Can you please explain how are power users disadvantaged in terms of flexibility if they chose FC3 as a distro over Debian, Gentoo or Slack? What is it that they can do with any of those distributions and not with Fedora? I am really curious to find out
Ease of installation / upgrade. I know, yum / apt is available for fedora. I read several howtos for various incompatible apt repositories and the only ones I ever got working were so slow it would take a week to install openoffice. I have broadband.
Yum never worked quite right for me either.
No mp3 support. I read everywhere how it's so easy to add; I tried FC1 and the only way I could find to add it was through additional, horribly slow apt repositories. Once again, I never managed to upgrade everything that needed mp3 support.
I use kde. Same story, just a handful of highly annoying things that are broken. Can't even recall anymore, and to be fair I haven't touched fedora since 'core 1' so perhaps these issues are gone.
I know, I know, there are a thousand l33t fedora h4x0rs out there who had no trouble with exactly the things I'm talking about. None of these are showstoppers by themselves (well maybe the apt/yum troubles), but after a while I call it "dying of a thousand papercuts". It just went on and on, and in spite of the notorious non-graphical (gasp) installer on debian, I found it far easier to manage.
It's a shame really, I think fedora looks slick and I was a long time redhat user (4.something until RH9). But the whole fedora thing was absolutely obnoxious on redhat's part; I remember spending a good deal of time laboring under the impression that I would never even be able to upgrade RH9 unless I paid several hundred dollars. By the time I found out otherwise I had already jumped ship.
David Atkinson was my Professor at University of Idaho for Fields & Waves. He's a seriously bright guy, possibly the best professor I had (and there were a number of very good teachers at UI during the 90s).
I'm sure he's taking it with grace, but frankly I'd say we should take up a collection so he can get wasted and trash an extravagant hotel room. I hear that's therapeutic.
The company has set a course, invested considerable resources, indeed likely staked it's future on this: No one person leaving is going to have a huge effect.
This is a non sequitur. Your assumption is that every person in the company contributes equally to the direction of the company. In fact, most companies are held together by surprisingly few people. The rest look to those key personalities for their direction.
If a highly influential leader departs Novell, and those left in his wake have different ideas, those ideas will gain traction because the most powerfull advocate for the status quo has disappeared. I've seen this happen. It's natural. Even on individual engineering projects the first thing many coders want to do when picking up a software project left behind by someone else is challenge the design premises and take the codebase in a new direction. It works the same way in management, only the "codebase" is the company.
The sky is probably not falling. But we cannot say conclusively that it is not falling based solely on the fact that Novell is a big company.
Having something to hide isn't the only reason why IBM might say they can't find the source.
For every additional motion SCO has to file to make IBM play ball, that's more money from their pocket.
Every time SCO doesn't immediately get what they ask for, SCO is forced to wait it out a bit longer.
Admittedly, I have no insight into IBM's strategy against SCO. But were I to be faced against the litigious whores at SCOX, I wouldn't want them to have an easy time of it.
Nothing sells like a working system. I've done this before in the engineering labs where I used to work. Set up a debian system, and leave it where people can get to it and would likely use it. Make sure it works exactly as you promised.
When they need something that isn't installed, introduce them to APT.
Once my fellow engineers were able to witness just how well debian works, the whole lab was converted to debian (and a few desktops as well).
Slashdot Mirror
Yum never worked quite right for me either.
No mp3 support. I read everywhere how it's so easy to add; I tried FC1 and the only way I could find to add it was through additional, horribly slow apt repositories. Once again, I never managed to upgrade everything that needed mp3 support.
I use kde. Same story, just a handful of highly annoying things that are broken. Can't even recall anymore, and to be fair I haven't touched fedora since 'core 1' so perhaps these issues are gone.
I know, I know, there are a thousand l33t fedora h4x0rs out there who had no trouble with exactly the things I'm talking about. None of these are showstoppers by themselves (well maybe the apt/yum troubles), but after a while I call it "dying of a thousand papercuts". It just went on and on, and in spite of the notorious non-graphical (gasp) installer on debian, I found it far easier to manage.
It's a shame really, I think fedora looks slick and I was a long time redhat user (4.something until RH9). But the whole fedora thing was absolutely obnoxious on redhat's part; I remember spending a good deal of time laboring under the impression that I would never even be able to upgrade RH9 unless I paid several hundred dollars. By the time I found out otherwise I had already jumped ship.
-kev
-kev
I'm sure he's taking it with grace, but frankly I'd say we should take up a collection so he can get wasted and trash an extravagant hotel room. I hear that's therapeutic.
-kev
If a highly influential leader departs Novell, and those left in his wake have different ideas, those ideas will gain traction because the most powerfull advocate for the status quo has disappeared. I've seen this happen. It's natural. Even on individual engineering projects the first thing many coders want to do when picking up a software project left behind by someone else is challenge the design premises and take the codebase in a new direction. It works the same way in management, only the "codebase" is the company.
The sky is probably not falling. But we cannot say conclusively that it is not falling based solely on the fact that Novell is a big company.
-kev
For every additional motion SCO has to file to make IBM play ball, that's more money from their pocket.
Every time SCO doesn't immediately get what they ask for, SCO is forced to wait it out a bit longer.
Admittedly, I have no insight into IBM's strategy against SCO. But were I to be faced against the litigious whores at SCOX, I wouldn't want them to have an easy time of it.
-kev
When they need something that isn't installed, introduce them to APT.
Once my fellow engineers were able to witness just how well debian works, the whole lab was converted to debian (and a few desktops as well).
-kev
"Has the horrendous security done anything other than support thousands of jobs and spawed a massive aftermarket security industry?"
By that logic, we should view terrorism as good for the economy since it creates jobs for the folks employed at the office of Homeland Security.
Think, real hard. What other effects came from from security flaws (in either case)? Anything bad? Anything at all?
Perhaps this is just crazy talk, but I submit that there are better ways to stimulate the economy.
-kev