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

[Anonymous Coward]

and feel in control of my package

You should always feel in control of your package. ;-)

Re:What a load of crap

[The Snowman]

It's not just users. Applications still aren't being written to work properly with non-administrator accounts. I just installed SimplyAccounting 2010 on Windows XP and started getting weird errors poking around in it using a Limited Account, but switching to an Administrator account, no more errors.

I agree, the problem with Windows is not so much the OS itself but poorly written applications.

One of the largest examples is World of Warcraft. After five years, it still insists on storing all of its data in its program directory. I actually had to install it outside of Program Files to get it to work on Vista, even with UAC turned off and logged in as Administrator (the account, not an account in that group).

I think more software developers need to look at Firefox, a good example. Data, including plugins, are kept in the user's home. Different users can have different plugins and data, and everything just works even on a properly-secured system.

Blizzard can even download the source code to figure out basic stuff like "where to put files" because after all these years of writing Windows games, they still lack that basic knowledge.

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.

Re:What a load of crap

[obarthelemy]

I actually like WoW's way of doing things: want to backup/restore WoW, or put it on antoher PC ? just copy WoW's dir. No dependencies. No DLL Hell. No registry hacks. Want to wipe it ? Delete the directory.

I wish all programs worked that way and were that easy to manage.

BTW, Data and program files are segregated in separate subdirs. User data, too.

Re:What a load of crap

[rdavidson3]

Sadly, my girlfriend is control of my package and when I get to use it. :(

It doesn't matter at all

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Does the distro work with your printer without any complicated installation procedures?
Does the distro work with your audio hardware without any complicated installation procedures?
Does the distro switch between all the resolutions supported by your video hardware?
Does the distro have a reasonably good package installation mechanism?
Does the distro support your applications without special package installation requirements?

If the answer is affirmative to all of the above, then you've got yourself a winner. It's very cool how Ubuntu has essentially forced every other distro to get up to speed on these seemingly basic features. Otherwise, the distros are just flavored differently. It's all the same under the hood.

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.

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:It doesn't matter at all

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

And these are the reasons Windows still has marketshare.

Nah. Main reason is most of the driver and install issues are figured out by the vendors at the factory. Once it comes out of the box the users are willing to take lots of punishment when it comes to Windows. Things dont work. Crapware installed by vendor keeps nagging them to upgrade and get the "new and exciting features". Security holes. Forced to buy anti virus products. Vendor lock. Upgrade treadmill....

Through it all the people suffer stoically. But when you suggest switching to Linux they balk. The first thing that does not work, they bitch to high heaven and run back to their captors. One would think the typical PC user is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

There are many reasons why Windows has its market share. "It just works" is not one of them.

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.

openSuse

[abigor]

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

Re:openSuse

[Interoperable]

Although, it would be worthwhile to point out that openSuSE doesn't favor KDE over Gnome. It has fully integrated the SuSE environment into both. As I understand it, the decision to set the default selection to KDE is quite arbitrary at this point.

I'll add that it's a fantastic distro for reasonably modern computers. Yast is a great tool, but the whole thing is a bit too heavyweight for netbooks or old PCs.

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:Who cares....

[greenguy]

I have to agree. I get annoyed when I hear people describe Ubuntu as distro that's appropriate for Linux newbies. It's not that that's untrue, it's that it sells Ubuntu short. It makes it sound like it's dumbed down somehow, and that after using it for a while, you'd want want to move on to something more advanced. That's simply not the case. All the advanced features are there, waiting for you, as soon as you're interested in them.

Re:Who cares....

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Agreed, wholeheartedly so. I hopped from the sinking Windows ship after XP and started using Ubuntu on release 8.04. I must admit that I am not nearly as proficient on Ubuntu or Linux as I would like to be, but I am learning quickly. Where the first few months of my Ubuntu experience had me clicking through GUI's and resetting defaults regularly, after a few months of posting on the Ubuntu forums and getting a feel for how problems can be typically trouble-shooted, I started gediting config files and browsing through /etc on a regular basis. I started downloading some programs that could not be found in my repositories (with more confidence) and even started editing my sources list. Eventually I switched my default editor over to vim and began spitting out shell and perl scripts right and left to keep things simple for me and give me some peace of mind security wise. I've been using Ubuntu for just over a year now and, already, I am now posting advice on the Ubuntu forums more frequently than asking for it.

The point isn't that I learned quickly, its that, since I wanted to learn some of the more hardcore and advanced features of linux, it was easy for me to go out and do so once I got comfortable. The nicest thing about Ubuntu is that it doesn't scare the crap out of you the first time you use it. As a social experiment, I often take my non tech literate friends and sit them down at my central living room computer (hooked to my TV) which is running 9.04 and tell them to put on some music to listen to. None of these folk have ever used anything but Windows. None of them take more than 20 minutes and maybe 1 or 2 questions to figure it out.

Once someone gets comfortable with Ubuntu, if they want to start developing more advanced skills, they have a friendly place to ask which is easy to find (almost always google search result #1 with the word Ubuntu in it), the Ubuntu forums. When they do start asking about advanced topics, they are never dismissed as newbs or told something condescending. They are never attacked or outright flamed. Instead, if what they are asking about really is something of concern, they are told, in a rational and mature manner, about the risks they may or may not be taking. I couldn't be happier with the Ubuntu experience so far. I may decide to distro jump sometime in the future out of boredom or curiosity, but in terms of need, I really can't see a good reason to find something else.

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.

no root password?

[burnin1965]

in earlier versions, ordinary (non-admin) users could install software on Fedora without access to the root password

huh?

I've used every version of Fedora linux and before that I've used Red Hat Linux from version 4.2 until Fedora Core 1. I don't recall ever having the ability to install software without providing the root password. In fact, when this type of insecure feature was implemented in Fedora 12 it caused a huge uproar and the insecure feature was removed in an update.

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...

Tried Ubuntu, switched back to Fedora

[Stone316]

I installed Ubuntu 8 on my kids computer and they loved it... I played about with it as well and liked it enough that once it came time to rebuild my linux box I decided to install 9.04... I have to say, i'm not impressed with 9.0.4... I have had issues with using the software manager to install new applications.. I miss the popular column and thought that was great. Switching to a static IP address wasn't straight forward... It seems that if you are the type of user that will just download it, install defaults and use it, then its fine. But as soon as you want to make changes, it started to get painful.

So for now i'm switching back to Fedora.. Something i'm familiar with and just seems to work.

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:Wiser? WTF

[amorsen]

Actually the Fedora assumption was the exact opposite: That we can't expect to pop up a dialog asking the user for the root password to approve the installation of software, and have the user make the right decision every time. It is better to make a list of safe software which can't compromise an installation, and allow the user to install that without prompts.

This is not without problems, but once it is done right, the system will be less dependent on users making the right choices.

Gentoo

[jittles]

So does that mean Gentoo is designed for users that have more free time?

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.

Fedora has always required the root password

[fluxdvd]

To my knowledge (I've been using Fedora since its inception), Fedora has always required root credentials, or the user be in the sudoers list to install software packages. Only in Fedora 12 was that not the default behavior, and there was a BIG uproar over that change (see the VERY lengthy discussion on this issue on the RedHat Bugzilla report - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534047), which has since change the default behavior BACK to requiring root credentials to install software.

Take with a grain of salt.

[Tubal-Cain]

Speaking of easy, openSUSE is also the first of the major Linux distros that makes it simple to upgrade the system over the Internet. With most distros, you need to download an ISO image of the new release and then boot from it to upgrade your Linux distribution. However, I was able to do an in-place upgrade of openSUSE 11.1 to 11.2 on my ThinkPad over a Wi-Fi connection. This arrangement makes upgrading the entire operating system as simple as installing one really big program.

That's been a part of Ubuntu's Update Manager for...how many years now? And in Debian using stable rather than lenny in your /etc/apt/sources.list will achieve the same effect. Or you could just use testing and enjoy more-up-to-date-but-still-stable software that has rolling updates.

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.