Why Fedora ?
Scot L. Harris
webid at cfl.rr.com
Wed Nov 2 17:45:49 UTC 2005
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 11:17, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:51:27AM +0530, Vikram Goyal wrote:
> > Then came fedora with its bag of problems. Most of the users like me
> > thought , ok, maybe in one or two release it will also reach the same
> > level of comfort as redhat 8, 9. But that never happened.
>
> And it probably never will. Fedora is meant to be a cutting-edge
> testbed for RH enterprise-level distributions. This is both good and
> bad, depending on your perspective. As others have said, if you need
> a stable desktop environment, most likely you really should be looking
> elsewhere.
>
> > One good example is file browser. In 8,9 ver one could do almost all
> > acts in the same browser window. There was preferences tab with all the
> > nitty-gritty settings which a user might want to tweak. The comfort
> > level was great. Then came nautilus. File browser was put in the
> > system-tools. Its preferences tab removed. Now for each setting one has
> > to click Desktop -> Preferences -> the particular preference, which in
> > my opinion sucks. This is only one example, and there are numerous.
>
> There have been many arguments about this kind of thing on the
> gnome-usability mailing list (and other gnome-related lists too I
> would imagine). This is not a problem with Fedora per se; the gnome
> UI designers have issues. They keep making things worse, not better,
> all the while telling you that you're just doing it wrong. The
> computer is supposed to work the way *I* want, not the other way
> around...
Maybe GORM 1.0 will be an answer to these problems. :)
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list