Where Fedora Went Wrong (nice conclusion)

[Dotan Cohen]

On 15/05/07, Robin Laing <Robin.Laing at drdc-rddc.gc.ca> wrote:
>
> Having just seen Ubuntu for the first time, I can see the differences.
>
> Ubuntu is geared more towards the general public where Fedora is
> directed more toward corporate users.  I say this as Fedora, from what I
> have seen follows a more secure installation and higher concern for
> possible IP/copyright infringement.  This causes it's own sets of
> problems though.

I don't think that corporate users could stand the instability of
Fedora. Corporate needs rock-solid software. RHEL, maybe, but not
Fedora.

> An example is where I work, for multimedia work, Ubuntu is a better
> choice.  We needed a machine to run videos and other multimedia files
> that won't run on Windows machines.  We now have a Ubuntu machine just
> for this purpose.
>
> For secure work, Fedora looks better.  The best example of this is the
> dreaded SELinux.  In Fedora, this is default but Ubuntu it is an add-on.
>
> In regards to updates, I was watching Synaptic (sp?) update the Ubuntu
> machine and to be honest, I didn't see any difference between kyum and
> it on the front end.
>
> There may be problems with yum and rpm but I have not found that to be
> in my case.  I have found yum to be quite handy and my only issues come
> more from the different repositories than yum or rpm.
>
> So, for now, I will stick with Fedora due to the security issues.  If
> Ubuntu decides to follow suite, then I will look at it again.  That is
> as long as I can find secondary repositories that will meet my
> multimedia requirements.

You'll ifnd that enabling non-free software is a lot easier in Ubuntu
than in Fedora. Not that it's difficult in Fedora, but in Ubuntu, one
can click on an MP3, then click Yes Yes Yes until it plays.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com/what_is/gpl.html
http://dotancohen.com/eng/israel_attacks.php