Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Red Hat Software Businesses

Red Hat 8.0 Released 778

Posted by michael
from the pink-tie-linux-available-at-your-local-cheap-CD-reseller dept.
I_am_Rambi writes "RedHat has released their latest OS, 8.0. Here is Red Hat's ftp site for download and some mirrors. If you need help there's a Howto." Jeet81 adds: "Red Hat is out with a new release, Red Hat 8.0. Looks like Red Hat is moving towards the windows XP style using its new Bluecurve graphical interface (the new default email client 'Ximian Evolution' looks a lot like MS Outlook)." So what's the verdict on Null or Bluecurve or whatever it's called? Good idea, bad idea?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Red Hat 8.0 Released

Comments Filter:
  • by ck42 (134627) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:13AM (#4372833)
    If it gets more people using Linux....who cares if it looks like a pink elephant.
  • Interface (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:16AM (#4372863)
    Any improvement on the interface whether it looks like Windows or OS X (we could only wish) is a move in the right direction.
  • Speed improvments (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Wally_Hntr (591170) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:16AM (#4372864)
    One thing I've noticed is that it doesn't take a minute to open Nautilus anymore. Much appreciated change. Overall, it looks more polished than previous releases. (much easier for mom to use)
  • RH 8 on nvidia? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by (H)elix1 (231155) <slashdot.helix@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:19AM (#4372888) Homepage Journal
    Anyone know if the nvidia chipsets are supported out of the box, or is it still a post install patch with the laptop version?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:20AM (#4372891)
    The beta was a nice distro. I am glad that they admitted that ACL support was broken and removed it from the final release. Quality over features. Not something the computing world is accustomed to. Read the release notes. Nice touches, such as mkbootdisk supporting writing to bootable iso format. They are also looking out for our rights by not including mp3 support. A political statement, but an important one. Again, quality and values over features.
  • by John Paul Jones (151355) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:21AM (#4372902)

    I've been running Ximian Gnome for quite some time now, and Real People think it looks good, but is somewhat alien in presentation... the new RH "skin" on KDE/Gnome is targetted directly at them, and this is a Good Thing(tm) for Linux. The inclusion of a display settings dialog that changes the screen resolution and colors via a GUI that functions similarly to WinX is now present and functional. The purists scoff, but the Real People use.

    Embrace and extend, remember?

    -JPJ

  • Re:Get it right (Score:3, Interesting)

    by _|()|\| (159991) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:27AM (#4372945)
    And Red Hat code names are usually related to each other, as chronicled here [smoogespace.com]: valhalla -> limbo -> null -> psyche.
  • Re:FP! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by rseuhs (322520) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:29AM (#4372960)
    But also let us have our opinion about it. We are free to say it.
  • Re:Yay... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Your_Mom (94238) <slashdot@@@innismir...net> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:32AM (#4372978) Homepage
    Slackware users will probably dislike what they've done.
    Hi, Slackware Zealot here. Just to prove you wrong, I like the idea of a nice perty interface. I think it is needed. However, I won't use it. I am downloading it for one of my roomates who wants to try Linux though, I think this is a real nice starting point for most users.

    That being said, I have one complaint. FIVE fscking-disks?! Hello!?!? Some people still are too cheap to buy stuff! Hell Slack is just recently toying with the idea for possibly going to 2, and even they postponed it for another release. Sheesh!

  • Re:Yay... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by garcia (6573) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:37AM (#4373015) Homepage
    as an ex-Slackware, ex-RedHat, and current Debian user I don't care what they have done.

    I would dump KDE and/or GNOME and run what I have run since however many years ago.

    While I think that it looks nice (except for PACKED menus) for people that want that sort of thing, Linux is still great b/c we can run whatever the hell we like instead of whatever the default is.

    I have tried Gnone and KDE once before each. I wasn't impressed w/the speed of the UI on this machine. I suppose once I get older and less annoyed with attempts to make Linux more of a desktop OS and I become lazy and want to stop having to move files with commands I will switch.

    Until then, if I were to upgrade to a distribution that offered this sort of UI, I would disable it and go back to what I have been used to.

    Ahh, the wonders of freedom! Just my worthless .02 for today.
  • Re:3 or 5 CD's (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @09:54AM (#4373114)
    Source code CDs.
    Which is funny, because by not providing them, the mirror is in violation of the GPL.
  • Isn't it slightly unfair for someone to experience a single problem and say, "How is this better than Windows?" I mean, problems are going to happen, and their nature will be different on different systems, but Windows people have grown accustomed to Windows problems and are oblivious to their pervasiveness. When they are given a single new problem, their universe collapses.

    So everytime a friend comes to me, their resident "computer genius" (their term for me, obviously) and say, "Why does Windows do this?", be it driver problems, IE crashing, blue screens, MS Word screwing up the document, CPU utilization going crazy, start menu randomly vanishing, and so on, I give them the true answer.

    "Because Windows is SO easy to use."

    This whole nonsense about Linux being tougher on the end user is absurd. Is it more difficult to administer? Sure. Is it more difficult to use? Absolutely not.

    Last night, my brother was using his Windows box and Explorer screwed up 3 times in a row, IE crashed, his file associations made opening a file complicated, and rearranging programs on the start menu infuriated him. He was fuming, I was snickering. "Hey man, don't be mad. It's just that Windows is so easy to use. Be glad you aren't running linux."

    Anyway, this isn't meant to flame, preach, or correct you, but just to share my observation that the real problem with linux converts is that they suffer a mental breakdown when they experience a new problem, and have very little appreciation for the utter lack of their old problems. My solution? Mock their old problems to death. ;)

  • Redhat-logos (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Alan Cox (27532) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:16AM (#4373282) Homepage
    At least I assume it is the redhat-logos that he means. If you sell a Red Hat 8.0 based distribution you need to replace the logos with your own logos so that people know it isnt the genuine Red Hat article.

    So you swap the logo package for 'emporium linux' or whatever. Logo rules are there for the obvious trademark reasons, and helping to ensure people know if they are getting Red Hat or not.

    In terms of non free packages - netscape is gone and the flash type stuff is on the extra app cds or available from the vendor rather than lurking in with the free stuff.

    I'm not sure quite how the logos fit in with each persons individual definition of free. What we do is basically the same as for example Debian
    (http://www.debian.org/logos/)

    Alan
  • by mithras the prophet (579978) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:23AM (#4373330) Homepage Journal
    Looking like the Mac, but not sharing the ease of use of the Mac, was exactly Microsoft's strategy for years.

    Eventually it paid off - sometime around Windows 98 most people decided that Windows was "good enough", even exceeding the Mac in some areas. Being "good enough", plus running on cheaper hardware (and a dash of network effect and anticompetitive behavior) sealed Windows' victory.

    So, perhaps becoming "good enough", and cheaper, will seal Linux's victory. Time will tell whether Linus should add a dash of the network effect and anticompetitive behavior. ;-)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:27AM (#4373357)
    Given it takes about 3 hours of trying to get on the FTP site. P2P at 10% sounds good compared to 0% because the mirrors are full and I'm tired of watching ncftp attempt connections.

    Does anyone know if we need all 5 ISO images? Seems pretty bloated. What do I need to install a running system? I want to upgrade (or reinstall) from RH 6.0.
  • at 5 cds... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by DuckWing (19575) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:29AM (#4373367)
    At 5 CD's, I don't think many people will download and burn the sucker. RH 7.3 actually wanted to see all 3 CD's on install. I'm really hoping RH 8 doesn't really require all 5 on install though it may depend on which items you install. But *5* CD's is a bit much, dontcha think?
  • RPM hanging problems (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vorwerk (543034) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:31AM (#4373383)
    For years, I've been compiling the software on my system and tweaking everything by hand. Lately, I've been spending way too long doing this [my computer is slooow], so I decided to nuke my linux install and put on Psyche.

    And I love it. It looks great, and RedHat has done a terrific job. Hurray. ;)

    EXCEPT ...

    Imagine my surprise when, on my fresh Psyche box, I tried to install xmms MP3 plugins and found that RPM was hanging. No matter what I tried (deleting stale __db locks, rebuilding the rpm database, etc.), I continually had to 'kill -9' to remove the rpm zombie process. I can't upgrade or install new packages without rpm dying.

    It turns out that there is very likely a race condition in the signal handling code in rpm 4.1, which ships with Psyche. You may or may not experience this problem, but you can follow the status of the bug at the following URLs:

    bug 74726 [redhat.com]
    bug 73097 [redhat.com]
    bug 73134 [redhat.com]

    cheers
  • by nyquil superstar (249173) <aaron@NosPam.snowcrest.net> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:44AM (#4373462)
    I'm using it now, and I have to say, this is the nicest distrto I have ever used. The default themes are good and clean, the fonts look *far* better than anything before it (with the exception of the MS fonts) and the default apps work well. OpenOffice is a tad slow to launch, but past that, the speed overall is far, far faster.
    The configuration tools are pretty nice, I haven't spent much time with the server daemon config tools (those kinds of things scare me), but the user environment config tools are nice. I had no problems getting netowrk connections set up and all of my hardware detected fine. I had none of the mouse issues that Eugenia described in her earlier article.
    The two things that really stand out to me are (1) the speed. Nautilus fles, it's actually usable now, even on slower(!) 450's like the one I'me on now. (2) The look, it's just plain beautiful, but of course that's a personal opinion kind of thing.
    This release is definately a worthy upgrade, and finally something I wouldn't feel somewhat guilty about recommending to my non-geek friends. Oh, and did I mention that it's faster?
  • Thank God (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ceswiedler (165311) <chris@swiedler.org> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:45AM (#4373468)
    Thank god at least one Linux company is actually acting like a company and trying to make a profit in a realistic way.

    The important thing about Open Source and Linux isn't that Red Hat has to give away their product, nor that they be "nice" to the community by keeping KDE and Gnome separate. The important thing is that no matter what, you know that you can get the source to every (important) piece of the Red Hat operating system. You can replace the kernel, the GUI, the web server. You can examine the code and recompile it yourself.

    Red Hat is a company. If you want completely free, volunteer-based stuff, go to Debian. If you want a corporate-style OS, with actual help, support, integration, and consistency, then for christ's sake YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.

    Red Hat could really care less if Slashdot readers think that BlueCurve sucks, or that the new licensing scheme sucks, or that the mirrors suck, or whatever. They're in the business of selling copies and support of their Operating System, which is the Red Hat Operating System based on the Linux Kernel and the GNU tools and the X Windows GUI and the Gnome and KDE toolkits / environments.

    Personally I think Red Hat should abandon the idea of giving away copies entirely. Sell the damn things. That's what companies DO. The support idea is hogwash. Support is good cash but it won't replace copies sold. Red Hat needed to win acceptance and dominance, and so it gave away binary copies of their OS.

    The GPL, thank god, means that Red Hat DOES have to give away their SRPMS, at least to any code in their OS that is GPL'd. Their installer doesn't have to be GPL'd. Their makefiles and build scripts don't have to be GPL'd. They could legally give away nothing but the actual source code they used to build the finished product. That satisifes the GPL, both in letter and spirit.

    Personally I think the Open Source community should applaud Red Hat for acting like a company and proving that Open Source doesn't mean amateur, or broke.
  • by Pii (1955) <jedi@NOSPAm.lightsaber.org> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @10:57AM (#4373527) Journal
    For perspective, I'm not a RedHet user. I prefer Debian on servers, and have been utilizing Mandrake on Desktop/EyeCandy machines.

    Having said that, I read the summary that you've written about RedHat, and their KDE modifications. I think it's very well written, and very comprehensive. I would have a hard time disagreeing with any of the conclusions that you've drawn.

    I hope that some of the complainers take the time to read it as well.

    RedHat is simply trying to put forward the best that Linux has to offer, which will invariably result in the subjective assessment of various competing applications. Some applications are simply more refined than others, and as a result, they've been elevated to "default" status. The alternatives are still present.

    As for trying to unify the appearance of the completing desktop environments, that too is a step that most people see as inevitable. It certainly makes life easier for the new users, and OS converts. I know that from an aesthetic perspective, I'd like my KDE and GNOME apps to have a similar appearance, regardless of which desktop I happen to be running.

    These are for the most part cosmetic changes, and the end result is a better overall distribution.

    Good for RedHat, and good for Linux.

  • by ichimunki (194887) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @12:21PM (#4374102)
    BS! Binary distros save everyone a lot of CPU time and make for more stable systems, since the packages are usually well-tested, etc. The average user is not going to notice the performance gains from custom compiles. They would probably be better off just buying a faster computer or more RAM first.

    And comparing a binary distro to Windows is just insulting to the intelligence of your readers. Let me know when Microsoft starts offering source via FTP on a 2nd CD in the boxed set, ok? In fact, Gentoo protects your freedom less than Debian GNU/Linux does by facilitating a lot of binary-installer packages (the default Java VM being the main one). However, they obviously "get it" and this is not meant to be a slam.

    Finally, on older hardware, recompiling all the software is a big time sink... and probably a wasted effort. But I have to say I'm proud to have installed Gentoo as the only OS to ever run on my new homebrew Athlon XP-based desktop. Something very satisfying about putting a system together from parts and then compiling the whole system from source code. But it's probably not for everyone.

    Congratulations to Red Hat on another milestone release.

  • by atrus (73476) <atrus@@@atrustrivalie...org> on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @01:37PM (#4374783) Homepage
    iPhoto is a wonderful application for its rather small feature set. Sure, I would like better photo editing controls in it, but I guess thats the price of pure simplicity. iMovie is similar. While it has a higher learning curve than iPhoto (non-linear video editing is not exactly well known), I've seen people go from randomly clicking around the Dog Wash movie to importing and editing their own video footage in the span of a few hours. Its great for a high school video class, where little instruction has to be given on the editing system, so more time can be spent on filmmaking techniques, camera movements, and the like. Way to go Apple :)
  • Re:Redhat-logos (Score:2, Interesting)

    by otis wildflower (4889) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @02:25PM (#4375231) Homepage
    The problem is, clueless user doesn't contact cheapbytes for support, they contact redhat. If there's enough clueless users, it becomes a pr and support hassle for redhat, which they really don't deserve.

    I agree it's not the best of situations, but when you have enough bad apples abusing the barrel, what else can you do? AFAICR RH still offers iso downloads, which are fine for me (broadband + burner) and for the non-clueless-user who doesn't have the bandwidth, time or equipment to do isos themselves there's always debian...
  • Re:FP! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ejasons (205408) on Wednesday October 02, 2002 @03:49PM (#4375934)

    He also didn't include a jab at Red Hat's filesystem layout when they are fully LSB and FHS compliant.

    Well, I think that's open to interpretation. The FHS specifies that "/usr" is for everything that is part of the "base OS install" (or something like that). I'm skeptical that "tux" can be considered as part of the base OS.

    Regardless of whether they are right or wrong, I despise having thousands of files in /usr. Is there any distribution who thinks that there may be a better way? I'm getting tired of having to recompile gnome and KDE to be more sane (especially when RedHat's source RPMs often make it difficult to target anything other than /usr).

    I laugh when people mention Windows' "DLL hell", when most Linux distributions do the equivalent of putting everything into C:\WINDOWS.

Old programmers never die, they just become managers.

Working...