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).'"

Comments

What a load of crap

[nacturation]

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.

Re:What a load of crap

[NeoSkandranon]

Considering the LFS user is most likely to have an attitude like yours, I'd prefer not to hear a single condescending word from him.

Re:What a load of crap

[HarrySquatter]

No user should ever be more skilled than any other users, and all distributions should cater to the newbie crowd.

Except the GP made no such point at all. He was saying he didn't want to have some condescending ass try to come and fix his system.

When all computing grinds to a halt because no one knows how to fix or maintain them anymore, at least you'll have the comfort of knowing that no advanced users are going to make a tongue-in-cheek post on Slashdot that stimulates your inferiority complex.

There are plenty of people who have skills that people could go to to fix their computers that don't act like condescending and pompous assholes like you and the rest of the "1337 h4x0r" LSF crowd.

Re:What a load of crap

[TheCycoONE]

I'd mention that MySpace uses a distributed file system running on Gentoo; but I think that might just prove your point.

Re:What a load of crap

[amorsen]

Installing pre-approved software without root access would be a great step forward both for usability and security. Imagine if we can get to the point where a normal user can use a laptop computer for a year without running with sufficient privileges to install untrusted software.

Sure, there are challenges, first and foremost how to revoke approval of a particular package. That doesn't mean we have to stick with the old trusted root paradigm forever. For the vast majority of Linux laptops/desktops, the user IS the administrator, and we can't expect to educate all computer users to be competent Unix administrators.

Re:What a load of crap

[causality]

Not everyone really wants to be on the cutting edge, and I like being at least a bit closer to Fedora/CentOS because i use them a lot at work (Debian and CentOS/RHEL are among the best Linuces for servers, while Gentoo is completely inappropriate (although this almost never comes up because Gentoo fans are also completely inappropriate as sysadmins)).

Many Gentoo users only use Gentoo for their personal computers. Those same users would recommend distributions like Debian to anyone who approached them and said "hey, I'm new to this Linux thing and I want to run a server, what would you suggest?" Gentoo is for users who a) know their way around Linux and b) love to tinker. It doesn't pretend to be for anyone else. I use Gentoo and very much enjoy it, but I would not recommend it to someone who's new to Linux and switching away from Windows. It's about what you like and believe to be appropriate for the job. It's not a religious cause.

Actually one of the reasons I got into Gentoo in the first place is that I wanted to know more about how a distribution is put together. As a learning tool its manual installation is one of the best. As a "I just want it to work, ASAP" tool it's one of the worst. Again it doesn't pretend to be otherwise. If Gentoo claimed to be the be-all and end-all, the Ultimate Linux Distribution, superior in every way to all others, then maybe I'd understand why it's so trendy to slam Gentoo whenever it comes up in a discussion. Or if I frequently visited the Gentoo Forums and saw the users talking about how lame binary distributions are, maybe then I'd understand it too, but they don't do this.

Since that isn't the case, this looks to me like another religious issue. Like when you have one sect of Christianity going to war against another sect of Christianity because they disagree on whether to drink wine or grape juice for Communion. Naturally the grape-juice drinkers think they have irreconcilable differences with the wine-drinkers and vice-versa. Each side thinks the other is composed of total idiots and assholes. Neither appreciates that what they're arguing over is a trivial matter of taste. Don't like a distro? Good, use something else. That should be the end of it, but it isn't, because it's not good enough that you use what you like, the other guy must also use what you like, right?

Re:What a load of crap

[sa666_666]

Actually, some of us use Ubuntu and the 'easier;' distros because (a) we're tied of screwing around getting things to work like we did 6-7 years ago, and (b) to target the version of Linux that most people seem to be using.

When it comes to fixing inane issues in Linux, just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you constantly *want* to. Many people (myself included) have cut their teeth with Linux since the very beginning, and would like to use something that 'just works' most of the time, rather than performing constant low-level maintenance that is only necessary to elevate ones epeen rating.

Don't knock ease of use, or the influx of new users that will make Linux a force in the industry. It's called progress; maybe you should check it out sometime.

openSuse

[abigor]

Nice to see good results for openSuse. The reviewer didn't fall for the immature "Novell is evil!" absurdity.

Re:It doesn't matter at all

[bertoelcon]

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.

Who cares....

[salva84]

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.

Re:Wiser? WTF

[Cro Magnon]

It's an indication that you believe your users are wiser than the average users, or at least that you expect them to become so.

And THAT is an indication that the Fedora developers are NOT particularly wise.

Senior Citizen Linux

[NukeDoggie]

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...

Re:It doesn't matter at all

[RanCossack]

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.)

Re:Need root to install software?

[Hatta]

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.

Slackware

[spaceyhackerlady]

If you can't do it with Slackware, it doesn't need doing.

:-)

...laura

Re:It doesn't matter at all

[jedidiah]

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.

Re:What nonsense!

[idontgno]

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.

Re:Need root to install software?

[Hatta]

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.