are not included in Fedora
1. so you have to add the 3rd party rpm repositories.
2. Then if you have the built in firewall turned on you have to add rules for bittorrent, etc.
3. Want to play video games? Have to install nvidia/ati drivers.
4. Want divx or mp3 codecs? Not installed.
5. Java or macromedia support for firefox? Not installed again.
6. NTFS support not installed, mp3s are prob on a NTFS parition.
7. Tweak away, ms fonts, VLC, x11 setup, etc.
Really, fedora isnt the best choice for a linux desktop for a beginner, you have too much configuration. Its a nice polished server OS, or bare basic workstation, but its limited due to licensing.
I'd recommend SuSE professional for a more complete install that you dont have to manually tweak. Ubuntu has the same problems as Fedora, applications/codecs are not included. There are 3rd party applications that close the loophole for ubuntu.
I stopped using Mandriva the last couple releases due to error prone installs if you dont use the default settings. It includes more of the applications you need, but you have to pay for support.
firezonk
Download ISO, ISO download failed at 100% (This is why I use Firefox and not Opera now), downloaded ISO again, burned ISO, booted CD, ran install, rebooted an hour later, wondered why the fuck the "much faster" GNOME 2.14 was running so slowly then 2 hours later removed it and put Debian on.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
That same kinda thing happened here for me. I downloaded the images, and burned them to CD, with the intent of using it on my old Dell C640 laptop. Guess what? I couldn't get past the LILO part.
I have been a RedHat fan since 4.2, followed them right through Fedora. *Never* had a problems installing RedHat on any system, unless it had bad hardware, or badly burned disks. In the case with FC5, I was stumped. Seriously stumped. What did they do?
Now, I use CEntOS, and works like I expect.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
KDE is broken in the latest Fedora release, which doesn't really surprise me given the fact that Red Hat has always had abyssmal support for KDE.
I think applications like Konqueror File Manager, K3B for burning CDs and DVDs, AmaroK for listening to music, Kaffeine for watching movies, etc are a must for a desktop computer. It's a shame that Red Hat doesn't put more resources into ensuring KDE is usable on their systems.
Anyway, I'll stick with ArkLinux, Kubuntu and openSUSE since KDE actually works on those distros.
Is that good? It looks like the Ubuntu installer. And let's face it, text-mode installers are scary for newbies. How hard is it to make a simple graphical installer front-end?
Honestly, I think the Mandrake installer looked quite good already back in 2002. I wonder why no decent distribution adopted it.
I swear I've seen two dozen of these image slideshows put up by different people for different distributions. It's the same frikkin' thing. Keyboard layout, international characters, hard drive, install. No one cares. The install is made to be easy and I did it without any documentation.
How about we have a pretty picture slideshow about hoe if you want to use ndiswrapper on Fedora Core 5 you have to literally create by hand the configuration files you need so that you can still use the interface in Fedora Core's pretty GUI network manager, since ndiswrapper uses wlan0 as an interface device and the pretty GUI network manager doesn't recognize anything that doesn't begin with eth?
Install porn!
Same here, I completely ignore the media check part now. I installed fine when they said the ISOs were bad (note: haven't gone to 5, I skip every other fedora release now, once a year is way more than enough). I don't trust the media checker thingee.
Simply Mepis has vids, courtesy of Roblimo and his "point and click linux" book. You get the Mepis OS, a DVD video disk and a dead trees manual. A noob kit in other words. About as noob friendly as possible, you can be watching the vid he made on the TV and doing stuff on the computer, just follow along with it.
I am a regular with this linux-noob where my mate has been doing walkthrough screenshots for a while. He has managed to get FC1-5, Smoothwall3, Suse OSS 10 and some RH shots too (not all are install shots!).
I really enjoy seeing these, its always helpful to show a new user, you say "see its this easy and here is the outcome".
BOO
You missed the point of the article. With a little help from me, my 4 year old son who cannot read or write, managed to install successfully fedora core 5 with the help of this 'picture book'.
Now i am trying to find another 'picture book' for him because he is bored with FC5 after installing it 5 times a day for a week. I think he needs a new game. For the moment we are waiting for the release of FC6 picture book and the new Harry Potter Comic book.
--------------
i gave my last 2 cents for CentOS
2+2 = 5 (for very large values of 2)
Can I install Fedora 5 on a USB hard drive and boot it from there?
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
I was bugged by the absence of the "Install Everything" option.