Linked by Rahul on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 23:48 UTC
Fedora Core Phoronix has a done a set of benchmarks with the Fedora 12 Intel driver and concluded that it performs better than previous releases of Fedora. "Compared to Fedora 11 especially, Fedora 12 offers much-improved Intel Linux graphics. Besides just the frame-rates being better, when using Fedora 12 we have encountered less problems with kernel mode-setting and quirks with different hardware configurations. In fact, the Intel experience is quite pleasant atop Fedora 12. This is good news for those running Fedora 12 now and should be even better news for those that will receive these updated packages in their distributions next year."
Order by: Score:
great!
by Calipso on Tue 24th Nov 2009 14:35 UTC
Calipso
Member since:
2007-03-13

This is great news! Intel chipsets should really be a flawless experience in Linux. Intel wireless seems to usually be flawless, and now that Intel graphics is getting nice improvements, Intel+Linux should be a really nice package.

Reply Score: 2

RE: great!
by DigitalAxis on Tue 24th Nov 2009 15:49 UTC in reply to "great!"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Well, speed hasn't been my problem with Intel graphics lately; drawing things correctly has.

Mesa 7.5 is the last version that could run Celestia correctly; with the versions in K/Ubuntu 9.10 and Fedora 11, the Earth is covered with moving noise, clouds don't align to continents, and the rings of Saturn look like either uniform red lines or huge flat polygons. I wonder if that's fixed for Fedora 12.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Tue 24th Nov 2009 16:18 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

As much as I loved Fedora 11, I gave Fedora 12 a go and I've since moved to OpenSuSE 11.2 because of the atrocious bugginess of Fedora 12. Xorg 1.7.1 included with Fedora breaks compatibility with Nvidia drivers, strange wake up problems, keyboard suddenly stops working which never occurred with Fedora 11.

I know this isn't the place to moan and groan about the faults with Fedora 12 but I do believe that it is necessary to raise issues one has with Fedora 12 so that there is meaningful and balance assessment of what is being discussed.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by Calipso on Tue 24th Nov 2009 16:39 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
Calipso Member since:
2007-03-13

As a Fedora user you should have expected nvidia drivers to not work right now. It always takes a little bit of time for nvidia to release new drivers that work with new X.

The keyboard and wakeup problems are another story.

Edited 2009-11-24 16:42 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Tue 24th Nov 2009 17:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

As a Fedora user you should have expected nvidia drivers to not work right now. It always takes a little bit of time for nvidia to release new drivers that work with new X.

The keyboard and wakeup problems are another story.


I guess it kind of serves me right for upgrading as soon as it came out - but at the same time I do think that if Xorg is as buggy as I experienced with the lag between driver producers and distro release, maybe it is best to stick with old reliable.

Worked with OpenSuSE which uses the older 1.6.5 of Xserver which is very reliable, none of the problems. I'd like to think that the problems I experienced will be fixed in the future but it depends on a lot of things that have been promised but never delivered on.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by AdamW on Tue 24th Nov 2009 17:09 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

"because of the atrocious bugginess of Fedora 12. Xorg 1.7.1 included with Fedora breaks compatibility with Nvidia drivers, strange wake up problems, keyboard suddenly stops working which never occurred with Fedora 11."

Point one, well, that's not a bug, is it? Anyway, it's not true, except for the legacy drivers for old cards. The current NVIDIA current-gen driver works fine with X server 1.7, it's not a problem at all. http://www.mjmwired.net/resources/mjm-fedora-nvidia.html#f12 is a good reference for getting it running on F12, if you really need the proprietary driver. Unless you need 3D acceleration for something, you shouldn't.

Could you be a bit more specific about your other two problems? It's rather hard to know what the issue might be with the level of detail you've provided there.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by kaiwai
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 17:28 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

...I gave Fedora 12 a go and I've since moved to OpenSuSE 11.2 because of the atrocious bugginess of Fedora 12. Xorg 1.7.1 included with Fedora breaks compatibility with Nvidia drivers, strange wake up problems, keyboard suddenly stops working...

Somewhere along the line, the term "bleeding edge" came to be regarded as a positive term. It's come to mean that you get all the latest and greatest. What has been forgotten, or at least de-emphasized, is just who it is who gets to do all the bleeding: You.

A distro with a rapid release cycle which includes all the very latest *cannot* have anything approaching a consistent level of reliability. It might be "good enough" for some who don't have anything critical depending on it. It might *seem* to be "good enough" for some who don't *think* they have anything critical depending on it... until the day that they really do need it to work... right now... and it doesn't.

Linux and its associated desktops have evolved to the point that the advantages of "bleeding" are limited, compared to what they used to be. But the disadvantages of "bleeding" are the same as ever. Even worse, really, since we have become ever more dependent upon our computers.

Most users... even hobbyist/enthusiast users... are better served by the more tried and true distros. I'm content to leave most of the bleeding to the massochistic users.

I fled in another direction. But I sincerely hope you enjoy your OpenSuse experience.

Edited 2009-11-24 17:30 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 17:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

The direction you "fled" in didn't turn out to be that different anyway considering that Linux distributions all share the same components. To quote from the article

"The Intel Linux driver stack can be attributed with many firsts, but continually pushing this driver while putting out quarterly timed releases has led to some pains. Earlier this year in fact the driver stack was rather buggy -- especially in Ubuntu 9.04 -- that impaired many users with stability issues, performance problems, and other headaches. "

For the last couple of releases, the best performance and stability was via Fedora due to backported fixes but let's not reality stop us. Continue.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

For the last couple of releases, the best performance and stability was via Fedora due to backported fixes but let's not reality stop us.

I'm quite happy with the performance of my Intel GMA 4500 under the distro to which I fled from Fedora.

However, to be fair, I was going to compare it, head to head, with the Fedora 12 Live CD. But I'm just getting a black screen where I would expect to see a login screen, after booting the CD.

The "reality" of Fedora 12's "black screen" is, indeed, stopping me from making a direct comparison. Then again, perhaps these results are the most useful comparison. (And no, I'm not interested in wasting any more of my time in Fedora's Bugzilla.)

Better luck with Fedora 13, I guess...

Edited 2009-11-24 19:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

I doubt a vague description like that is useful in bugzilla so its good that you didn't bother. Any time you "waste" in providing feedback benefits every single distribution since Fedora by the being a leader in integrating the latest upstream components will merge any fixes upstream.

A quick check would be to be boot with "nomodeset" to disable kernel mode setting and see if that helps. If it doesn't more hardware details would be useful.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kaiwai"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

A quick check would be to be boot with "nomodeset" to disable kernel mode setting and see if that helps. If it doesn't more hardware details would be useful.

And yet KMS has worked perfectly for me for the last two releases of the distro to which I fled. It seems that it's Fedora which needs the help.

Make your distro stable enough to even test, and I will test it. Until then, I have more productive things to do with my time.

Edited 2009-11-24 19:16 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by kaiwai
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:24 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kaiwai"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Ubuntu didn't even enable KMS by default the release before the last one and they don't ship the latest Xorg either. They still had many Xorg issues

http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/904#Performance%20...

You have time to comment in length in every Fedora post but not time to provide any details? I don't believe that. A little less attitude and more constructive approaches would be useful.

Reply Score: 1

Stupid distro's?
by emilsedgh on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:28 UTC
emilsedgh
Member since:
2007-06-21

Im starting to belieave distro's who call themselves 'bleeding edge' are crap.

Bringing the latests to users isnt hard. Bringing the latests __with quality__ is what should be achieved.

Fedora and Ubuntu released KDE 4.0 and improper graphics stacks to users, only to stay bleeding edge.
(just an example)

Upstream --> Distro --> User

This is our stack. In this 'bleeding edge' model, upstream and user are hurt. Look at KDE. Users were moslty f--ked up due to early adoption by distro's. KDE people were hurt and their branding went into trouble, even with the fact that they warned everyone NOT to use 4.0 in that way.

Dear distributions, please, stay logical.

Edit: I forgot to mention that there are some exemptions. For example Debian Sid is bleeding edge, but in a logical way, IMHO.

Edited 2009-11-24 19:32 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:43 UTC in reply to "Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Im starting to belieave distro's who call themselves 'bleeding edge' are crap.

I came to the same conclusion some time back. Although I would note that only one major distro that I know of is officially described as "bleeding edge", and that is Fedora. Ubuntu does not describe itself as such.

Bringing the latests to users isnt hard. Bringing the latests __with quality__ is what should be achieved.

Agreed.

Fedora and Ubuntu released KDE 4.0 and improper graphics stacks to users, only to stay bleeding edge.

My gripes about KDE4, in general, are well known around here. I will give Ubuntu credit for having at least held off on KDE4 and PulseAudio inclusion for at least a sane, if not actually adequate, period of time, hoping that they would finally stabilize. Unlike the officially badged "bleeding edge" Linux distro. And I would note that KDE is not the default desktop on Ubuntu. It is simply an option which can be installed by the user *after* installation.

There is a great deal of discussion going on right now to determine which X version goes into the next Ubuntu release. And it seems pretty clear that it will not be the latest. Most likely it will be the same as in Ubuntu 9.10, which is proving to be pretty stable.

But "The Bleeding Edge" is a very strict master to those who serve him. There is little question regarding which version must go into distros in that category.

Edited 2009-11-24 19:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Stupid distro's?
by emilsedgh on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Stupid distro's?"
emilsedgh Member since:
2007-06-21

Well, Kubuntu included 4.0 as soon as it was ready. I blame them.

Im happy that Ubuntu people are discussing about next verion's X. This means they've learnt.

Edited 2009-11-24 20:07 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:14 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Well, Kubuntu included 4.0 as soon as it was ready. I blame them.

No. While Fedora jumped and included the very broken 4.0.3 immediately in Spring of '08, Kubuntu more conservatively stayed with 3.5.9, and did not switch to KDE 4 (4.1.2) until Fall of '08.

Still too early. But at the time, it was being claimed that KDE 4.1.x would fix the massive issues with 4.0.x.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=fedora
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kubuntu

Edited 2009-11-24 20:21 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Stupid distro's?
by emilsedgh on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Stupid distro's?"
emilsedgh Member since:
2007-06-21

No, Kubuntu 8.04 had two versions, one with KDE 3.5.9 and one with kde 4.0 [only community support].

Most users as expected tried 4.0 version and... BAM: they hated KDE and Kubuntu. Lose Lose situation.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:32 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

No, Kubuntu 8.04 had two versions, one with KDE 3.5.9 and one with kde 4.0 [only community support]. Most users as expected tried 4.0 version and... BAM: they hated KDE and Kubuntu. Lose Lose situation.

I was unaware of that. But if Kubuntu, a somewhat less official spinoff of Ubuntu, did release an unofficial version as "Community Support Only" and people used that and were disappointed, I would tell them what I tell potential Fedora users: If you want stability... don't do that.

At a certain point, people really do need to take responsibility for the decisions they make.

My gripe is with unstable distros whose advocates actively try to deny the fact. Or try to take all the credit for being bleeding edge when there is credit to be snatched, and then deny being bleeding edge when the requirements of PR dictate so.

Sounds like whatever Kubuntu release you are referring to was honest and upfront.

Edited 2009-11-24 20:35 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Stupid distro's?
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Stupid distro's?"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

"I came to the same conclusion some time back. Although I would note that only one major distro that I know of is officially described as "bleeding edge", and that is Fedora. Ubuntu does not describe itself as such"

Fedora doesn't describe itself as "bleeding-edge" anymore than Ubuntu does and anyone with a bit of clue can really see that any distribution with a six month release cycle will likely have similar upstream components and hence share similar features *and* bugs whether they want to admit it or not.

On occasions, Ubuntu will ship something more bleeding edge like a development snapshot of GRUB2 and on other occasions, it will be Fedora. There is *more* in common across distributions these days and that's a very good thing, silly fanboyism aside.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Fedora doesn't describe itself as "bleeding-edge"...

Well, there goes your credibility. Are you seriously claiming this? Really? Of course, as the official Fedora PR rep here at OSNews, I guess you had to say that.

Everyone who thinks that Fedora does not present itself as "bleeding edge" please raise your hands. :-0

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Stupid distro's?
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Stupid distro's?"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Its very funny to see you talk about credibility after all the past assertions you have made. I would like to point that you were not making claims about what others said about Fedora but rather making the claim that Fedora is the only distribution that calls itself "bleeding-edge". I dispute that claim in two different ways:

a) You haven't added a single reference to a place where Fedora officially calls itself bleeding edge unless you are referring to development releases.

b) Fedora or Ubuntu or any distribution with six month releases has about the same amount of bleeding edge components regardless of whether they want to admit it or not.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

a) You haven't added a single reference to a place where Fedora officially calls itself bleeding edge unless you are referring to development releases.

How about prominently on the front page of the fedoralinux.com site:

"Fedora is a Linux-based operating system that showcases the latest in free and open source software."

Please don't embarrass yourself by hair-splitting about the the word "bleeding" not appearing there. It would make you look desperate. The intended meaning is quite clear.

b) Fedora or Ubuntu or any distribution with six month releases has about the same amount of bleeding edge components regardless of whether they want to admit it or not.

And yet the links to the software version tables at distrowatch clearly put the lie to what you are claiming. It is your claims, and not mine, which lack a certain level of concreteness.

Edit: Plus, the churn doesn't stop there. Even after installation, Fedora just plunks updates from the upstream down the pipe. Even new major kernel versions get pushed down the pipe several times over the (short) life of a Fedora release. Fedora is simply not managed for stability. It is managed as a shiny, gee-whiz distro where stability is not a major concern.

Edited 2009-11-24 20:51 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Stupid distro's?
by Rahul on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Stupid distro's?"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Now you have admitted a failure to find a single reference to backup your claim that Fedora officially describes itself as "bleeding edge". If you want to equate "latest" with "bleeding edge", you might want to read the Ubuntu announcements.

You mean the same distrowatch which shows several places where Ubuntu is more bleeding edge than Fedora including core components like GRUB and upstart? Sorry, no cookie for you.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Stupid distro's?
by sbergman27 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 20:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Stupid distro's?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Now you have admitted a failure to find a single reference to backup your claim that Fedora officially describes itself as "bleeding edge".

Well, you did opt to embarrass yourself. Don't say I didn't warn you.

This is just too easy.

Reply Score: 2

Saving the "Best" for Last - Fedora 12
by tktim on Wed 25th Nov 2009 06:15 UTC
tktim
Member since:
2009-11-25

Saving the "Best" for Last - Fedora 12
.
http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10014494o-2000498448...

Ubuntu users are great, but Fedora just seems easier to me and always just works.

Reply Score: 1

You can make it better.
by tktim on Wed 25th Nov 2009 06:57 UTC
tktim
Member since:
2009-11-25

Anyone who wants stability can always stay one release behind in their favorite distro.
.
All distros need users interested in and capable of contributing to open source through their own contributions, which doesn't have to be code. End users have a role in making GNU/Linux better.
.
Fedora users working together with Ubuntu / GNU/Linux users.

Reply Score: 1

v cheap shopping with free shipping
by cocoanny on Wed 25th Nov 2009 09:35 UTC
Problems with ATI
by reez on Fri 27th Nov 2009 01:48 UTC
reez
Member since:
2006-06-28

I have an ATI graphics card, but somehow I get some glitches on KDE4 with F12. Strange colours as rectangles. On GNOME it seems to work. Any ideas?

I'm using HD3650

Reply Score: 1

RE: Problems with ATI
by Rahul on Fri 27th Nov 2009 18:30 UTC in reply to "Problems with ATI"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

There is a around of KDE updates among others being pushed out recently. Make sure you are updated and see if it gets better.

Reply Score: 1