When Ubuntu tries to be Fedora

They struggled trying to keep the betas in control. Inclusion of too new , latest technologies caused breakage and other problems to Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron.

Harald Hoyer wrote a good comment out of the responses to Mark Shuttleworth's post about synchronizing distro releases.

Ubuntu should stay as they are. Its a good distro for me to recommend for those users who just want a JustWorks machine with no interest to contribute to FOSS world. Fedora development is admittedly way too fast for those type of users to bother. If Ubuntu tries to follow Fedora rapidness, that won't solve anything (except, maybe, open a way for grabbing the Fedora contributor/userbase to the Ubuntu side). Ubuntu has been a good player in trying to solve their bug #1. So, keep it that way. The Fedora path is too hostile for Ubuntu current target market.


Anonymous said…
rapidness ?
what does that mean ?
i want a better system and not a weekly build...

please, think about posting these insanities...

just because fedora lacks ubuntu community and user base bitter comments shouldnt be done...
Anonymous said…
"rapidness ?
what does that mean ?"

It means Ubuntu is just a packager that ships a fork of Debian unstable branch and does not contribute much upstream and works on proprietary technologies like launchpad, landscape etc while Fedora is a major innovator.


And unlike other distributions, Fedora has shown clear metrics on its growth.

Unknown said…
rapidness ?
what does that mean ?
i want a better system and not a weekly build...
inclusion of beta softwares, inclusion of experimental technologies.. Ubuntu should not follow that .. Hardy Heron includes several of these, which made it hard for those so-called "users".. and IMHO, is simply wrong for a distro with a good reputation of newbie-friendly like Ubuntu ..

If a user want a distro with less moving parts, use CentOS/Ubuntu/Debian .. Fedora have lots of moving parts, but thats what Fedora is .. the leader of innovation .. innovation may need big, rapid changes, something of which Ubuntu-type of distro should not take on if they really care about their newbie users ..

Why create another Fedora? when Ubuntu is going very well with its current values?.
Anonymous said…
oh lord... linux purists everywhere.
"newbie" distro ?
Im sorry, Ive been using linux since red hat 4.x and for me its awesome not to have the dependency hell of rpm and NOW that u guy created yum... Its so good still to be using apt... Gosh, everytime I give Fedora/OpenSuse a try I just go back to Ubuntu.

And btw, fedora aint a packager ? All distros are packagers because you all embed linux kernel with the packages on the top.

Its funny to point that Linux was trying very hard to go mainstream since God knows when, and then finally Ubuntu arrives and, of course, fedora users are jealous becasue "they didnt pick me, bua".

Face it, innovation doesnt mean much if no one is using it ;) I dont count linux purists and techies as much as adoption...
Unknown said…
dear whoever u are,

i believe u didnt get my point here.

Ubuntu is going well as it is .. it shouldn't try to be moving too fast like Fedora and cause troubles to their current users.. If Ubuntu have as much moving parts like Fedora, it will behave like fedora - that is, sudden breakage, beta/alpha softwares here and there etc.. Do you want Ubuntu to be like that? .. I know I don't .. because that means, we will go back to square zero, where all linuxes are hard to be used by non-techies ..

Ubuntu and Fedora have different target markets, and lets keep it that way .. Fyi, I promote Ubuntu to a lot of users too - especially to those who are non-techies .. and Fedora, to my techie friends (as they have more potential to bring new stuff upstream, and knowing ubuntu, their contributions might end-up-ubuntu-only - which is not good for the FOSS world ) .. thats my strategy of getting more people into linux .. I don't really mind about people not picking Fedora, especially if they are not techies .. Ubuntu is far better as an environment for non-techies .. while any users whom I see as a potential contributor , I will try to bring them to Fedora ..

Theres nothing wrong of having a lot of distros .. each have their strength .. but I don't think Ubuntu have the strength to move as rapid as Fedora, because it will introduce similar problems, duplicate of effort .. and the loss of a distro for me to recommend to my non-techie friends ..
msian_tux_lover said…
I will always have a soft spot for Fedora. Somehow I find it more polish out of the box. But sadly it does require some tweaking for it to be a usable desktop. Hardware detection wise, it is still behind Ubuntu.

Ubuntu is not only for noobs but also for those of us who just wanna concentrate in getting our job done and don't have the time or will to hunt for packages and to resolve any dependency issues.

Having the latest and greatest is not important; heck we can argue all we want but the version of xorg in Fedora 9 is totally unusable for some of use with non Intel graphical chipsets.

This is even worse than any QA snafu issues one might say abt Ubuntu.

So if one would argue that Ubuntu is trying to be like Fedora, perhaps Fedora's approach is good enough for others to emulate.

Don't be so pissed of Ubuntu is trying to emulate Fedora, after all, Fedora also took things like Tomboy from SUSE and yum from Yellow Dog; they are GPL'ed after all.

I cannot be sure about Ubuntu not contributing to upstream; if it is so, then I am sure there will be a huge uproar. But so far I have not seen any.

Both distros in my opinion are equally good, they just have different focus.
Unknown said…
yeah i agree about the ubuntu is for people who do not want to bother about problems of too-new softwares and does not bother about not having latest and greatest ..

and I am not pissed off with ubuntu trying to emulate fedora. They are not much different anyway. What I am worried is, if they try to move away from their stable environment - including experimental technologies, half baked programs (thus, what i meant by fedora rapidness) .. they will end up creating yet-another-high-moving-parts distro, which of course, will not going to be a good experience for those who don't want to end up baking half-baked softwares ..

I value ubuntu as a place for me to put normal users, and expand userbase .. and I value fedora as a place where development take place and people can learn the rough parts of FOSS world.. Having to lose ubuntu because it started to behave fedoraish (in term of stability and stuff), is not what i want .. like i said again, ubuntu should stay as it is ..

about upstream contribution, admittedly, ubuntu do contribute some upstream .. however, what I noticed in some of the practise, a number of user-friendly improvements they made, they keep it for themselves, leaving other distros to appear bad .. i do hope, stuff might change ..
Anonymous said…
Funny how you compare Ubuntu against Fedora and get flamed :-). Might as well compare Ubuntu against Debian SID. For me, Ubuntu used to strike the right balance: faster (half-year) upgrades than the glacial Debian stable cycle; but still a very stable, useful system.

I'm a techhead allright but the Hardy upgrade was botched for me - Firefox and Thunderbird plugin breakage. And then some. So I agree - leave out the beta stuff.

Popular posts from this blog

Announcing PlatoCDP, a Plone distribution for enterprises.

Adding simple popup to Plone frontpage

An Open Letter for the Rector of PETRONAS University of Technology