LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Reviews > Distributions > Fedora Project
User Name
Password

Notices

Search · Register · Submit New Review · Download your favorite Linux Distributions ·
 

Fedora Core 4
Reviews Views Date of last review
51 142650 07-27-2009
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average Rating
86% of reviewers $10.80 7.6



Description: Fedora Core is RedHats latest offering at it's Open Source OS. Released on June 13th 2005.
Keywords: fedora core 4


Author
Post A Reply 
Old 01-27-2006, 11:52 PM   #1
d_GeNeRiT
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 5
Posts: 28

Rep: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros: Popular distro so lots of support available. Excellent first linux for a newbie
Cons: None! As long as you are willing to ask questions and learn a new OS



Having dropped Linux after trying Mandrake 9.2 a cyear ago i decided to give it one more shot with Fedora 4 and it was a great idea!

I resent these dummies that posted a 1 or 2 as the rating because they are too ignorant to burn an ISO image. I Downloaded the cd-r isos on Windows XP. I used blindwrite (part of the Copy toDVD suite from VSO) to burn the images. Im sure you could use Nero as well. But I think those people are being very foolish to give the distro a bad rating when they never even installed it succesfully and tried it out.

As for these people that say it doesnt support mp3, they are ignorant also. The mp3 codec is not included on the Installation CDs for copywrite issues but you can download the mp3 package easily enough. Just do a search on this site. And also installing VLC media player will allow you to play wma, wmv, and just about any other media format in existance.

Also wine is improved so much to run applications I use to love in Windows such as DVDShrink for ripping DVDs and Mirc for warez!! Limewire also rns on Linux as does Azurian the bit-torrent client. Between those you have all your warez needs covered.

So if you are good with computers as far as Windows is concerned and want to give Linux an honest try, then you cant beat Fedora 4 as a first Linux system and its a server O/S so when you get ready to run servers and such Fedora can do it standing on your head.

Between the fact that this is such a popular distro with so many good technical books written for it and so much help available on the web......this is my distro of choice and I would recommend it to ANYBODY. Now if you are a lazy bastard that wants everything spoonfed to you then stick with Windows and help me make money. Because I am a Windows HelpDesk Technician and I put food on the table from fixing Windows O/S all day. Then I come home to an O/S that works....Fedora Core 4.
 
Old 01-29-2006, 03:28 AM   #2
dudeman41465
 
Registered: Jun 2005
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 794

Rep: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: Stable, fewer bugs than some other distros, more resource efficient
Cons: up2date is crap and should be permanently replaced by yum


As a former Mandriva user I was reluctent to try Fedora Core 4 because Mandriva is what I started Linux with, but I have to say I'm not sorry. Fedora Core has fewer bugs then Mandriva and is a lot more resource efficient. The fonts in web browsers, including Firefox are rendered very well. Video support seems to be of a higher quality as well, and the sound quality. It comes packaged with a "ton" of software. There were a couple things I was annoyed by though. The initial update manager "up2date" is crap and should be replaced by yum upon installation. Yum is easier to navigate, offers bash integration, and is a good package manager as well as update manager. Also some commands (mkisofs and ifconfig to be specific) weren't present in /bin by default, so I had to hunt them down and create my own symbolic links so they would work. It's a really "pure" linux distro, no proprietary stuff, but they might have been a little too careful because I have yet to find the packages to enable NTFS support so I can see my Windows drive. When it comes to resources, FC4 reacts a lot faster and loads faster then some other distros. This is the machine I'm running it on with absolutely no problems.

850 Mhz AMD Duron processor
640 MB 400Mhz DDRAM

All around this is a very good distribution with a ton of customization possibilities, a huge library of built-in software with a huge possibility for expanding that library thanks to .rpm support. I would recommend this distribution to anybody who already has some background in Linux and is looking for a stable, reliable and well supported Linux distribution. It has replaced Mandriva 2006 as my primary OS.
 
Old 02-06-2006, 08:01 AM   #3
Othmane
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros: It's free open source & community developped distribution
Cons:


The most important thas RHEL
(Red Hat Entreprise Linux )
is based on Fedora, then we can run any certified and tested product [ for RHEL ] on Fedora.

like:
- Sun JRE & JDK
- IBM products (eg: JDK, ...)
- Maple 10.x
- SGI products (eg: Maya3D ...)
 
Old 02-10-2006, 10:12 AM   #4
sharma_deepak83
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Red Hat, mandrake, Fedora,Knoppix
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Free, better hardware support and better look and feel
Cons: Installing Source Packages is a pain.


I have a Toshiba Satellite Pro 6100 with windows xp pre installed it. I downloaded the FC4 iso images from the website so It was almost free for me. Installation of FC4 was peice of cake. It installed almost every hardware in my laptop nd even my wifi card nd dat was good part which meant I was on my home network in a flash but dis distro is messed up when it comes to installing softwares from source packages and even some of the rpm installed failed so this was a minus. So I will recommend dis distro 2 a person who is well known 2 linux and who knows how to get it working. This distro is not intented 2 window user who r thinking of making a cross over to linux and give it a try cos dey wont try linux after using it. I still give it 8 becos it has excellent hardware support and also becos its a FEDORA.
 
Old 03-07-2006, 05:09 PM   #5
chuto
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros:
Cons:


im new using linux im learning about it and i dont know where i can get the fedora core 4, i already have fedora core 2, if someone can help ill appresiate
 
Old 03-13-2006, 05:43 AM   #6
stephenwalter
 
Registered: Jul 2005
Distribution: Fedora core 4
Posts: 85

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: easy to install and and lots of new software
Cons: The ISO images are a complete letoff its quite difficult to get the correct images which will install without any errors , i had to waste nearly 12 cd's


I had started working in linux since aug 2005 and I found FC4 to be very easy to install and use. As a programmer i should say that the tools present were very helpful. Installations and updates of software were also easy using yum. Though there were some problems with the welcome screen it was crashing prompting me to use an alternate welcome screen. Otherwise iam really satisfied by the way it works.
 
Old 03-24-2006, 10:41 AM   #7
shorun
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: fedora, mandriva, suse
Posts: 148

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: verry stable, fast install, rather fast boot.
Cons: sometimes slow and poor multimedia support


well, it depends what you are going to do with it. it is sometimes a pain as there is no general config panel, but then again it's so stable and easy in use this allmost fall's apart.
building 3rd party programs is f**** easy, just a simple "yum install [package]" usualy does the trick, and the same program keeps the system up to date out of it's own.

i've not tested it for desktop use, only the server side. it works great and i would reccomend it as a server. but i did notice it is not for desktop use.
 
Old 04-08-2006, 08:43 AM   #8
SA_Ron
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Multiple. Depends on my mood.
Posts: 9

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Good resource use. Easy to use.
Cons: Some kinks. No good config manager.


I've used various SuSE versions, Debian, Puppy, and some others I don't remember. I play around with different distros to find 'the one'. Haven't found it yet, but FC4 is getting there. This is the distro I used every day.

Visually, I'll take SuSE 10. It's beautiful and it has the GUI config manager (YAST 2) that makes life good. However, it eats RAM like there's no tomorrow.

FC4 uses my resources well and it looks nice. The install was easy enough and using yum to install mplayer went really well. I didn't have to go out and get the 6 packages needed to get mplayer running. I just a yum install mplayer and it took care of it. That was sweet.

I wasn't thrilled with the menus, though. Specifically, how do you add or delete things from the menus? Who knows. Some day I may look it up. It's a pain.

Another odd thing is that sometimes the menu bar and the task bar just up and move themselves around. I keep the menu bar up top and the task bar below. Every once-in-a-while the task bar will go up top with the menu bar. Weird.

Despite the little problems, this is a good distro. If you're new to linux, I'd recommend SuSE, since there is basically no learning curve. But if you've used a few OSs, then I'd recommend FC4. The learning curve will be small.
 
Old 05-06-2006, 12:27 AM   #9
Trio3b
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: MDV 2008.1, PCLinuxOS,
Posts: 315

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 3

Pros: none
Cons: resolv.conf/dual boot/bad iso still issues


FC2 had resolv.conf issues when setting up auto DHCP causing 'net connect problems. This problem was listed in errata since 1999.

Unable to dual boot without lengthy workaround also errata listed for years.

Menu groupings seem odd.

Interface "feels' clunky.

You would have thought this was all worked out in FC4, but I never found out. All isos checked out with md5sums but failed during install. CD test failed but many posts recommend continuing with install, but no dice. Burner is good, burn speed is good, checksums good. There are many posts about this issue. Have dwnloaded and burned slax, PClinux, Mandriva, Kubuntu on this exact same PC, burner, and media at 4x,8x,16x,24x with absolutely no problems. Tried different mirrors.

Also the installer will not resize a Wxp NTFS partition. Had to use my Mandrake bootdisk to partition, then reboot and insert fedora. Installer is vague during the partitioning portion. "Unhandled exception" occurs and attributes itself to a bug.

Distro seems bloated.
Wow....for as long as this distro has been around and bugs been listed at the RH site - for me it rates a 3-4 for FC2 and a 0 for FC4.
 
Old 05-16-2006, 08:36 PM   #10
angryfirelord
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Posts: 497

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: $50.00 | Rating: 7

Pros: tons of stuff
Cons: slow at times(feels bloated), sometimes rpms don't work


I got this with the Fedora bible, so that helped me out a little bit.

This distro is a nice distro, and I still enjoy using it, but there are some issures that need fixing:

-KDE still isn't perfectly stable. Some programs will refuse to work.
-hardware requirements are a littel steep compard to other linux distros. You need 200mhz for cpu and 64MB for text, or 400mhz and 192mb(256mb recommended) for the GUI. I ran mine on a PIII 866mhz and 320mb RAM & it ran at a reasonable speed, but not as snappy as Ubuntu did.
-Fedora introduced it's own installer similar to the Windows Add/Remove programs. However, it never seemed to want to install the RPMs.

Other than that it's a good distro. Besides, it's free, so quirks are expected.
 
Old 05-23-2006, 01:54 PM   #11
sms043
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: RH9 looking at Deb
Posts: 19

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Easy installer, good community support, good hardware support
Cons: No mp3 support, no DVD support, No Sun Java


Downloaded the DVD iso from a Fedora Core mirror site.
Updated the kernel once to 2.6.15-1.1831_FC4.
Platform:
Asus K8N, Sempron 3100, 1G OCZ DDR-400 memory, GeForce4 MX 4000 AGP 8x, PVR-250, Agere Systems FW323 (Firewire), SoundBlaster. Triple boot - Ubuntu, Windows 2000, FC4.
Good: All of the mother board hardwre was recognized and works. Both on-board sound and SoundBlaster work. Clearlook theme is easy on the eyes and useable. Wine 0.9.7 is much better - allegro viewer, MathCad, PCBTemp working in wine. I like the gnome panel applets - cpu temperature, netspeed, cpuspeed.
Bad: Had to manually edit fstab and mount non-Fedora HDD partitions. Ubuntu atomatically mounted my HDD partitions. I had to edit cpuspeed.conf to make the Sempron power states work.
WishList:
DVD support, MP3 support, Sun Java, Automount HDD partitions. I know DVD,MP3 and Sun Java support can be added after the install.
 
Old 06-16-2006, 10:26 AM   #12
tusharkant16
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Distribution: Fedora& Debian
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros:
Cons:


It's an amazing Distro. I have recently switched over to linux from windows, i had tried Mandrake and Mandriva, but they always gave some problem or the other. Fedora Core 4 is realy stable, easy to use. However, it does get a little slow at certain occasions and the KDE shipped with is is rubbish. Also multimedia is realy sad, but the moment you connect to the internet, you can wave all your multimedia problems good bye!! Also 99.9% of the softwares have a version for FC4 so searching for rpms is realy easy.
 
Old 06-17-2006, 08:44 AM   #13
RedCharlie
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Distribution: Fedora, Ubuntu, CentOS
Posts: 26

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: dvd iso, easy install, YUM package manager, hardware support
Cons: multimedia apps generally don't work


Being able to install from a dvd beats the heck out of swapping 5 or 6 CD's. And anaconda makes the install very easy (as it has for a while now).

What really made me switch from Knoppix to Fedora was 1)SATA support (I have an MSI KM400-M with a sata drive, and earlier Fedoras would not install) and 2) yum, which free me from rpm hell (and works as well as apt in debian)

My main complaint is some of the multimedia apps (totem, cdplayer, nautilus for burning?) don't work all that well. I wound up installing kde apps (kaffeine on top of xine, k3b) to do the job. But they work well in Gnome/Fedora and yum made installing them a snap.
 
Old 06-17-2006, 08:46 AM   #14
RedCharlie
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Distribution: Fedora, Ubuntu, CentOS
Posts: 26

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: dvd iso, easy install, YUM package manager, hardware support
Cons: multimedia apps generally don't work


Being able to install from a dvd beats the heck out of swapping 5 or 6 CD's. And anaconda makes the install very easy (as it has for a while now).

What really made me switch from Knoppix to Fedora was 1)SATA support (I have an MSI KM400-M with a sata drive, and earlier Fedoras would not install) and 2) yum, which free me from rpm hell (and works as well as apt in debian)

My main complaint is some of the multimedia apps (totem, cdplayer, nautilus for burning?) don't work all that well. I wound up installing kde apps (kaffeine on top of xine, k3b) to do the job. But they work well in Gnome/Fedora and yum made installing them a snap.
 
Old 08-16-2006, 10:49 AM   #15
Chargh
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Fedora 16
Posts: 251

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Easy to Install, Great Applications, Easy to use, Great OS.
Cons: Does not seem to come with Wine.


The first Linux used was Red Hat Linux 6. Then I used Red Hat Linux 8 for years. After Red Hat Stopped making new versions, two New Linux distributions were created Fedora Core, and CentOS which my Farther uses for work. I installed Fedora Core 4 last January and are quite happy with it. I installed Gnome and KDE on my computer. I prefer Gnome but like KDE applications. I am still having trouble installing programs on Fedora, because I have only been using Knoppix for years beforehand. However I am learning. Luckily Fedora being a Red Hat based distribution, it supports RPMS. I think have to install wine, unless it Comes with Fedora Core 5, I just need more CDRs to burn the Fedora CD images. I would suggest Fedora to any one with a Fairly Modern Machine. My Brother though is going to try Debian and Slackware because they have Older machines than I do. To get Fedora Core go to http://fedora.redhat.com/ ;)
 
Old 08-20-2006, 03:42 AM   #16
bashishtha
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 1
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 1

Pros: easy availability
Cons: media error (ISO files)



I have faced similar problems, as other users of iso file error. Currently using Fedora Core 3 successfuly. Tried to upgrade to core 4, with downloaded files from net & failed in the first booting screen. Retried with other site with same result. Then tried with CHIP magazine DVD distro, again with same result & now tired.( It took my 6 month of patience.) My configuration is Intel P IV 2.8, 915GAV board. I want to upgrade only to hear from onboard (HD )Audio & SL1900 modem to link to internet.
 
Old 12-05-2006, 05:14 PM   #17
StargateSteve
 
Registered: Dec 2006
Distribution: Debian Lenny
Posts: 107

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 10

Pros: Stable, useful set of tools, lightweight
Cons: Limited set of included multimedia tools


It recognised my hardware, even though the OS came out years before the computer. Comes with SMP kernels, good set of drivers. Also, it has more than one of each type of application, so you do get to customize a bit. Has all of the dev files.

Unfortunately, it doesn't include lame or libdvdcss, so you need to get those seprately.
 
Old 02-20-2007, 12:06 AM   #18
henrysukumar
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 33

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: More faster on Laptop
Cons: Good on Dell


I fairly recommend people you have laptop to go with FC4. Since i have done FC4 installation on my Dell laptop, which works much faster. I have 512 MB RAM on a p4. I have not tried FC6, but have a plan to upgrade. I could highly see the difference in my boot time. Cool OS that can really replace windows on laptops..
 
Old 05-15-2009, 06:50 PM   #19
airwei
 
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 0

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros:
Cons:


why download link none of working to me?
 
Old 05-15-2009, 08:43 PM   #20
airwei
 
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 0

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros:
Cons:


in the achieve directory, got it
 
Old 07-27-2009, 11:26 AM   #21
Jose Rivas
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 54

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: Works SATA disks, complete list utilities
Cons: Some ATI cards not supported


Nice to work like samba server to shares into the lan.
There is a problem, when the ethernet signal stop, the NIC can be stop too. The you should start manually or restart.
To me, is a nice desktop linux. The printing engine is easy.
I dont can gain access to my Epson Perfection 1670 scanner, using Kooka or SANE, was not possible (to me!!)
 
Page:  1 · 2 




  



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:35 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement

My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration