NOTE: Red Hat vs. Fedora Forum

now who said that it isn't ?

Well I finally decided to try out those FC2 cds which I have laying around. To say that was a big disappointment would be a gross understatement!
It was a sign of things to come, I guess when I found myself reading up on making sure the hard drive doesn't get wacked during install. I used the instructions which I found on the web "linux hda=9729,255,63" and that worked ok. Even so, I got a message to the effect that whatever partitioned the drive before did a bad job ( it was FC1 ) Anywho, I just clicked on ignore and nothing bad happened.

When I booted up is where the ugly stuff started coming out of the wood work.
For the first time ever, Redhat aka FC2 failed to install my nic. Nice, I'll check that later.
When I click on an icon, I get this stupid bouncy thing which adds nothing usefull.
When I go to close a window by clicking on the X , it has a resize <--> thingy instead of a normal arrow
Konqueror doesn't save the view which I last used.
Start Here used to have server configuration tools which I can't find anywhere.
When I use the panel configuration, it won't resize vertically so one can't click on apply or ok to save the settings.
The mouse action is set to one click by default which it never used to be.

Argh! I'm falling out of love with Redhat.

hehehe
i already hate FC , so i switched over to other

Ok, the nic problem was easy enough. I ran the command:dmesg | grep eth which showed the nic as being detected but a look at the hardware address showed that FC2 had reversed the assignment of eth0 and eth1. Other distros have done that but never before has Redhat done this to me. That's no big deal but now I have to adjust my firewall script.
I found the folder called System Settings. It's still available in the Gnome desktop which I don't normally use. I can't find the Desktop Switching Tool where I tell the system to boot up into KDE. Since that isn't available, the system boots into Gnome by default.
The bouncey thingy by the cursor arrow is more likely a brain child of KDE as I also noticed that when using Knoppix 3.4 .
I wanted to install Mozilla Firefox using apt or even yum. Apt is not available and Yum doesn't have the apt package or even the firefox package. No problem, I'll just install Apt from an rpm in my collection. WRONG! Normally, you can right click on a rpm package and select "extract here" but that feature seems to be missing in FC2. Ok, I'll just use the command: rpm -Uvh < some.rpm> . Wrong again, some kind of lib compatability issue.

At this point, I'll just zap FC2 and reinstall the FC1 image. Don't mean to sound nasty or ungreatful and I hope the good folks at Redhat / Fedora will fine tune things abit.

Grrrrr.... Can't seem to make it behave properly... (sigh my dog behaves more properly than software) oh wel.... anyway, i just tried to use it just to know what the hype is all about...
But IMHO, if you have some things want done... rather use something else(in my case anyway)., RH9 installed w/out a hitch on my boxen., and FreeBSD took a while but installed anyway.. both of my boxen seem to run properly with (wine)$$office,and other stuff... So., ill just have to try it again some other tyme.. But surely Fedora has the right motives for incorporating "bleeding edge" software in their system., but for me., it plainly makes me bleed...
And now i can see why other distro's (e.g. Debian) have older software...

That's strange how people compare FC and RH by installation matters not by usage. I have an experienxce og RH8 (my first Linux), then RH9 and finally FC2. All of them installed fine on my PC. I decided to switch to FC2 only due to my wish of getting an upgraded system with current versions of kernel, perl etc. RH8 was bad, RH9 was great, FC2 is rather on the way to RH8 and I'm thinking about definetely switching to something like Debian. I'm tired of getting numerous errors during compilation and bugs in X system. The only thing that stops me is the huge RPM base over the net for RH/FC.

True Red Hat doesnt support it, but at least there are updates, and new cores (a.k.a Fedora 2), however Fedora 2 is still very buggy, and I have never used RH9, only Fedora 2 and Mandrake 10.0

mandrake ten any good? I dont really like the way mandrake looks, but have heard 10 is a big improvement.

well fedora is not running well on p4 3.2 ghz ht. it hangs a lot and internal modems are not getting detected on it! RedHat 9 much better in these 2 cases.

Internal modems are a "NO" to any linux (even though some distros may work, but still its a NO)

what problems do u face running it on a p4 ?? have u tried disabling ACPI / APM or APIC ?

I've tried both Red Hat Linux 9 and Fedora Core 1 and I say that Fedora is better. Why? Because Fedora uses up2date and yum, so you don't have to register with RHN. Plus, Fedora has newer versions of OpenOffice, GNOME, up2date and more. It also has a part-graphical part-text bootup. Obviously, Fedora is as easy to use as RHL, but also faster and better. So I'd recommend to whoever's using RHL to move to Fedora Core!

I've used in turn RH8 ,RH9, FC1, and FC2. In my opinion they got better all the time. Of course I am also getting more experienced. With FC2 there was a problem with no firewire support, then a problem with gdm when you switched user, and recently another problem.. I think that FC2 is more "bleeding edge" now, than (say) RH9 was, when RH9 came out. So you are taking a bit of a risk, especially if you are a newbie, going with the newest FC. On the other hand, now that we have yum and all the yum repositories and there are so many people contributing to fedora, life has become a lot easier than in the RH8 days.

I've used RH9, FC1, FC2 on both servers and workstations. I have yet to have any major issues. The only thing I've come across w/ FC1 is that I've had to disable USB support on some older Compaq servers that don't even have USB, otherwise install will crash right before it starts anaconda. Personally, I'm sticking w/ FC1 until I can test FC2 a little more. Specifically I want to play with SELinux. Has anyone had any experience w/ it?

redhat and fedora core have the same architecture, so if you know or you're good at one of these distrib then you can do the same on the other one.

actually, RedHat is far to be free anymore & FC is redhat opensource project.
does this mean FC is a kind of a beta test for RH?
mmmmhhh...

RedHat label itself as the industry distro. most of the IT buisness group i worked for definitely wanted RH.
The problem is that till the last open release (9) RH put to much experimental stuff in there system. This is completely amazing for a distro that aim to hit the buisiness market. RH should not sacrify anything to stabilty & compatibility but it did for RH 9.
At least FC doesn't claim for anything.

Right now, i wouldn't use any distro that doesn't provide a decent packet manager. FC as a reliable RPM repository servers system & has a good port of apt-get.
Whatever, FC would install twice more stuff on a minimal install than a slackware would do, it has a really good hardware support & reliable package managment.
FC has a heavy kernel compare to Debian, Arch, Rock... but at least your USB mouse, touchpad gonna work directly, without any kernel rebuild or driver build & modprobe. If you have recent hardware, this is a good choice.

RH is dead as open source. I would never use a Linux distro i'd have to pay licence for.