Why Top Linux Distros Are For Different Users
Lucas123 writes "Fedora, openSUSE and Ubuntu Linux desktops may look alike, but they've got some important distinctions, like the fact that Fedora and Ubuntu use GNOME 2.28 (the latest version) for their default desktop, while openSUSE uses KDE 4.3.1. And, Fedora's designers have assumed that its users are wiser than the general run of users. 'For example, in earlier versions, ordinary (non-admin) users could install software on Fedora without access to the root password. As of this version, however, local users will need to enter the root password before they can install software (as they do on almost all other Linux distributions).'"
And, Fedora's designers have assumed that its users are wiser than the general run of users. 'For example, in earlier versions, ordinary (non-admin) users could install software on Fedora without access to the root password.
So according to this "logic", Microsoft assumes that its users are wiser than the general run of users too? Nice way to spin Fedora finally addressing this security issue, dude.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
I use Fedora because you always get the latest stuff. I've never had a major problem -- used all 12 releases.
Nice to see good results for openSuse. The reviewer didn't fall for the immature "Novell is evil!" absurdity.
And these are the reasons Windows still has marketshare. The last 2 are not covered by Windows but because its already got the marketshare then the apps are easy to find. Not trying to troll but that is why it does "just work", even with bugs and holes aplenty.
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
Who cares? I've been using Linux around 10 years ago, I'm a computer engineer, and after all, I beeing using Ubuntu until today. I've tried a lot of distros, but I've never found a better distro for me, despite I'm a programmer too.
And THAT is an indication that the Fedora developers are NOT particularly wise.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Someone should make a version of Ubuntu or openSuse or Fedora or whatever that is designed for Seniors. Large Fonts, easy to use, very little duplication of apps, no problems... I bet it would spread far and wide. We have the kids checking it out, time to take the seniors... Also, why does all the netbook distros never fit the dialogs on the screen? 800x480 is not much to work with granted...
It's very cool how Ubuntu has essentially forced every other distro to get up to speed on these seemingly basic features.
Please stop saying inane things.
Nothing ubuntu has done the past 3 years is any better than lets say mandriva has done.
i tried Kubuntu 7.04 to install on friends computers and found taht PCLinuxOS which was #1 then was a much better 'just works out of box' experience.
Im typing this from Kubnutu9.10 and its no different than any other KDE distro. Actually, THAT is the thing my non Linuxy friends always say... its the same thing.
Your choice of distro for a first timer is a quesstion of taste when it comes to the big distros. The REAL decision is the desktop.
Since everyone comes over has used Windows, it makes sense to use a DE that is familiar to them.
But having used every Buntu since v7, I think your statement is nothing more than fanboi driven hype.
And these are the reasons Windows still has marketshare. The last 2 are not covered by Windows but because its already got the marketshare then the apps are easy to find. Not trying to troll but that is why it does "just work", even with bugs and holes aplenty.
I don't want to troll, either, but this really isn't the case; I tried to reinstall Windows on one of my machines for dual-boot (fresh setup on a new drive) using a generic, non-customized XP disk, and it is amazing how much work it was -- hunting drivers down, having to download extra drivers to a USB key so I could get online, and so on.
You could say Microsoft does a lot of work with its partners to ship customized Windows distros, but out of the box, Windows is pretty bad; we all just either don't have to deal with it or take it for granted.
(Or don't deal with it at all.)
I've got to say, this is a huge feature that most package managers are missing. If I can download an archive, unpack it, and run it from ~, I should be able to install a package under ~ as well.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
If you can't do it with Slackware, it doesn't need doing.
:-)
...laura
Windows 7 is a little better, and this is coming from a Linux user. So they are trying.
Ubuntu also brought something else to the table: The Debian package manager.
RPM was clearly inferior. Debian despite of it's other tradeoffs always had
a packager that was just the bees knees. I even defected from Mandrake to
Debian myself over this.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Use Windows 7 or OS X.
If all the major distributions were sold at BestBuy and Joe Sixpack walked in and wanted to buy Linux, he'd have no idea which one to get.
If I walk into Best Buy and want to buy Windows 7, I'd have no idea which one to get.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I think you will have precisely the same problems with an 8 year old Linux distro as well. SATA won't be supported, newer NIC that don't have an emulation mode won't be supported. Newer video cards won't be supported by X, etc... Now, granted, once you get the basics working you should be able to update but you will still have most of those same issues.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Video resolution? Huh? Really who runs their monitor at less than the max? I'm running at 1920x1200 and there is NO reason to use anything else.
Ever tried using a 15" laptop with 1600x1200 resolution? The text is impossible to read. Most people run these at much lower resolutions than the hardware is capable of running at. The same is true of people with poor eyesight.
You're a classic example of why Linux has problems, claiming there is "NO reason" for something shows a lack of foresight or even imagination. Too many Linux developers feel the same. Because they don't have a problem with something, they firmly believe nobody should have a problem with something, and refuses to support it.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
You're a classic example of why Linux has problems, claiming there is "NO reason" for something shows a lack of foresight or even imagination. Too many Linux developers feel the same. Because they don't have a problem with something, they firmly believe nobody should have a problem with something, and refuses to support it.
+1 Right On
There's a lot of "If I don't need it, no one needs it" arrogance in the OS community. Part of it comes from "it works for me, I don't care about you" (which is just fundamental human nature); part of it is the longstanding "RTFM" tradition (i.e., the root geek community that Free Software sprung from put a high premium on self-help. The extreme manifestation, and also the practical reason for full source code disclosure in FOSS, is "Read the Fucking Source" as the rejoinder for someone asking for help.)
It's a cultural weakness now that FOSS has spread into the general public. Unless you're paying for support, no one is obligated to help you, so if you're not technically savvy and have enough time and effort to chase it down, you're stuck.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
I had to add specific functionality for Windows users to save into the app folder. [...] some people still can't see any other way of saving their personal data.
I'd bet that a lot of these "some people" use multiple desktop computers and carry their apps and data with them on a USB mass storage device. There's even a name for apps that support this use case: portable apps (not to be confused with multi-platform or mobile apps). The solution I used for one of my own apps was as follows:
Installation inside the Program Files folder writes "installed.ini"; installation to removable media does not.
What about shared libraries? Should those be duplicated everywhere?
The user installed package should use the system library if available, otherwise install a copy under ~.
What about differing versions of the same package? Should user X have the old version and user Y have the new version?
Each user should use whatever version they want.
What if the user installs it and the admin installs it? Should the user's package have higher precedence (PATH, MANPATH, etc.) or the system-wide package?
It's up to the user to set up the PATH the way they want it.
These aren't particularly hard questions.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!