Linked by Christian Paratschek on Tue 2nd Nov 2004 16:46 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu By all means, Ubuntu Linux and Canonical Ltd. have made a spectacular arrival on the Linux scene lately. The combination is like a dream come true for many, many Linux aficionados: tightly selected bleeding edge packages to focus the distribution on a single CD, corporate backing, 18 month support, that all sounds like a formidable package.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re: Fedora vs Ubuntu
by Anil Wang on Tue 2nd Nov 2004 20:35 UTC

Actually, your characterization of Fedora is faulty. Fedora Core 1 has been rock solid for me. It has a huge repository of *current* software and through the Fedora legacy project, it maintains support even after Fedora's 6 month cycle is over.

Ubuntu is good, but it still hasn't built up a good base of current software. From what I understand, Universe is basically SID and SID is not anything that I'd ever use on my desktop.

Once the stable Ubuntu repositories start appearing in numbers (I'm confident that they will), the key difference between Ubuntu and Fedora is that:
* Fedora wants to provide you with a reference system that contains most everything that you want out of the box and is eager to implement new features like Security Enhanced Linux as default.
* Ubuntu uses the KISS principle. It provides a lean base system and focuses on the simplicity of SUDO to lessen the need for SELinux.

It's the distribution version of the old CISC versus RISC debate or the Microkernel versus Macrokernel debate or the "Worse is better" school of thought versus the "Always do it perfectly" approach.

Each camp has it's devotees and neither side show any signs of disappearing, so let's be civil. Okay?