Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 31st Aug 2009 21:14 UTC, submitted by Henry
Fedora Core The next version of Fedora, Fedora 12, will integrate a Moblin Desktop Environment. It can be easily "groupinstalled" via the yum package manager. The environment has already been added to the Constantine alpha release of Fedora 12 and to Fedora's "Rawhide" development branch. They're seeking testers to "make it great" for the final release of Fedora 12, which will be released in early November.
Order by: Score:
Moblin?
by Macrat on Mon 31st Aug 2009 22:15 UTC
Macrat
Member since:
2006-03-27

Is that a brand name or someone trying to be O'Reilly plaguing the world it silly names/

Reply Score: 0

RE: Moblin?
by robojerk on Mon 31st Aug 2009 22:40 UTC in reply to "Moblin?"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

http://moblin.org/

Moblin is an open source project focused on building a Linux-based platform optimized for the next generation of mobile devices including Netbooks, Mobile Internet Devices, and In-vehicle infotainment systems.

It's for Nettops/Smart Phones

Reply Score: 2

Fedora
by marcp on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:01 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

Fedora used to look _good_, but it's terribly unstable. I installed it on a corporate desktop once and I was hugely disappointed. It was also working really slow constantly mangling its guts. That was a nightmare. I don't see it on the mobile devices, even if it's trimmed down already.

Edited 2009-08-31 23:04 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Fedora
by AdamW on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:07 UTC in reply to "Fedora"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

runs fine on my Vaio P, which is hardly high spec (1.33GHz Atom). Of course, I would say that...

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Fedora
by fretinator on Tue 1st Sep 2009 13:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Fedora"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

The one thing Fedora does better than any of the other main distros is power management. Fedora had the lowest out-of-box power usage of any - 8-9W on my Asus 1000HE. I had other problems (my Atheros wireless) that wound up making Fedora untenable,but I hope all distros will examine what they are doing power-wise.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Fedora
by kenji on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:11 UTC in reply to "Fedora"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

Fedora used to look _good_, but it's terribly unstable. I installed it on a corporate desktop once and I was hugely disappointed. It was also working really slow constantly mangling its guts. That was a nightmare. I don't see it on the mobile devices, even if it's trimmed down already.

Fedora is not built to be used on the 'corporate desktop' AFAIK, that is what Red Hat EL is for.

I run fedora 11 on my laptop and it is by far the best performing OS that I have installed on that machine (out of around 7 different OSen, I can't recall all of them). Not sure where this slowness you were experiencing was coming from. Also I have not noticed Fedora to be 'terribly unstable' as you say but maybe I have just had better experiences with it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Fedora
by John Blink on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Fedora"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11


Fedora is not built to be used on the 'corporate desktop' AFAIK, that is what Red Hat EL is for.


I am tired of hearing that. It is not stable, it is broken.

For example I can't install F11 on an nforce motherboard PC or even eeepc1000hd. This is because of a broken anaconda, on release!!!!

Quoting from the following page.
To understand better whether Fedora is suitable for you, ask yourself the following:

* Do you want the latest stable software, produced and maintained by a growing community of FOSS contributors?


The result to all the dot points....
If the answer to any or all of these questions is "yes," you should consider Fedora as your operating system. We feature the latest in free and open source technologies


Lies all lies. I use to love Fedora.

I will try version 12 lets hope it works.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Fedora
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fedora"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Oh, thats why it doesn't work my nforce computer. I just moved on without thinking twice about why.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Fedora
by John Blink on Tue 1st Sep 2009 00:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fedora"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

I have an nforce4 board, but that isn't the reason it won't install. It is the anaconda installer causing my install issues.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AnacondaStorageRewrite

The target release for that should have been delayed.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Fedora
by Hiev on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fedora"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

For example I can't install F11 on an nforce motherboard PC

Same here, Fedora has been broken for like 2 years or more. It is just an amateur project, learn from Ubuntu.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Fedora
by sbergman27 on Mon 31st Aug 2009 23:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fedora"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I am tired of hearing that. It is not stable, it is broken.

I hear you. After 12 years in the RH camp, my clients and I have given up and moved on. Because it's getting worse and worse, and yet the devs feel they're doing great. And if you complain about the breakage you just get chastised by for not helping them enough. It's as though they don't realize they have competition. When a distro is broken, and the devs just want to blame the users... the users, reasonably enough, prefer to move to a distro that isn't broken rather than wasting their time on a lost cause. IMO, Fedora's attitude has helped fuel the popularity of a certain other distro.

My advice? Stop worrying about Fedora. Find a distro that isn't so broken all the time and enjoy life. By staying with Fedora you are only enabling the project's continued maladaptive behavior.

Lies all lies. I use to love Fedora. I will try version 12 lets hope it works.

I did too. And RH Linux before it. Go ahead and waste your time on another release if you want. But don't say I didn't warn you. ;-)

Edited 2009-09-01 00:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Fedora
by jackson on Tue 1st Sep 2009 00:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fedora"
jackson Member since:
2005-06-29

I have been a long-time Debian stable and Slackware user (10 years or so) and I definitely value stability over bleeding edge. I remember trying Fedora Core in its early days and having a terrible time with stability.

However, in the past year, I decided to devote one of my laptops (Thinkpad x61s) to Fedora, starting with F10. I have been very pleasantly surprised at both F10 and F11. The installs have been flawless, the repos have met all my needs, and the stability has been there. Yum with yum-fastestmirror and yum-presto easily matches apt in transaction time, and yum's clean and informative output exceeds the garbage apt spews out.

Overall, Fedora has definitely improved its overall experience, and I find myself quite enjoying my time with my Fedora laptop. I still love and use Debian and Slackware (and probably always will) but Fedora has really impressed me.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Fedora
by joekiser on Tue 1st Sep 2009 01:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Fedora"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30

Bump for freaking truth.

I used to distro hop every few weeks, but since F11 came out, I've been absolutely impressed with the quality of product that Fedora puts out. This is hands down, the best OS I've used on my T61...and that includes the XP that it came with. I've changed desktop environments and software from LXDE to KDE to Gnome and back to Xfce in that time without breaking anything. The package management system is the best I've seen...DeltaRPMs make updating a breeze by only downloading the difference between what has changed and thus reducing download size. The only thing I have to worry about is manually recompiling the VirtualBox kernel module whenever it or the kernel is updated. I don't know what to say, maybe it's a Thinkpad thing, but this system is rock solid. Sorry that I had to go offtopic, but I just wanted to add my case to the "Fedora is not broken" camp.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Fedora
by sbergman27 on Tue 1st Sep 2009 01:39 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Fedora"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I used to distro hop every few weeks, but since F11 came out, I've been absolutely impressed with the quality of product that Fedora puts out. This is hands down, the best OS I've used on my T61...

Just wait until your next upgrade. You'll see. A couple months using one release on one machine is hardly grounds for claiming your experience to be "truth". F11 worked for you on your T61. That's exactly all that means.

And you can only put off the day of reckoning for 13 months from the day of release (10 months from now) because they drop your support like a hot potato 13 months from release. Talk about an upgrade treadmill! That's another thing we got fed up with regarding Fedora. Once we *did* finally get the breakage worked around on our machines after an upgrade... we couldn't stick with that installation very long. And so the whole nightmare would begin again.

Edit: Of course, the above assumes that one or more of the torrent of updates flooding out of the Fedora update fire hose doesn't get you first.

Edited 2009-09-01 01:42 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Fedora
by AdamW on Tue 1st Sep 2009 05:28 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Fedora"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

"Just wait until your next upgrade. You'll see. A couple months using one release on one machine is hardly grounds for claiming your experience to be "truth". F11 worked for you on your T61. That's exactly all that means."

So...your subjective experience on your hardware is truth, someone else's subjective experience on their hardware isn't?

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Fedora
by segedunum on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:54 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Fedora"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Just wait until your next upgrade. You'll see....And you can only put off the day of reckoning for 13 months from the day of release (10 months from now) because they drop your support like a hot potato 13 months from release. Talk about an upgrade treadmill!

Hmmmmmm, and you think you've solved that 'upgrade treadmill' by moving to another distribution? They *all* have that problem sunshine except if you use a source based distribution like Gentoo where you can largely get around binary compatibility problems and upgrading or reinstalling 'as a whole', but that brings problems in itself. Most people just install their new distribution, and they can largely get around the pain of doing so by having a separate /home partition.

The notion that you can do in-place upgrades with impunity with any distribution apart from Fedora is just plain stupid.

Once we *did* finally get the breakage worked around on our machines after an upgrade... we couldn't stick with that installation very long. And so the whole nightmare would begin again.

Specific known examples? For any one that you come up with anyone will almost certainly be able to point you to breakages in any distribution.

Of course, the above assumes that one or more of the torrent of updates flooding out of the Fedora update fire hose doesn't get you first.

Without examples and a rational comparison between different distributions then this is meaningless I'm afraid.

Edited 2009-09-01 11:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Fedora
by AdamW on Tue 1st Sep 2009 05:26 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Fedora"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

"The only thing I have to worry about is manually recompiling the VirtualBox kernel module whenever it or the kernel is updated."

You don't need to do that, unless you need the non-open source edition of VirtualBox for some of its features. If the features of the open source edition are OK for you, you can get it packaged from RPM Fusion, where the kmod/akmod system will take care of the kernel modules.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Fedora
by segedunum on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fedora"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

After 12 years in the RH camp, my clients and I have given up and moved on. Because it's getting worse and worse, and yet the devs feel they're doing great. And if you complain about the breakage....

Hmmmm. Specific examples of breakage that you can at least Google for, as I did 'for a certain other distro' at one point? I'm willing to bet we'll find comparable breakages and problems in all distributions.

Fedora is basically a feed into RHEL and little more really. However, if people think things are going to be better with Ubuntu or any other distribution then they are likely to be disappointed. Every distribution throws something together with brand new software version bumps that they all share every six months and releases like LTS have problems in themselves. The notion that you'll get stability elsewhere from 'a certain other distro', and that has boosted its popularity, is laughable.

Certainly, corner case hardware issues happen on any distribution, and I had one with installing OpenSuse 11.1 (but not 11.0 bizarrely) not so long ago. By and large I've found Fedora to be no worse and no better than any other distribution.

Edited 2009-09-01 10:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Fedora
by sbergman27 on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Fedora"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

However, if people think things are going to be better with Ubuntu or any other distribution then they are likely to be disappointed.

My clients and I certainly have not been disappointed by the migrations. Fedora's penchant for including stuff that's not quite ready yet combined with the "Fedora Update Firehose" and the forced upgrades every 12 months[1]... well, let's just say that those "features" set Fedora apart from other distros.

It's true that distros with long release cycles have their own problems. But we're finding that we can upgrade the distro we've moved to as frequently as desired (6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months), and do it with relative confidence.

[1] Every six months, really. Sure, you can skip a release... but then you *have* to upgrade within 4 weeks of the release of the next version... which is always a bad idea with Fedora. In my professional experience, it's best to wait until close to time for version x+1 to come out before upgrading to version x, and pray that they've fixed enough breakage by that time to get you by. Or move to another distro, of course.

Edited 2009-09-01 11:04 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Fedora
by segedunum on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:59 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Fedora"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

But we're finding that we can upgrade the distro we've moved to as frequently as desired (6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months), and do it with relative confidence.

If you can do that then I'm happy for you because you're virtually the only person who can do anything like that with 'relative confidence'. It's easier just to install a new version because there's always something that doesn't surface until a few months later.

Every six months, really. Sure, you can skip a release...

I'm talking about it from the point of view that every six months packages are basically version bumped so there is very little time to test and account for any issues that might occur when you do an in-place upgrade. Whether you upgrade after six, twelve or eighteen months doesn't change that fact.

Edited 2009-09-01 11:08 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Fedora
by sbergman27 on Tue 1st Sep 2009 11:23 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Fedora"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

It's easier just to install a new version because there's always something that doesn't surface until a few months later.

Yes. It's nice to be able to give a release a year of shake down time before upgrading to it if we choose. And how does that work out with Fedora's 13 month support period? Hmmm. Not very well.

This kind of flexibility is supposed to be one of the nicer things about OSS. If Microsoft or Apple forced upgrades every 12 months like Fedora does you (yes, you, Segedunum) would be screaming about it from the hilltops. But somehow it's perfectly OK with you that Fedora does it.

What can I say? It's amusing to watch you jump through hoops, perform logical contortions, and act generally hypocritical to justify it. Especially while I'm enjoying the flexibility I now have. We've been on that 12 month treadmill and we're not going back.

Edited 2009-09-01 11:23 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Fedora
by kenji on Tue 1st Sep 2009 00:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fedora"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

I am tired of hearing that. It is not stable, it is broken.

I wouldn't call it broken. Fedora has a large install base and that simply would not be the case if it was broken.

For example I can't install F11 on an nforce motherboard PC

I can. It works just fine on my nForce 430.

I don't want to stir the crap pot but I actually have experienced more installabilty with Ubuntu than I have with Fedora (especially pertaining to nForce motherboards; hello, hard lock up). That is only my experience but it's the truth. I still wouldn't call Fedora rock solid but it is stable enough for me.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Who_uses_Fedora.3F

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics

Edited 2009-09-01 00:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Fedora
by sakeniwefu on Tue 1st Sep 2009 01:31 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fedora"
sakeniwefu Member since:
2008-02-26


I wouldn't call it broken. Fedora has a large install base and that simply would not be the case if it was broken.

...

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview#Who_uses_Fedora.3F


Most of the people and organizations there get paid to use Fedora.

Every time I have tried Fedora I have been disappointed. It is unstable, many times(as in different non-consecutive versions) I can't even get it to install because the installer crashes, and that's with the stable versions I cannot imagine what a beta would do to my computer(Oh yes, I can, it would burn my ethernet card). And by the way, its package management is still horrible.

The people in Fedora seem to think that having to compile an older version of a module and integrating it with a modern kernel is a normal operating procedure. It surely is for their users, because they don't bother to test a new kernel before commiting it.

Ubuntu is not perfect, many times it breaks with new releases and package updates, but it is in a completely different league. The league of trying to get an operating system out of the mess upstream delivers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Fedora
by kenji on Tue 1st Sep 2009 01:57 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Fedora"
kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

Most of the people and organizations there get paid to use Fedora.

And who would that be? Any examples at all? Does NASA get paid to use fedora?

I found that to be an odd statement because it would be nice for me to get paid to use Fedora.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Fedora
by AdamW on Tue 1st Sep 2009 05:24 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fedora"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

No-one's ever released any version of any operating system which worked with all hardware.

Having said that, yes, there were regressions in F11 anaconda, we did explain that at the time of release. It was necessary pain to get a substantial rewrite of anaconda's storage code done. There wasn't any other way to do it which wouldn't have caused more pain to someone.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Fedora
by John Blink on Tue 1st Sep 2009 05:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fedora"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11


Having said that, yes, there were regressions in F11 anaconda, we did explain that at the time of release.


I wish someone told me so that I would waste my precious bandwidth.
;)

How about when issues like this get fixed then Fedora community could do a "respin" so I can download something that works.

Edited 2009-09-01 05:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Fedora
by akaas on Tue 1st Sep 2009 08:24 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Fedora"
akaas Member since:
2009-08-16

How about when issues like this get fixed then Fedora community could do a "respin" so I can download something that works.

http://fedoraunity.org/
IRC: Channel: #Fedora-Unity  irc.freenode.net

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Fedora
by John Blink on Tue 1st Sep 2009 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Fedora"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

Thanks.

But where are the fedora11 respins?

http://spins.fedoraunity.org/spins

Also check this out.
http://www.kanarip.com/2009/07/new-fedora-11-respin-in-testing-plus...

Look at the dates in the comments section. F12 will be out before the respin. Fedora=useless (for some).

Edited 2009-09-01 13:19 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Fedora
by akaas on Tue 1st Sep 2009 14:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Fedora"
akaas Member since:
2009-08-16

But where are the fedora11 respins?

IRC: Channel: #Fedora-Unity  irc.freenode.net

Reply Score: 0

RE: Fedora
by gilboa on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:05 UTC in reply to "Fedora"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Your hardware configuration? *
Have you reported these issues to bugzilla.redhat.com?

Just for the record,
I'm running F10 and F11 on 12 different machines, ranging from an nVidia based T61 laptop to a 24 core HP DL585G6 and Intel S7000 machines.
Never the less, as always YMMV.

- Gilboa
* Intel on-board?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Fedora
by gilboa on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Fedora"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

P.S. at least two of the machines used nVidia chipsets.

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 2

Fedora + Moblin
by akaas on Tue 1st Sep 2009 05:11 UTC
akaas
Member since:
2009-08-16

I tried Moblin on my Fedora (rawhide) installation and it worked great. I like it's simplicity. It's propably the UI I'm going to install my wife's EEE PC once Fedora 12 is released.

Fedora is the distro that drives Linux desktop forward.

Edited 2009-09-01 05:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Fedora + Moblin
by strcpy on Tue 1st Sep 2009 06:46 UTC in reply to "Fedora + Moblin"
strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20

Fedora is the distro that drives Linux desktop forward.


It is also the distro that pushes often questionable solutions to the throats of other distros.

The *Kit-foo are the latest example.

I am a happy Fedora user, but I remain critical for many reasons. One example of my critique focuses on too rapid release cycles and bleeding-edge solutions, which I consider doing more harm than good to Linux generally, leading to often badly planned, post haste solutions. This is of course evident in other Linux distributions as well, but Fedora may be the prime example.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Fedora + Moblin
by akaas on Tue 1st Sep 2009 08:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Fedora + Moblin"
akaas Member since:
2009-08-16

It is also the distro that pushes often questionable solutions to the throats of other distros.

The *Kit-foo are the latest example.

Isn't it a GNOME community that decide to use *Kit technologies? Does some distros have problems with *Kit stuff? Have the distros raised their voices on GNOME devel mailing list about the issues?

I am a happy Fedora user, but I remain critical for many reasons. One example of my critique focuses on too rapid release cycles and bleeding-edge solutions

Fedora is a bit different than other 98% of other distros because Fedora developes new techinologies. Of course there are rough edges but without providing the latest technologies they are not going anywhere.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Fedora + Moblin
by spikeb on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE: Fedora + Moblin"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

fedora pushes the bleeding edge for a reason, and other distributions are free to wait until the technology matures. it does FAR more good than harm.

Reply Score: 2

only cc1 (F11) ???
by Rugxulo on Tue 1st Sep 2009 08:57 UTC
Rugxulo
Member since:
2007-10-09

Am I wrong or did F11 only include "cc1" without the GCC compiler proper? Very strange.

I also find it very disheartening when most Linux distros ignore one of the main components: GCC. ("Users aren't developers", "not enough room", blah blah blah. They don't even try including TCC. Argh!)

Reply Score: 1

RE: only cc1 (F11) ???
by spikeb on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:50 UTC in reply to "only cc1 (F11) ???"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

red hat is one of the biggest contributers to GCC, there is no way fedora doesn't have it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: only cc1 (F11) ???
by gilboa on Tue 1st Sep 2009 11:08 UTC in reply to "only cc1 (F11) ???"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Huh?

A. GCC is fully included in Fedora. (Including a number of cross compilers. *)
You sure you didn't forget to install gcc-c++?
B. Nothing stops you from packaging TCC and including it in Fedora.

- Gilboa
* $ yum search gcc | grep gcc.x86_64 | sort
arm-gp2x-linux-gcc.x86_64 : Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at arm-gp2x-linux
avr-gcc.x86_64 : Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at avr
gcc.x86_64 : Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...)
libgcc.x86_64 : GCC version 4.4 shared support library
mingw32-gcc.x86_64 : MinGW Windows cross-compiler (GCC) for C
msp430-gcc.x86_64 : Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at msp430

Edited 2009-09-01 11:09 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: only cc1 (F11) ???
by Rugxulo on Wed 2nd Sep 2009 18:18 UTC in reply to "RE: only cc1 (F11) ???"
Rugxulo Member since:
2007-10-09

GCC is fully included in Fedora. (Including a number of cross compilers.


I mean on the liveCD, for some reason it includes cc1 but nothing else. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: only cc1 (F11) ???
by AdamW on Wed 2nd Sep 2009 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: only cc1 (F11) ???"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

livecds are incredibly short on space, there's no good reason to cut out other stuff to put a compiler on there.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: only cc1 (F11) ???
by gilboa on Thu 3rd Sep 2009 08:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: only cc1 (F11) ???"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

... Why do you need a full compiler on a LiveCD?!?!?

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 2

pretty interesting
by spikeb on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:51 UTC
spikeb
Member since:
2006-01-18

I knew eventually fedora would get on the netbook variant bandwagon, just wondered if they would choose moblin or ubuntu's netbook-launcher. Now we know.

Reply Score: 2

Why is this on PAGE 2!?!
by fresch on Tue 1st Sep 2009 10:59 UTC
fresch
Member since:
2006-09-12

Fedora, Moblin... that looks a lot like Linux distributions. And Linux... wasn't that at some time an operating system kernel? So this looks like an article about operating systems, right?

Then why is an article about Facebook (not an OS) on PAGE 1, and this article isn't? Is this not osnews anymore, is osnews.com becoming random-geeky-news-for-geeks.com? If I wanted that, I wouldn't be here, I'd be hitting slashdot!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why is this on PAGE 2!?!
by John Blink on Tue 1st Sep 2009 14:28 UTC in reply to "Why is this on PAGE 2!?!"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

Page 1 often has stuff written by osnews writer/editor, in other words they put that little extra effort. Which helps.

Page 2 just has interesting links that may even be submitted by us the readers.

Reply Score: 2