Why is F34 the Most Popular Fedora Linux in Years? (zdnet.com) 125
This week ZDNet dedicated an article to "the most popular Fedora Linux in years."
Red Hat's community Linux distribution Fedora has always been popular with open-source and Linux developers, but this latest release, Fedora 34 seems to be something special. As Matthew Miller, Fedora Project Leader, tweeted, "The beta for F34 was one of the most popular ever, with twice as many systems showing up in my stats as typical."
Why? Nick Gerace, a Rancher software engineer, thinks it's because "I've never seen the project in a better state, and I think GNOME 40 is a large motivator as well. Probably a combination of each, from anecdotal evidence." He's onto something. When Canonical released Ubuntu 21.04 a few days earlier, their developers opted to stay with the tried and true GNOME 39 desktop. Fedora's people decided to go with GNOME 40 for their default desktop even though it's a radical update to the GNOME interface. Besides boasting a new look, GNOME 40 is based on the new GTK 4.0 graphical toolkit. Under the pretty new exterior, this update also fixed numerous issues and smoothed out many rough spots.
If you'd rather have another desktop, you can also get Fedora 34 with the newest KDE Plasma Desktop, Xfce 4.16, Cinnamon, etc. You name your favorite Linux desktop interface, Fedora will almost certainly deliver it to you... Another feature I like is that, since Fedora 33, the default file system is Btrfs. I find it faster and more responsive than ext4, perhaps the most popular Linux desktop file system. What's different this time around is that it now defaults to using Btrfs transparent compression. Besides saving significant storage space — typically from 20 to 40% — Red Hat also claims this increases the lifespan of SSDs and other flash media.
Although the article does point out that most users will never reach the end of that SSD lifespan (approximately ten years of normal use), it suggests that "developers, who might for example compile Linux kernels every day, might reach that point before a PC's usual end of useful life."
In a possibly related note, Linus Torvalds said this week in a new interview that "I use Fedora on all my machines, not because it's necessarily 'preferred', but because it's what I'm used to. I don't care deeply about the distribution — to me it's mainly a way to get Linux installed on a machine and get all my tools set up, so that I can then replace the kernel and work on just that."
Why? Nick Gerace, a Rancher software engineer, thinks it's because "I've never seen the project in a better state, and I think GNOME 40 is a large motivator as well. Probably a combination of each, from anecdotal evidence." He's onto something. When Canonical released Ubuntu 21.04 a few days earlier, their developers opted to stay with the tried and true GNOME 39 desktop. Fedora's people decided to go with GNOME 40 for their default desktop even though it's a radical update to the GNOME interface. Besides boasting a new look, GNOME 40 is based on the new GTK 4.0 graphical toolkit. Under the pretty new exterior, this update also fixed numerous issues and smoothed out many rough spots.
If you'd rather have another desktop, you can also get Fedora 34 with the newest KDE Plasma Desktop, Xfce 4.16, Cinnamon, etc. You name your favorite Linux desktop interface, Fedora will almost certainly deliver it to you... Another feature I like is that, since Fedora 33, the default file system is Btrfs. I find it faster and more responsive than ext4, perhaps the most popular Linux desktop file system. What's different this time around is that it now defaults to using Btrfs transparent compression. Besides saving significant storage space — typically from 20 to 40% — Red Hat also claims this increases the lifespan of SSDs and other flash media.
Although the article does point out that most users will never reach the end of that SSD lifespan (approximately ten years of normal use), it suggests that "developers, who might for example compile Linux kernels every day, might reach that point before a PC's usual end of useful life."
In a possibly related note, Linus Torvalds said this week in a new interview that "I use Fedora on all my machines, not because it's necessarily 'preferred', but because it's what I'm used to. I don't care deeply about the distribution — to me it's mainly a way to get Linux installed on a machine and get all my tools set up, so that I can then replace the kernel and work on just that."
Missing CentOS? (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe some people (with personal servers) are replacing CentOS with Fedora?
Re: Missing CentOS? (Score:2, Insightful)
CentOS was a good distro and it is a shame that they managed to kill it, but honestly, after the stance of RedHat against Stallman ( https://www.redhat.com/it/blog... [redhat.com] ), i wouldn't touch a RedHat product not even with a stick. I don't support dumb SJWs.
Honestly, i have already removed all my CentOS installations waiting to decide how to replace them with a distro which isn't run by idiots.
Re: Missing CentOS? (Score:5, Funny)
Let me get this straight: You removed CentOS and haven't yet decided what to replace it with... so your machines currently run on hot air and a prayer? I guess that checks, going by the rest of your comment.
Re: Missing CentOS? (Score:2)
He runs Windows 10 with a "my other partition is a Gentoo stage 1" background image.
*laughs in Linux From Scratch ... or is it crying? ... I can't tell*
Regardless of the politics (Score:4, Informative)
However, if you still want to avoid Fedora due to politics, go for ArchLinux (on the desktop) instead. It has no corporate overlord, uses the latest stuff (just like Fedora) and is very forward thinking in a lot of ways. You also gain the benefits of what I consider to be common sense packaging, where non-free is treated equally to free; meaning if you want to install VLC or a web browser with full codec support, just install from mainstream repos like on any other (non-Linux) operating system.
For servers, Slackware will work just fine, provided youâ(TM)re willing to bolt on TOMOYO or the like by hand to harden each network-enabled daemon. Otherwise, you really will be missing out on Red Hatâ(TM)s awesome SELinux integration which really does shield against a lot of nasty problems in the event of an attacker somehow gaining a reverse shell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Missing CentOS? (Score:4, Informative)
It depends on the awkwardness, and whether or not it tends to be of a sexual nature. After that, it depends if it continues to happen despite the targets not wanting it to happen.
I do know that the behavior described by the women who have written about their interactions with him on campus rises to the level of sexual harassment.
At the very minimum, that behavior should be brought up with him, and then it should cease, or he should be removed from the campus.
Re: (Score:2)
Good chance he will be moving into the Debian+derivative ecosystem.
Re: (Score:2)
CentOS was a good distro and it is a shame that they managed to kill it, but honestly, after the stance of RedHat against Stallman ( https://www.redhat.com/it/blog... [redhat.com] ), i wouldn't touch a RedHat product not even with a stick. I don't support dumb SJWs.
So based on your disagreement of RedHat's stance on rms you're boycotting their products.
For all your hate of SJWs it would seem you are one, just with a disagreement on the type of Social Justice you fight for.
Re: (Score:2)
CentOS was a good distro and it is a shame that they managed to kill it
Personally, I think they made CentOS *much* better by getting rid of the point releases.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: Missing CentOS? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Did people run centos as desktop?
Yes.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes I did. When CetOS 6 ran out of support my default upgrade was to CentOS 8; but that had the Gnome 3 desktop (which I find unusable); so I upgraded to Debian with the Mate desktop.
Re:Missing CentOS? (Score:4, Interesting)
That would be an odd choice, but I suppose it could have been something some people wanted to push for already but momentum with CentOS had prevented it. Some opinion that the stability of CentOS isn't worth the staleness of CentOS, but a larger sentiment that 'well, we are on CentOS, so no'. Then you get a shot and win when CentOS goes away. I'm skeptical and anecdotally have not seen this though. I think the 'Ubuntu refrains from Gnome jump' is a more likely theory.
Other choices:
-You want as close to RedHat as possible, you don't mind registering to access downloads, and you either fall under the free usage scenario or could finally push for budget with the CentOS situation: Run RedHat
-You will absolutely not spend or you absolutely do not want to register and have your usage tracked and audited and want only RedHat release clone content: Oracle (for now, justified skepticism for future), Alma, or Rocky linux
-You want to stay with the free option close to RedHat, and don't mind not-quite RedHat release level: CentOS stream
-You are upset with the whole ecosystem as curated by RedHat over CentOS, and want to get further away, but with an option for commercial support: Ubuntu or SuSE
-You want to get far away from any chance of corporate strategy calling the shots on the welfare of your distribution: Debian
Missing Option? (Score:4, Interesting)
All of the above, plus: you want to get as far as possible away from the drama, code churn, personality wars and egos (Poettering). You desire stability and peace, that just plain works.
So you backup your home directory and install FreeBSD.
Everything just looks and works like before, but with none of the drama. The only real change is the firewall syntax and package management. The security and scalability features of FreeBSD are just the icing on the cake.
Re: (Score:2)
While there may be technical merit to using FreeBSD, from a drama/ego/etc perspective, I doubt that FreeBSD could scale to the user count of Linux without incurring the same general situation. E.g. OpenBSD v. FreeBSD is an example where some drama/ego comes into play in the BSD neck of the woods.
So the only reason you may have relatively less drama and/or the world at large doesn't care about drama, is the relatively small community. Might as well pick your favorite neck of the linux ecosystem and ignore t
Re:Missing CentOS? (Score:4)
That was my motivation behind the move from Centos to Fedora Server. I converted with Fedora Server 32 several years ago to try it out. Centos 8 had just came out and I was facing a complete reinstall anyway, and never run Zero versions of any thing. So, I installed Fedora as a test intending to run it till Centos 8.2 came out.
It ran so well that I never bother with the conversation back to Centos. Then Redhat shot Centos and I said 'fuck it."
So far it has run just as flawless as centos did. I wouldn't run it in a enterprise environment because there is a kernel update ever week requiring a reboot, but for a home server it has served excellently.
Re: (Score:3)
never run Zero versions of any thing. So, I installed Fedora as a test intending to run it till Centos 8.2 came out.
Your ultimate result may be ok, but this is interesting logic. CentOS 8.0 was effectively Fedora 28 but with a year of extra testing and fix updates. Every Fedora is a 'zero', they just never explicitly put a '.0' at the end.
The lesson may be '.0s aren't as scary as they used to be', rather than 'fedora never has a .0'.
Re: (Score:3)
It's an old habit. Steams back from windows 3.0 and other hot messes from that time. Reality, you just as likely to be bitten by a update flaw any time.
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny, because IBM had a standing policy of designating '.0' as '.1'. Hence you had AIX 6.1 and 7.1, but never 6.0 or 7.0. They still had .0s, but would not label them as such, precisely because customers were wary of '.0'.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, that's why I'm running Fedora again.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe some people (with personal servers) are replacing CentOS with Fedora?
I did that for about 6 months until I realized what a PITA it is to have a server OS that gets EOL'd 13 months after release.
There might be a few people who were using CentOS as a desktop who made the jump to Fedora, but generally people would have gone to free RHEL or another server distro.
It's been 15+ years ... (Score:5, Interesting)
... since I've used an rpm distro. How are they these days? That's an honest question. I'm used to apt Ubuntu and the occasional Devian original plus the occasional arch / manjaro when I want to feel particularly l33t and cutting-edge. I had a short run-in with rpm on SuSE a few months back and it felt like a throwback to 2002. ... Is that just me? Are there some noteworthy updates on rpm distros and how they handle things these days?
Re: It's been 15+ years ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Can't tell you much about details... been using Debian for ages, some Slack in between, sprinkle some linuxfromscratch for good measure, and SuSE in the '02s. So to me SuSE is always going to be "Nuremberger Windows 2002" any way you put it :-)
I'm using Fedora Silverblue [fedoraproject.org] now, and I can definitely say it's worth a try. Can't tell much of the difference is because it's "rpm" vs "deb" based, but this is because Silverblue is *so* much more different that I honestly can't say what is owing to a different package manager and what to ... you know ... Silverblue being immutable & all.
I guess what I'm trying to say is: if you're looking for an escape distro, and Slackware is not your pair of shoes, try Fedora Silverblue :) Switching between "claassic" .deb and .rpm based distributions is like switching between Democrat and Republican -- same shit, different config file. Silberblue is a true 3rd-party choice (and in the true spirit of a 3rd party vote, it may very well suck for you *shrug*).
Re: (Score:3)
Anything with a ports-like system is like flying to the future in a spaceship, by comparison. (Say the BSDs, Arch, Gentoo, ...)
I'd say it's more like flying to the future in a jacked up 1974 Chevy Vega where it's always pouring fucking oil everywhere it goes and breaking down.
You are otherwise correct that the system is easy enough that a moron can use it, as long as that moron doesn't mind oil all over his driveway.
You can keep that Vega running if you don't mind working on it all the time, and getting oil everywhere, but the rest of us would rather just buy a nicer car.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Uh, rpm distros have gotten past dependency hell. RPM distros used to use
Re: It's been 15+ years ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
rpm in its base form is relatively unchanged from the perspective of basic package management functionality. It still installs, updated, or removes individual packages.
But these days one uses dnf rather than interact directly with rpm. dnf takes care of pulling in any dependencies, downloading them, and handing them off to rpm to install. rpm's equivalent on Ubuntu would be dpkg, I believe, while dnf is apt.
The major changes to rpm have been on the development side. By default when you build new packages wi
Re: (Score:2)
rpm's equivalent on Ubuntu would be dpkg, I believe, while dnf is apt.
Just so.
When I'm doing package management on any Debian-based repo, I like to use Aptitude.
https://wiki.debian.org/Aptitude [debian.org]
Is there an equivalent to Aptitude for Fedora?
I think there must be some kind of GUI, but Aptitude is ncurses-based, which I like very much.
Every time I think about trying Fedora I remember, "Oh right, I won't be able to use Aptitude" and I decide to put it off until later.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been rotating out distros on my media player box and decided to give OpenSUSE a try. It works well but they don't seem to support standby power saving mode. The docs even say it's not supported. What the fuck? So every other distro could wake up immediately and OpenSUSE takes 15 seconds. Might as well power the damn thing off fully. I mean standby was working in Windows 98...
Re: (Score:2)
when I want to feel particularly l33t ... Is that just me?
It's just you. Same as it was 15 years ago.
Those of us who didn't change, also didn't have any reason to.
I'm surprised you never looked up how to do something, saw instructions for the different distro types, and noticed they're still all about the same.
Re: (Score:2)
At the risk of wading into a battle of mostly opinion, I'd argue that yum/dnf are measurably better than other systems.
Yum can install a package file on the local system, along with any dependencies from its repo set (advantage over apt). It's also very convenient, as it can also install packages from a repo based on the path to a file the package, or the name of something the package provides.
It's secure, with the ability to check GPG signatures on every package before installation (and if you see a repo
C'mon RH... put the btr back into RHEL (Score:4, Interesting)
The one thing I wish were in RHEL 8.x would be btrfs, even if it is just btrfs-utils and a kernel module, so the filesystem can be used. Yes, btrfs has had its issues, but if worried, it can be used on top of MD-RAID (Synology implements this, and if it is any way broken, it would be all over the place.) As a filesystem, it is a useful thing to have as an alternative. For example, I have encountered applications that create tens of millions of small files in a single directory (third party vertical market application, and that's just how their devs roll, so they will always close any issues as "Wontfix") where the only filesystems that can handle the huge amount of files are btrfs and ZFS, because neither filesystem uses inodes. On a small scale, archiving E-mail in Maildir format can result in the same thing.
Yes, it isn't perfect, and something that one wouldn't use for every task, but it is nice to at least have the option of using. Fedora has had it as an option for years without issue, same with SuSE and Ubuntu. I just wish Red Hat would put it back into RHEL, because stratis is a good product, but isn't a magic bullet for all things, and btrfs has a lot of nice features, including bot rot detection.
Re: (Score:2)
whats that? the file system you want to use is essentially a fully featured database that surely will forever contain bugs? well then
Re: (Score:3)
Even Microsoft binned their database based filesystem WinFS before release. If the company that gave the world Windows 8 and 10 gives up on it as a bad idea that tells you how much the concept truly sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Even Microsoft binned their database based filesystem WinFS before release.
Because you don't access a database with a database?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:C'mon RH... put the btr back into RHEL (Score:4, Insightful)
Fedora has had it as an option for years without issue
Fedora has had it as an option for years. That's really where the sentence should stop. btrfs has issues. You even said it yourself in the second sentence that it has issues. That may make it suitable for tinkerers, but far less so for an enterprise OS targeted at customers who expect support contracts for all included software. I've heard btrfs described in a lot of ways, but never "enterprise ready". Hell even the project's own feature stability page offers "should be okay" as the best vote of confidence they can give.
Re:C'mon RH... put the btr back into RHEL (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, btrfs has had its issues, but if worried, it can be used on top of MD-RAID
I think you have to be more specific about the sort of issues. If it is the case that btrfs problems are only with its builtin RAID, then fine, you are saying skip that and use MD-RAID instead to avoid the problems.
If you are saying it has other issues, then MD-RAID would just happily replicate those issues across a lot of disks.
I think btrfs as stands has got ease of use problems, and thus a huge support liability to a company like RedHat. I have to support some people who use it and they generally get into some problem where they are out of space unexpectedly (snapshots that they are oblivious to). Last one I heard of but didn't actually participate in the debug so I don't know details: it went read-only because it needed some action, and it scared the crap out of them because they thought it was data corruption or something, but turned out to be no big deal. Basically, it's more capable and does some nice things, but for people that are accustomed to 'just a boring filesystem', it can be confusing.
Re: (Score:2)
I read a great post here once that described btrfs as a system designed by a developer, developed by a developer, to solve the problems a developer was having. This opposed to a file system designed by a competent architect who understands storage systems, developed by a developer, to solve problems that administrators of PB scale storage were having.
The post then goes on to list a lot of points but one that stuck with me most was that a CoW filesystem designed in the 2010 (okay 2009) somehow has an fsck ut
Replacing the kernel is easy... (Score:5, Insightful)
...compared to replacing SystemD. Slackware and Devuan do their best, but we need a heavyweight distro to bin this PoS and go back to a sane init system. The amount of time I've wasted attempting to configure some - what should be simple - aspect of the system and with init would be simply 2 min edit of bash script I've lost count of. I despite what Poettering has done to linux.
Re: Replacing the kernel is easy... (Score:3)
Gentoo doesn't give a fuck about systemd unless you do.
It's also the system if you want to actually understand what you are doing, and have control over your computer (be it for real work, or to be be a "f'in ricer". :) If you go back to nannybuntu and massa Poettering, at least you will know what you lose.
Re: (Score:2)
If only the package maintainers understood what they are doing.
Configure just a couple of innocuous USE flags and you can easily get a system that won't install.
What's the point of USE flags if you can't build the system with any of them?
Re: (Score:3)
I've had decent luck with keeping the ones from the default profile for my architecture in make.conf, and just setting the flags I need and want on a per-package level, but conservatively, especially for packages that others will likely depend on. I won't pretend I don't ever get blockers or other problems from time to time, but they are never so frequent nor so burdensome to correct, even on my mixed-arch system, as to outweigh the benefits they provide.
I will fully admit that Gentoo isn't for people who
Re: Replacing the kernel is easy... (Score:2)
Maintainers of packages need to produce init scripts for an init to be acceptable to most people, few want to diy them all.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know. I still use OpenRC. But I wanted to reply to the "unforgiving" comment. Your experience may vary, but I find that my Gentoo systems are "forgiving," or not, depending on how quickly and drastically I try to change them.
It is supposedly possible for instance to change an entire system from using ALSA to PulseAudio to Pipewire, then back again, or from Xorg to Wayland and back again. But this high level of flexibility does come with a high burden of actually knowing what you are doing, and in
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but we need a heavyweight distro to bin this PoS and go back to a sane init system.
Sure do you have one? Or are you about to mention the init system that some 15 other projects including many popular large distros were actually trying to replace?
The amount of time I've wasted attempting to configure some - what should be simple - aspect of the system and with init would be simply 2 min edit of bash script I've lost count of.
You mean it's more complicated to edit a 10 line configuration file than it is to edit one of the many 150 line scripts which somehow despite their heft achieve far less? Oh darling, It's 2020, surely you've RTFM by now... Surely!
I despite what Poettering has done to linux.
"Despite" what you think some of us don't "despise" what Poettering has done. In fact we welcome Linux finally having a
Re: (Score:1)
Slackware and Devuan... are niche products that not so many people used these days... .
If you need a run a system that is razor sharp? Then Slackware. Maybe not so much if you don't need the network to do anything but say, pass mass data to applications...
Re: (Score:3)
"without core concept like SystemD"
SystemD isn't a concept , its a process starter. And you're a fucking idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
No, sorry, it is also a concept. It is much more than a process starter. It has expanded to include darn near everything up to though not yet including systemd-kitchensinkd. The concept is that unifying all these disparate parts of the Linux ecosystem under a single closely-integrated set of daemons, sharing a development philosophy that is at least arguably non-Unix-like, is a good thing. And perhaps for some folks, maybe it is. But it's not for me, and I appreciate that the distribution I prefer, Gen
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I suppose in Poeterrings mind its more of a philosophy. But all of it apart from the core init section can be faily easily binned and replaced with something else. But extracting PID 1 and replacing it would be a mother of a task, and thats the real problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Says the A/C who wouldn't understand sysadmin if his life depended on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Missing SystemD is a feature. Sort of like missing ejector seat on a helicopter.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL :) Yeah, right. You have to be going some to make an init system unbootable since it generally ignores script errors and just carries on.
Get the fact straight (Score:3)
Ubuntu 21.04 ships with GNOME 3.38. There was no "GNOME 39" version. This puts the whole article in BS category.
implying popular is good... (Score:5, Funny)
And Gnome died for me, ever since they considered the wish to select a theme or colors to be a personal offense of their religion.
Oh well, at least it's not systemd/Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Plenty of other better desktops out there, don't let GNOME be the thing that keeps you from leaving Windows. GNOME is now a niche thing, not mainstream.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just an average home user who would love to be free of Microsoft
I urge you to try out Linux Mint. I personally run Linux Mint MATE edition. MATE and Cinnamon are two desktop environments that work a lot like Windows, with some good ideas stolen from Mac OS X.
https://linuxmint.com/ [linuxmint.com]
A simple explanation (Score:5, Interesting)
which has nothing to do with Fedora's new features is that Michael Larabel, the owner and chief editor of Phoronix.com, one of the most popular Linux websites on the net, has recently switched to Fedora as well and he's been advertising it a lot.
Secondly, out of all prebuilt distros, Fedora normally contains the freshest packages and is generally easy to use. Arch often contains newer and fresher packages but it's a lot harder to use and up until recently it hasn't even had a graphical installer.
On a grand scheme of things however Linux on the desktop does not exist. I mean some people use it but the general population has no idea what Linux is and most people have never seen it which is proven by web analytics services and Steam Hardware Stats.
Add to that the fact that... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows having third-party libraries (like Qt) bundled as per-application private copies...
Welcome to flatpak/snap, where we manage to copy that dysfunction as well!
Gnome is still unusable out of the box (Score:5, Insightful)
Ubuntu and alike are minimizing the pain with their own customizations, however I still very much prefer KDE Plasma desktop especially now that it became quite polished in the recent years. Also highly recommending openSUSE Tumbleweed for the desktop, which is a rolling distro. Stable, beautiful, always up to date.
Re:Gnome is still unusable out of the box (Score:5, Informative)
I also highly recommend xfce as an alternative to gnome. The updated xfce in F34 looks just beautiful, but it is still a traditional desktop, with traditional semantics that everyone expects.
Re: (Score:3)
I second the xfce for a desktop. I would say the motto of xfce is "do the job and get the fuck out of the way."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One reason I stick to Fedora on my main desktop, is that they actually do a much better job of packaging KDE than Ubuntu.
For some reason, the last time I tried Kubuntu, it just seemed janky and sloppily put together. But on Fedora, KDE runs just fine and feels like its as intended.
I've never liked the UI decisions that Gnome3 made. Similar to some decisions Apple has made, they seem to fall into the category of "probably make sense if you're hunched over a laptop without enough screen space" but downright a
Re: (Score:2)
That's it? (Score:5, Interesting)
most users will never reach the end of that SSD lifespan (approximately ten years of normal use),
Only ten years then it's useless? How much more electronic waste are we going to dump in landfills?
Re: (Score:2)
most hardware is useless after ten years, considering how much more demanding the same common programs become through the years
we used to email and IM each other with devices that had 64 MB of ram
my cpu has more L2 cache than that, now
you want less waste? start hunting down programmers who say "that's what the customer wanted"
Re: That's it? (Score:2)
my laptop from 2009 seems to be able to edit documents and presentations just fine (Core 2 duo with 8gb RAM). I recently replaced the battery because there was a warning that it was losing its charge. I don't see why I need a more powerful one when this one seems to do the same things it did 10 years ago.
Re: (Score:3)
most hardware is useless after ten years,
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you. That may have been the case in the 200x, when processor speed was increasing by leaps and bounds. But as of 201x not so much. I know people with 10 year old processors still in service as their main desktop. They play modern games just fine, and so far they have no plans to replace these aging AMD systems.
I have a old i3 processor from around 2014 in service right now. My current workstation is a i9-9900k. I fully expect to have it in service doing somet
Re: (Score:2)
a 4digiter responding to my mostly-handwavy comment, i do not know how to feel about this
you say that you have the 7 year old i3 in service... but you also say that your current
why is your current workstation not the i3?
the absolute highest performing cpu i could find from 2011 is the 3970x. Not the threadripper, obviously, but the intel one.
it's a 150W component with the same processing power as the **30W** i7-7700T from *four years ago*. Its efficiency is AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE WORSE than amd's offerings t
Re: (Score:3)
The ol' fx-8350 a decent processor and a excellent space heater. I redirected the air coming out the back of my 8350 across my feet in the winter to keep my toes warm.
Outside of running on the warm side, its still a pretty decent gaming processor. It won't keep a power gamer happy but for a casual one it still has some pretty good performance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah in ten years with LEO's and 5G (always-on, everywhere) connections, cloud-computing, and AR/VR implanted (STE)* everywhere; the computing experience will be vastly different.
*Streaming To Eyeballs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How much more electronic waste are we going to dump in landfills?
I'm sure no one is going to notice that one tiny M.2 stick piled on the 2 TVs underneath it.
And before you say, "soldered on", I remind you that 2020 isn't even the year of Linux on Desktop, so by the time we get to the year of Linux on Laptop we'll no be using SSDs and rather quantum tunneling data directly into our neurons for storage. This should make my porn collection a lot more fun too.
Re: That's it? (Score:2)
Did spinning hard drives last 10 years?
Why? (Score:1)
Not because of how well bugs are treated; exceptions do apply of course. (some projects really are helpful)
Not because of decisions, or the ways taht a user can influence these.
Stupid architecture where a lot of things are foced onto the user when they do not need all that software.
Networkmanager? Gnome-o
Re: (Score:2)
Linus quote (Score:2)
Features (Score:2)
So what are the features of Fedora?
TFS talks about the possibility to choose the desktop environment. Almost all Linux distro offer the same choice.
And BRTFS might not be the default, but it's available as an option during the installation if you want it.
So what makes it special?
Re: (Score:2)
You get to be a guinea pig for Red Hat's random brain farts, some of which might show up in Red Hat Enterprise someday (and half of those make it crappier, glad I got my employer's Red Hat server count down from triple digits to six)
Just wish ISVs cared more (Score:2)
Whenever someone making commercial software decides to support Linux, they tend to focus on Ubuntu and cease caring beyond that point. I really wish I didn't have to depend on 3rd party attempts at copr repos that repackage those things (not always staying up-to-date). They usually work, but sometimes they don't and you're suddenly SOL at getting anyone to care about fixing the issue.
While I do still run Fedora on my primary desktop, that issue is probably my main continued frustration with doing so.
GNOME sucks (Score:2)
The most popular (Score:2)
The most popular of all the herpes variants?
GNOME (Score:2)
hahaha GNOME 40 (Score:2)
So GNOME has two digit numbers now that the wretched GNOME 3 drove everyone with a brain away?
Why even mention that crap if you're trying to promote a distro? No one with two or more neurons talking to each other between there ears is going to be using GNOME.
Next version (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If by that you mean desktop environments, there are many alternatives to the Gnome abomination.
Re: Because the current state of Linux SUCKS. (Score:1)
If you accepted desktop environments in your life, you already lost. :)
Re: (Score:3)
KDE and Gnome just annoy me. I can live with either, but they get in my way more than they actually help do what I want.
My compromise: XFCE. Lets me do just what I need and want, and otherwise stays out of my way.
Re: (Score:2)
The shell is a steaming pile of manure.
Re: (Score:1)
Flamebait?
Have people become such hypersensitive pussies that even a simple permutation of the "Sucks LESS" joke causes profuse monthly bleeding?
Re: (Score:2)
Have people become such hypersensitive pussies that even a simple permutation of the "Sucks LESS" joke causes profuse monthly bleeding?
Is this supposed to be a clever way to call them a bitch?
Your parents must have thought you were so smart.
Re: (Score:2)
No. If people are too stupid and shallow to get the joke, fuck them.