angryfirelord

[Log in to get rid of this advertisement]

This distro has definately improved since FC5. It does boot faster than its previous versions and actually has been relatively stable so far. All the software is new and nothing has broken yet.

Adding Compiz is easy. Just do a yum kmod-nvidia on nvidia cards and that will get it up and running. Make sure you use livna-testing as the nvidia beta driver only supports it. There actually is an option, "Desktop Effects" that let you turn it on and off.

Yum was supposed to have speed improvements. While somewhat faster, it still insists on checking the repos everytime I wish to install something.

& of course, the usual lack of multimedia support.

The only really big bug is that Anaconda installs a i586 kernel by default. Upgrading to i686 is as easy as rpm -Uvh --replacefiles --replacepkgs kernel-2.6.18-1.2798.fc6.i686.rpm

Other than that, very impressed, especially by the DNA background.

kevxh

As an update to my initial review - been playing around and tuning for a week or so now and I'm more impressed than ever. I'm a bit of a newbie really, make my living from Microsoft so Linux has always just been a curiosity to me but no more.

Installed it to a P4 1.7Ghz with just 256mb and 16mb ATI card - NOT a fast machine but after I turned off some services, tuned hard disk parameters and a few bits here and there it performs like a dream. I agree with all comments above although it did install the correct (i686) kernel and yes, updating software afterwards can be a little tedious.

The important thing really is that I've been running Windows XP on this machine with disgusting performance, I know it's old but I didn't want to retire it. Now I can run a modern OS with high performance - I'm so very, very impressed.

bswanson27

It was so easy with FC 5. Now with fc6 I have tried so many combinations that I have given up and looking for another distribution.

http://631
uri: //workgroup/192.168.15.225/HPDeskJe shows a connection but refuses to print.

bswanson27

Finally got the printer to work!
Installed without firewall and SELinux.
Use URI: //localhost.localdomain/ipToPrinterServer/PrinterShareName.

tamal

Fedora core is one of the widely supported and FREE Linux distributions.
FC6 now includes kernel-2.6.18 which now supports "pushing the power button of the cabinet to shut-down". I wanted this feature in FC5 and found in FC6.
In FC5, I had a problem with X server. It vanishes here.

cyberwere

I tried the 64-bit version of Fedora Core 6 and was impressed. It has one of the best looking implementations of the Gnome Desktop that I have seen. Things were pretty easy to set up using command line and Yumex. It could, however, use more repositories. There was only two available from what I saw. I had some sort of bug with my mouse in Fedora: it would pin my mouse pointer to the left side of the screen and the only way to fix it was to reboot. I also couldn't get Cedega running properly under Fedora Core 6.

A word of warning to some users with Nvidia graphics cards: You will have to do a text install on this one. The default drivers don't work, not even the vesa drivers. I had to install the Nvidia drivers via the command line using the Livna repository and then configuring Fedora to boot into runlevel 5. I finally got the Gnome Desktop to boot.

Pip

I changed my linux from Redhat Advanced Enterprise to Fedora Core 6 not long ago. Everything is so smooth and fine because they are relations: )
But FC6 looks more stable than the so called "Stable King".You can enjoy all new releases of free software with the wonderful linux distribution without any installation problems(yum and apt-rpm ,smart etc.).So if you really want have a powerful linux for desktop and servers,FC6 should be your best choice I think.
I am a software developer,so my most important need is "stability",and I got it : )

prometheusracer

Got really annoyed with sluggish XP, so erased it and installed FC6 in a bid of desparation. Best move I ever made by the look of it.

In the past month, it has crashed once only, and that was because I was using root constantly...

Wonderful wonderful distro

Khawk

ok, I have been using FCs for a while and found FC6 pretty impressive. But dont know why FC5 is regarded as less stable than FC6, as FC6 crashed a couple of times on PC and laptop (at one time X Server was not running:)). Nothing that happened with me while using FC5

Pros: Hardware recognition is damn impressive. As on a laptop, XP couldnt pick any of the dirvers whereas using FC6 audio, networking and VGA were working perfectly. [I have a history of playing with audio in Linux, so it was impressive :)]

Havent explored all the options in FC6 but a couple annoying things I would like point out.

There is no "Select All" option during Installation, which I really hate. [I guess this option was absent in FC5 as well]

Installing a package from CD after installation is not straight forward as it used to be, without creating yum repository.

KDE Desktop pager seems to have problem with 3D-Desktop, as shows only one desktop on task panel.

zoomgofstr

I have been using Linux off and on for 8 - 10 years. I have not made it to the "confident user" status yet. Do to complicated installation procedures and incompatibility issues. However, this version of Fedora Core has been the easiest to install and operate.
For the fact that I have been a Windows user for all of those years as well, This version of Linux made the cross-over easy for me.
While I am sure it isn't new "Yum" is an exceptional tool. For searching and installing packages you may want to use and/or experiment with. With FC6 the package updater runs smoothly and provides sufficient detail of the packages available for upgrade.
I previously had Fedora Core 5 running on a Dell-build desktop computer (Dimension 3000). I had Linux and Windows on a hot-swap drive bay. I managed to do the install (GUI) on the on-board Intel video and then it took some manipulation to FC5 to recognize the Ati x1300 video card to work with it. When I reinstalled to FC6 it would not start the GUI and failed to identify the Ati card. I attempted to update the core following the info provided at rpm.livna.org and other recommendations but I was not successful. So I installed FC6 on an older home built machine with a Nvidia Geforce2 MX/MX400 video card without any problems.
Easy access to my Windows Mshome network. As I stated in the cons, it is up and down, when the access is up it is good to go, but for some unknown reason to me it goes down. Rhythmbox Music player requires upgrade to play MP3s, do to MP3 legal issues with Fedora.
If your new to Linux and want to experiment with or experience the Linux revolution I recommend Fedora Core 6.

richard wayburn sr

Loaded it in, upgraded it, and took off.
No problems, good stable, great for a Linux novice.
Recognized all the hardware immediately, including the printer, with no tweaking needed at all.

sujinge9

I upgraded to this from Redhat 9 because there was no longer support for Redhat. Overall, this works just like redhat but with a few extra commands and stuff like yum. Overall, I liked it better then redhat, but there was something wrong with my ethernet connection. The modem and connection was detected and I could use the internet for about a minute until it would disconnect and I would have to manually disconnect the cable cord then replug it, and it would work for a minute, then disconnect again. I think its just picky about my ethernet port. It also lacked drivers for Geforce 7s but it came out in the early 2000s so I guess thats not it's problem.

esdumbo2003

I use FC4 64 bits in an production environment with Firebird Database Server for one year, with a Dell PowerEdge Server. The installation was easy and the tuning too.
Two weeks ago we upgraded to FC6 64 bits, but this time we have problems because some libraries don't be available. But now the server is running OK. Tree years ago we work for a year with mandrake comunity edition. For desktop I think Mandrake (now mandriva) is a litle better, but for server Fedora is the winner.

Before use linux for database server we used Windows 2000 server with Firebird 1.5. We test and compare for two months in two identical machines with the same database and the performance in a linux was 50% and some cases 80% better than Windows. This was the first reason to change a linux environment, the second was use a complete open source solution (FC4 now FC6 and Firebird Database Server)

Lsatenstein

Loaded it in, upgraded it, and took off. Noted the daily 6 or 7 updates that have been arriving since release date.

Stopped applying updates as the sysem was stable before the patches and I was afraid the patches might break something that is working.
Recognized all the hardware immediately. I discovered that if we right-mouse click on some of the selections, then the entire group of objects under that selection would be chosen. (select and right-click on kde, gnome, Postgress etc)

rewtedesco

After getting FC6 to work fine on one PC and 2 old laptops, I'm quite impressed with it. It's a lot faster, it seems, than FC5. I had some trouble with the text mode installation, necessary for one laptop. It wasn't clear at all from the installation instructions how to get to a working window system. Without help on the web or from a book it can be quite a pain.

I really like yum and yum-extension. It is very transparent and makes it possible to include other repositories (one should only use one, i chose livna). If one follows the rule - never do modifications other than by yum - it's hard to mess up even with some additional 1200 packages installed. It's a good idea though to have a decent book on Fedora handy (I like the one written for FC6 by Chris Tyler, O'Reilly).

newlin

[Log in to get rid of this advertisement]

downloaded live cd to check after a gap of 2 years using suse and slackware and RH9 which are all excellent ... been using windows 2000 pro sp4 for 2 years for female reasons but hate it so now fedora 6 is good windows is gone now...no problem ..everything works fine..

dudeman41465

As a user previously of Fedora Core 5, I moved to Ubuntu on my desktop machine for a while. After a failed attempt at getting the correct video support for my Dell Inspiron laptop in Ubuntu I decided to give FC6 a try. While it didn't automatically select the best driver, the "intel" driver provided by intel themselves was available, allowing me to use a widescreen resolution and take advantage of 3-d acceleration. It ships with Compiz which is a nice touch. However, there isn't much customization for Compiz available out of the box short of just turning off the window wobble effect and the cube desktop switcher. Some of the software also isn't the newest in the world, Firefox 2.0 still isn't in yum as of January 29th 2007. It's also, as with a lot of distros, a real pain to be able to listen to mp3's and watch .wmv videos, however I am aware that Microsoft is to blame for this. I did have an issue with my DVDs jumping and my CD read speeds being real slow, that being because for some reason (something about the type of dvd drive) DMA support was disabled. I managed to find a little hack to fix the issue, so it's not a real big issue. Thank god for things that run on open source text files!

Still, I don't have a lot of complaints personally about Fedora Core 6. It's a very rock solid and stable operating system, with a ton of software choices, and tons of repos for even more software than you can get by default, and it does ship with Compiz so even the casual user can add that little "snap" to their computer. Unless you set it up otherwise, you can install it using only the first two CDs, and it doesn't come with a whole world of software pre-installed, which is good. With a base, 2 CD install, it comes with Firefox, Evolution, Gaim, and all the standard stuff, then it leaves you, the user, to customize and install your software as you need it. Also, unlike I found out in Ubuntu, totem is not required to use Gnome. You can completely remove totem from your system and still use the Gnome desktop, and then use the software of your choice to play videos. It also seems to run faster than some other distros, just overall speed has improved. Plus, it's an rpm based distribution, making it "really" easy to find and install software.

Overall, Fedora Core 6 is a great operating system that runs very clean and has a lot to offer. I would suggest that everybody at least give Fedora Core a shot.

pappy_mcfae

Considering that Red Hat is a pay-for-it system, I figured the free version, Fedora, would be at least as good as let's say Ubuntu, or even Vector Linux. I was so wrong!

First of all, it took forever to install. For a distribution made up of pre-compiled software, this is inexcusable. It seemed that every step of the install process added another layer of time-eating. From the initial boot to the reboot after install took almost three full hours. The only other pre-compiled distribution to come close was Solaris.

Once installed, I had to stop three separate programs from operating so I could update the system, and attempt to install some other programs, like KDE. Once again, for a system composed of pre-compiled software, it took for ever for things to get done. Once things were done, the irritations just continued.

Samba operated spotty at best. Some times it would connect to my other machines, most times it sat there not connecting, and spewing numerous reasons why.

I didn't keep it on my test system for long. It lasted less than a day. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone for any reason. I'd sooner recommend Debian. At least Debian can eventually be stabilized. It also has lots of packages that don't take for bloody ever to install.

Fedora? Why bother? For what you get, it's hardly worth the effort of downloading the ISO's and wasting six CD's on it (of which, only three wound up being required). There are numerous good distributions out in Linux Land. Steer clear of Fedora! It sucks!

Blessed be!
Pappy

yakkmeister

This should be good ...
But it's broken!

I would think that will all the super-cool stuff and superior architecture of linux that the user experience could be much more fluid.
I don't mind tinkering with stuff to get the most out of my box, but it does gripe me when the latest and greatest can't even detect a serial hardware modem enough to use as much as 'generic drivers.'
This should be the kind of thing that gets seen too before the fancy pants stuff.

Having said that, it's the fancy pants stuff I am looking forward to ...

Viva la Linux!

the_gripmaster

My review is just a reply to the review posted by pappy_mcfae

I installed Fedora Core 6 on 2 of my PCs
PC1: 3.0GHz Pentium 4 with HT, 768 MB RAM
PC2: 2.4GHz Pentium 4, 512 MB RAM

I had a "everything" install on both PCs, and it required no more than 30 minutes. I don't know what kind of PC pappy_mcfae used, but his/her review is so wrong.

ronpolley