[GWatt]

i think Fedora doesn't use apt b/c it's maintained by Redhat.

[MorphiusFaydal]

GWatt, on 15 Feb, 2008 - 05:35 PM, said:

i think Fedora doesn't use apt b/c it's maintained by Redhat.

That's right. It's not officially a Red Hat project, but there are a lot of Red Hat engineers that do some work on it. And Fedora is the base for Red Hat Enterprise Server/Desktop.

And Tom9729; what's your issue with RPM? I still don't like it, it's too easy to get stuck in RPM-hell, but Yum and apt4rpm make it not such the headache it used to be. So I no longer hate it.

[Louisda16th]

I'm very happy with fedora. And I don't use the Package Manager (pirut). Yum is way more friendly and there's a GUI extension to it (I forgot what it's called). The package manager keeps hanging up every-time. Yum was slow initially but I used a fastest mirror plug-in which took care of that partially.

So what have you decided to use PsychoCoder?

[PsychoCoder]

I havent had a chance to install either as of yet, as you know I went back to work last week, which means 12+ hours away from home, and on Friday it was 14 hours @ work, then 3 hours worth of driving.

I have downloaded both, and am actually going to try both. One of my co-workers has a VM at work with Ubuntu and it looks quite interesting to say the least. I will keep you update as to what I think. I was kind of shocked the see the difference in download size: Ubuntu < 1 GB, Fedora > 2 GB, why such a difference in size?

[MorphiusFaydal]

PsychoCoder, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 10:12 AM, said:

I havent had a chance to install either as of yet, as you know I went back to work last week, which means 12+ hours away from home, and on Friday it was 14 hours @ work, then 3 hours worth of driving.

I have downloaded both, and am actually going to try both. One of my co-workers has a VM at work with Ubuntu and it looks quite interesting to say the least. I will keep you update as to what I think. I was kind of shocked the see the difference in download size: Ubuntu < 1 GB, Fedora > 2 GB, why such a difference in size?

Fedora comes with a lot more packages.. The entire GNOME and KDE suites, to name one. Also, it comes with all the packages needed to run a server (apache, thwo or three flavours of SQL, PHP, Phython, etc). Ubuntu spins that off into a separate disk.

[Louisda16th]

Quote

One of my co-workers has a VM

Virtual Machine?

Quote

Ubuntu < 1 GB

Are you talking about an Ubuntu Live CD?

[PsychoCoder]

MorphiusFaydal, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 08:39 AM, said:

Fedora comes with a lot more packages.. The entire GNOME and KDE suites, to name one. Also, it comes with all the packages needed to run a server (apache, thwo or three flavours of SQL, PHP, Phython, etc). Ubuntu spins that off into a separate disk.

Thanks Morphius, that makes sense


Louis,

I didnt download the LiveCD, just the ISO to install

[Louisda16th]

Louisda16th, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 10:17 PM, said:

Virtual Machine?

Virtual Machine it is .
It is a good idea to try all the distros out on a Virtual Machine (I use Virtual Box). In my case I ended up screwing my Fedora Installation in the VM thrice . But then, I was being careless. I also got to try out Ubuntu and Mint before actually deciding to try Fedora.

[PsychoCoder]

Oops, yes VM == Virtual Machine. We use Microsoft VirtualPC and VirtualServer at work, since of course all run Windows. Since I have both at home I might try it in a VM first to see which I like better, or I could just install both

[Nykc]

Well I am getting a Lappy either through Dell the Inspiron preloaded with Ubuntu or one of the many sales at Best Buy.

My problem is if I get the Windows box from Best Buy and slap Linux on, even as a dual boot - I am concerned about performance issues, especially with the integrated wireless card. I know broadcom isn't supported by linux so I suffered 26k transfer speeds compared to the usual 54k.

Has anyone experienced similiar issues running a dual boot?

[PsychoCoder]

Well I currently have dual-boot (Windows XP, PCLinux) and have suffered no performance lag. I don't know how Ubuntu supports wireless, but I know PCLinux was a breeze setting up my wireless connection. I know a co-worker (who has Ubuntu on a VM) has had a hard time getting the wireless card at work to work in a VM environment.

Linux.Com has a nice article on setting up a wireless connection in Ubuntu that may help with any problems/concerns you may have. Hope that helps

[MorphiusFaydal]

Nykc, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 12:01 PM, said:

Well I am getting a Lappy either through Dell the Inspiron preloaded with Ubuntu or one of the many sales at Best Buy.

My problem is if I get the Windows box from Best Buy and slap Linux on, even as a dual boot - I am concerned about performance issues, especially with the integrated wireless card. I know broadcom isn't supported by linux so I suffered 26k transfer speeds compared to the usual 54k.

Has anyone experienced similiar issues running a dual boot?

The Intel wireless cards are supported by Intel, officially. If you go for a Centrino laptop, that is.

Louisda16th, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 10:47 AM, said:

Quote

One of my co-workers has a VM

Virtual Machine?

Quote

Ubuntu < 1 GB

Are you talking about an Ubuntu Live CD?

In the case of Ubuntu, LiveCD == Normal Install CD.

PsychoCoder, on 17 Feb, 2008 - 11:56 AM, said:

Oops, yes VM == Virtual Machine. We use Microsoft VirtualPC and VirtualServer at work, since of course all run Windows. Since I have both at home I might try it in a VM first to see which I like better, or I could just install both

Personally, I like VMWare Server. Free (as in beer), and it works on Linux and Windows. And, if you buy VMWare Fusion, Mac OS X.

[Nykc]

There is only 1 reason and 1 reason only I would consider Vista in this dilemna. I really want to have the capabilities to play COD4, Crysis etc..

-- I hate these decisions cause for all my development & processing and lurking in the coffee shops basically everything else I want linux. I only want to play games also.

This post has been edited by Nykc: 17 February 2008 - 11:52 AM

[Louisda16th]

I'm not on a dual boot . I have one hard disk for Fedora and one for Windows. It does get irritating when you keep visiting the BIOS to change the hard disk boot priority but that doesn't matter now since I'm mostly on Fedora. It saves me the pain of backing up data if I need to reinstall any one OS. All I got to do is disconnect the required hard disk and continue .

Psychocoder, does Virtual PC work for the Fedora live CDs? I tried them and they didn't work (showed a hazy screen). This did not happen with Ubuntu and Mint. Virtual Box works fine.

[born2c0de]

Quote

Psychocoder, does Virtual PC work for the Fedora live CDs

Yeah, it does.
But it took me 15 minutes+ for the graphical installation screen to appear.
Install in text mode and you should be fine.