Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu or Fedora

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by daniel of sarnia View Post
    Launchpad is just a collaboration web site, are any of red hats web sites open sourced? Let alone this one or one like google. Frankly who cares, it's just a custom lamp stack. I don't mean to rage one web developers, me being one, but not much they do is novel or that hard to repeat. There just is not that much value in it.
    Also you're being unfair to the ubuntu development team, they work really hard to get stuff upstream. Stuff like upstart, and features in gnome. Ubuntu just does not have as many people as rad hat, and they have only been doing this since 2004. They also don't charge for their LTS like rad hat does. So give them a brake.
    I don't think it's giving ubuntu a hard time for being hypocritical on open source software.

    They market their launchpad software as the solution to develop open source software... I am under the belief open source software shouldn't be built maintained or otherwise dependent on proprietary software.

    Fedora also likes to be high and mighty that they don't use proprietary software, but last release they put in a codec manager, to buy fluendo codecs. Which now they are taking out I here. Also they use proprietary firmware like everyone else to get thinks like wifi runing. What's the difference, look I'd like everything I use to be open source. That's why I use linux. But when your just using close software to enable the use of open software, what's the big deal. Your just nit picking because you don't like ubuntu. I hardly think you don't use one bit of close software, between flash, firmware, codecs, and 3d video. What's the difference if you enable it. Or like ubuntu the os asks you IF you'd like to enable it. This is all just bickering and bias nit picking in my eyes.
    Firmware is different from drivers. Firmware is more tied to the hardware, and could theoretically be hardware. Codecs are more patent-encumbered... which is a different issue.

    Using binary blobs(drivers,flash, etc.) to fill in gaps in free software isn't a long term solution. It doesn't help the community to not aide developing free drivers. The problems most people have with Linux whether they use Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSE or whatever is the trials of binary blobs that don't work well with the fast pace of linux.




    I'm using both ubuntu and rad hat right now, which I have been for years. So don't be mad for me calling out people just name calling. Childish...
    I don't get what you mean here. Can you explain it?

    Tsabo, like me and other people have been saying, just pick up different live CDs and see what's best for you. There is a new version of ubuntu and fadora coming out at the end of this April to keep your eyes open for.
    Yeah this is good advice.

    Whatever though, these conversations are always endless discussions between users of either distro.

    Comment


    • #17
      Didn't take long for the smoke to start, next comes the flames.

      I tried suse 9 way back, and it was usable, I bet opensuse is very nice. ?

      Have you looked at this site?

      http://www.distrowatch.com/

      It has some page rankings in the right column.
      Last edited by c247; 03-29-2008, 05:33 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
        I don't think it's giving ubuntu a hard time for being hypocritical on open source software.

        They market their launchpad software as the solution to develop open source software... I am under the belief open source software shouldn't be built maintained or otherwise dependent on proprietary software.
        That's true, and fedora was selling fluendo codecs though their codec buddy app, which all are proprietary, regardless of whether they are legal or not. Who's hypocritical now!


        Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
        Firmware is different from drivers. Firmware is more tied to the hardware, and could theoretically be hardware. Codecs are more patent-encumbered... which is a different issue.
        But most of it is not hardware, it's microcode written in c. Your point is moot. Like I said before, the fluedo codecs are not "patent-encombered" they are just proprietary software, that fedora was "hypocritically" selling for fluendo.

        Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
        Using binary blobs(drivers,flash, etc.) to fill in gaps in free software isn't a long term solution. It doesn't help the community to not aide developing free drivers. The problems most people have with Linux whether they use Ubuntu/Fedora/SuSE or whatever is the trials of binary blobs that don't work well with the fast pace of linux.
        I never said that was not true, I Only asked what is the difference if the os enabled it or the user, when company's like nvidia give no other choice. You also are clearly avoiding my question or whether you hold yourself up to the some "moral" standard and only use free software.




        Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
        I don't get what you mean here. Can you explain it?
        No problem, you equated Mark Shuttleworth to Steve Balmer. Which is frankly just childish name calling. Especially considering he has played a big part in helping enable literally millions of users more easily get a hold of free software.

        Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
        Yeah this is good advice.

        Whatever though, these conversations are always endless discussions between users of either distro.
        Again, agreed!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by c247 View Post
          Didn't take long for the smoke to start, next comes the flames.
          Ahh yes, why people can't just use what works for them and not resort to name calling is always so much fun /sarcasm

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by koolmanoncampus View Post
            Just factual correction here... So the thread isn't tainted with misconceptions if it ever comes up as a reference in the future.
            So lets get some facts straight.

            AppArmor was a security suite that Novell came up with to compete against the SELinux Security package developed principally by the NSA.
            Wrong, AppArmor debuted in 1998-2003 in Immunix. On May 10, 2005, Novell acquired Immunix.On January 10, 2006, Novell released it as opensource under the GPL 2.

            so I really wonder why Canoical would base its security solution for a LTS release on unmaintained software.
            AppArmor is still maintained and developed by it's original developers with Crispin Cowan at lead developer with his startup company Mercenary Linux. The last recent maintenance release was Feb 15th of this year.
            Last edited by deanjo; 03-29-2008, 11:09 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Go with Ubuntu

              Try them both, but personally I would go with Ubuntu.

              The nice thing about Ubuntu installer is that you can run it like a live CD and see how well it works with your hardware without installing it.

              plus the ubuntu forums are the best for any questions and answers.
              http://ubuntuforums.org/

              Comment

              Working...
              X