I have played with both distros, and both seem quite nice. i was wondering, exactly how are they different? what sets them apart? i am not a linux guru, so most of my initial experiences will deal with the system right out of the box, maybe adding a program here or there. so i would like to hear others opinions on high and low points of each. perhaps little about each distro's "fundamental" concepts? any takers?

if it helps, i would like to use the computer for simple school work: office, internet, matlab, gimp, etc. and it will be on a pentium m laptop with an ati 9700.

I like the idea of the new aiglx included in fc6, i think ubuntu has it too, but i dont know where to enable it. (currently i have both running within vmware, and i know that you cannot use compiz from within)

Ubuntu has XGL and Compiz install instructions at the Wiki I think, try Googling if it doesn't help. Straightforward instructions are there.

Biggest difference: Fedora Core is based on the old RedHats, Ubuntu is based on Debian. Go ahead, read what's different with Debian and RedHat. Ubuntu is a one-disc thing at the time, Fedora is something like 3 or 4 discs if I'm right. If you want to know what's the difference in your daily use..well, there actually isn't. It's just that Ubuntu comes with some different packages than Fedora, they have their config files in a bit different locations on the disc etc..so if it's just regular use, gimp and internet, pick which one you like more (the outfit, for example).

One thing that has caught my eye is that Fedora comes with a million trillion packages, three quarters of which you'll probably never ever even use. Ubuntu tries to install only one application per one need, i.e. it shouldn't install thirty scanner programs by default, whereas Fedora might well do that (just an example, I have no idea how many scanner apps FC installs by default). For both of them you can install a lot of apps from the net, so it's not that big a deal -- I liked Ubuntu more because it's slightly smaller (had to download only one disc, installed very quickly -- 15 minutes against the 30-50 minutes for Fedora) and I consider it being a bit more stable. And Ubuntu has, if I'm right, longer support than Fedora -- Ubuntu (version 6.06 Dapper) should give updates for 5 years after the release, I doubt if Fedora releases updates that long for each of their releases.

Unless you're a geek, it makes no big difference. Take a look at the screenshots and decide -- remember, they both come with the same desktops too

There's not a whole lot of difference between them. The GUI on both can be configured identically, and although the underlying components differ slightly in places, the vast majority is the same.

One difference is the desktop effects you mentioned. FC6 does indeed use AIGLX; Ubuntu uses a similar technology, called XGL; it works rather differently but achieves the same overall effect.

For the tools you mentioned though, you could easily use either, there really isn't much to choose between them. As a long-time Fedora user, I'd recommend Fedora over Ubuntu, but that's just my personal choice. YMMV.

You can also get a single-DVD version which all goes on one disc.

***sorry***

Seems like my post got duplicated..
(don't know why, it took a minute to "save" the post, I clicked only once)

As others mentioned, there isn't much difference in terms of daily use because they have similar desktops and other features. One major difference is that Fedora ships more packages on its discs and leaves it up to the user to install what they like, whereas Ubuntu makes this selection for you, sort of like "one size fits all", which may or may not be ideal for some users. Shipping with many packages gives the user choice during initial installation and is ideal for those that have slow or no internet connections. Fedora Core also seems to have a lot more GUI tools for day to day configuration of the system. You can do most things without having to drop into the command line if you wish.

My opinion only..
Ubuntu has the better package management system
Fedora in many ways is simpler.

My current favorite is Mepis (based on Ubuntu), but uses KDE instead of Gnome. Thus it is really more like Kubuntu.
If I ever get everything working, I think that I may eventually switch to Arch. REALLY good package manager, but much more focussed on CLI and hand-editing of config files.

so is it safe to assume that both will install drivers and programs the same?(these are all packages?) fedora has rpms, ubuntu doesnt? same sort of thing? does ubuntu require more compiling?

No--every distro will have differences in what gets installed by default. The modern ones will ALL have drivers for the most common hardware.

Packages include utilities, drivers, applications--all kinds of things

Ubuntu is based on Debian, where the packages are called (.deb)s There is a tool (alien) that will install (.rpm)s I don't know if the reverse is true

The concept of packages is common to many distros--the details are different.

No--compiling is only required when there is nothing in the package manager (repository), AND when the SW is not built for your distro. Most users of Fedora or Ubuntu would seldom need to compile anything.