Why I think FC3 sucks!

[Edward Yang]

Edward Yang wrote:

> After getting so many reply from my last post, I finally understand 
> why the post aroused so much agitation.
>
> 1. It seems for some people, 'FC3 sucks' is the same as '*Linux* 
> sucks'. But I am very sorry, I did not mean that. I just meant FC3 
> sucks or FC3 sucks because it is worse than FC1 based on my personal 
> experience.
>
> 2. Some young guys (mostly students) or even not-so-young guys (what 
> the hell who are they?) like the feel of calling somebody *troll*, and 
> so they seize every possible chance to show off their *skills* at name 
> calling. That's a dark side I already know about Linux communitiy. 
> But, please note I am not saying the *whole* Linux community is bad, I 
> mean a small part of it.
>
> Okay, let me elaborate why I think FC3 sucks or FC3 is worse than FC1. 
> Note that I did not have experience with FC2.
>
> 1. Installation. Well, what can I say? It is not worse, but it not any 
> bettern than FC1. Components selection is still very difficult.
>
> 2. FC3 could not start into X in Virtual PC. It spews out tons of 
> error messages complaining something that actually should not have 
> caused its failure. So I have to download a temporary patch from 
> http://vpc.visualwin.com/. See page 
> http://vpc.visualwin.com/Notes/FedoraCore.3.Final.html.
>
> 3. After several times of kernel updating (at least 3), I finally can 
> boot into X from the so called official kernel provided by FC3.
>
> 4. It is hopelessly slower than FC1! I could run FC1 with only 128mb 
> memory and don't feel much sluggishness. I now run FC3 with 164mb 
> memory, but it is visibly slower than FC1! Application startup time is 
> almost unbearable.
>
> 5. I am a newbie on Linux, but I already find a few bugs. For example, 
> in gnome-termial, if I set DEL to ASCII DEL in the profile settings, 
> it actualy acts like BACKSPACE. This bug may be specific only to 
> gnome, but since it's bundled with FC3, so I attribute the problem to 
> FC3. It's quite reasonable.
>
> 6. I have not acurate data to prove this, but I feel the system boot 
> up time is longer than FC1.
>
> 7. This is a minor problem - I only installed kernel+gnome, no KDE. 
> Yet it takes up more than 2gb space. What the hell? A normal Windows 
> 2000 installation usually takes only 1.5gb even with all components 
> selected. I forgot how much was FC1, but FC3 apparently is not doing 
> better or even worse.
>
> 8. I may think of others that attribute to this 'FC3 sucks' topic.
>
> Final words - I am not negating Linux. Actually I think Linux and Open 
> Source has a very good future. That's why I am catching the new waves 
> here.
>
> Thanks.
>
Here is number 8!

I just found out that on FC3 Borland C++Builder takes more than 400mb 
memory! While on Windows, it only takes a little more than 60mb.This is 
making me believe that System Monitor is having a bug about calculating 
memory size...

And number 9:
Though I have screen saver disabled, but I still get xscreensaver in my 
session. :-(


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20050127/0c09a4d2/attachment-0001.htm>