Is fedora Core any good?

[roryt]

Like the forum this is in says I am a bit of a linux newbie. If anyone can give me some info on fedora core, such as what you think of it I will be very grateful. I wondered whether anyone could also recommend me a (free) linux distro that has these kind of features:

• Looks really sleek and much better than windows
• is quick to load up
• has a search like google desktop search.
• is easy to dual boot with and I can access all my windows files
• Has good compatibility with hardware

That's about it really.

Thanks

[John A]

I've personally never used Fedora Core, but I have used Red Hat 9 - the predecessor to Fedora Core 1, and not that much has changed. I'll tell you some stuff about it: it tends to include A LOT of software, a lot more than you'll need.

Looks really sleek and much better than windows

Well, just about all Linux distros can look that way when properly configured. Any Linux distro can run just about any window manager, such as KDE or Gnome. KDE is certainly larger, but it can handle more special effects and is often more suited towards programmers. I prefer Enlightenment as my window manager.

is quick to load up

*Cough*, *cough* Fedora Core isn't exactly lightweight, as previously mentioned, it's a monster of a distro, and won't likely run much faster than Windows unless you tweak it heavily. However, if you've got a fast computer it won't be too bothersome. But just to let you know: no matter how fast the distro seems to be, the load times for Linux are always longer than Windows.

has a search like google desktop search.

I've never used Google Desktop Search, but no I don't think Fedora comes with one. Knowing Linux though, it's highly probable that one has been made for Linux. Google is your friend.

is easy to dual boot with and I can access all my windows files

Fedora Core is pretty good at detecting your partition settings and setting up GRUB for dual-boot. Several things: you do know that you have to shrink your existing partition that Windows is installed on if you don't have any unpartitioned hard disk space? And also, although Linux (Fedora Core included) can read and write very nicely to the older Fat32-formatted partitions, it's limited to read-only on the newer NTFS partitions.

Has good compatibility with hardware

Depends on what hardware you have. Generally, standard hardware will be accepted by most brands of Linux, and Fedora Core usually doesn't require much if any tweaking to detect the less important peripherals, such as your printer or modem.

Another popular distro is Ubuntu, which is also very good at detecting hardware, but I find that it's often over-simplified and is somewhat bloated like Fedora Core. If you want a truly fast distro but still easy to use, go with pure Debian. It's one of the oldest around, and has good features without sacrificing speed.

Hope this helps

[roryt]

I'll tell you some stuff about it: it tends to include A LOT of software, a lot more than you'll need.

I do like my software ;)

Well, just about all Linux distros can look that way when properly configured. Any Linux distro can run just about any window manager, such as KDE or Gnome. KDE is certainly larger, but it can handle more special effects and is often more suited towards programmers. I prefer Enlightenment as my window manager.

OK, so when ever I have tried to install "special effects" on windows they always to out really bad and riddled with viruses and bugs. Could you possibly recommend me a few different ones.

*Cough*, *cough* Fedora Core isn't exactly lightweight, as previously mentioned, it's a monster of a distro, and won't likely run much faster than Windows unless you tweak it heavily. However, if you've got a fast computer it won't be too bothersome. But just to let you know: no matter how fast the distro seems to be, the load times for Linux are always longer than Windows.

Yeah I know that from past experience because the load up goes through all those checks. I am really bothered about how fast it is when it is running. I guess that will be superior to windows?

I've never used Google Desktop Search, but no I don't think Fedora comes with one. Knowing Linux though, it's highly probable that one has been made for Linux. Google is your friend.

Google is my friend, one of my only friends :( (joke) I was just hoping for the best kind of hoping for too much.

Fedora Core is pretty good at detecting your partition settings and setting up GRUB for dual-boot. Several things: you do know that you have to shrink your existing partition that Windows is installed on if you don't have any unpartitioned hard disk space? And also, although Linux (Fedora Core included) can read and write very nicely to the older Fat32-formatted partitions, it's limited to read-only on the newer NTFS partitions.

Is dual booting made easier over twohard drives? I can do that and that is what I was planning to do?

Depends on what hardware you have.

OK this is the sort of stuff I need to put in, it is all pretty well know stuff:

• Creative Sound Card
• Nvidia Graphics Card
• Wacom Graphics Tablet
• Microsoft wireless mouse and keyboard
• Trust web cam (I don't really care about that though)
• Normal LAN network
• Canon Scanner
• Ipod
• Bluetooth Dongle

Will they work?

I say that because I had real problems before getting my laptop to play any sounds with suse.

Another popular distro is Ubuntu, which is also very good at detecting hardware, but I find that it's often over-simplified and is somewhat bloated like Fedora Core.

Ubuntu is nasty, it is way to simple!

Thank you very very much for your help and time. Thanks for all that info.

[John A]

OK, so when ever I have tried to install "special effects" on windows they always to out really bad and riddled with viruses and bugs. Could you possibly recommend me a few different ones.

Well, you don't have much to worry about in term of malware, as viruses are practically non-existent in Linux. I'd recommend Gnome or Enlightenment if you want a fast desktop manager. Gnome has more add-ons and skins available, so choose that if you like to customize your environment a lot - just head over to www.gnome-look.org. I'd only recommend KDE if you need tons and tons of eye candy, and have lots of memory.

Yeah I know that from past experience because the load up goes through all those checks. I am really bothered about how fast it is when it is running. I guess that will be superior to windows?

Meh... On my old clunker PII, Red Hat was slower than Win98, however Fedora Core will likely be faster than Windows XP, just don't expect that much of a speed improvement. If you want a truly fast distro, just go with plain old Debian - or Slackware.

Is dual booting made easier over twohard drives? I can do that and that is what I was planning to do?

The actual installation is definitely easier; no messing around with partitions, and there's a lot lower chance that the Linux installer will wipe out your Windows partition.

However, the dual-boot setup is more prone to problems when Linux resides on a second hard drive. They key is to make sure that GRUB (the bootloader) gets installed on the Primary Master - the hard drive that the BIOS checks for an operating system. Then GRUB find the kernel image on the Primary Slave, and Linux loads. Generally, the Red Hat installer detects everything perfectly and it works - and if it doesn't, just come here for help.

OK this is the sort of stuff I need to put in, it is all pretty well know stuff:

• Creative Sound Card
• Nvidia Graphics Card
• Wacom Graphics Tablet
• Microsoft wireless mouse and keyboard
• Trust web cam (I don't really care about that though)
• Normal LAN network
• Canon Scanner
• Ipod
• Bluetooth Dongle

Will they work?

Your NVidia graphics card will work initally, although Fedora will use a generic display driver, so it won't take full capability of the card. Once everything's working properly, you should download and install a dedicated driver from NVidia.

Your tablet probably won't have problems being detected under Fedora Core - but if it does, see this page. Keyboard and mouse should be painless; your Canon scanner *should* work, although it might require tweaking. Your iPod will most definitely not work; thanks to Apple. Bluetooth should work fine.

I say that because I had real problems before getting my laptop to play any sounds with suse.

Hmm... Originally Red Hat didn't detect my sound card; it was only after I did a bit of modprobing and then uncommented a line in the module-loading file (I can't remember what it's called) that it worked. Probably the best thing you can do if it doesn't work is to google the exact model of your soundcard and "linux drivers", and you'll get a help page on how to set it up.

Ubuntu is nasty, it is way to simple!

Finally, someone who has the same point-of-view as me! :D

Thank you very very much for your help and time. Thanks for all that info.

No problem - I do it all the time.

[roryt]

Thanks for your excellent help and you have cleared all my queries up nicely. I know who to ask if I have any problems whn i install it. ;) Thanks again!!!

[jbennet]

If you like the idea of fedora take a look at SuSE but bear in mind thats its updater is currently broken but its very nice (just about on a par with vista)

Beware as Fedora has quite high system requyirements but it is good for beginers

[roryt]

But Suse costs money and when I used it when it was free I had some compatability issues. So I think I will just try fedora for the mo. I am yet to find some time to do it though...

[jbennet]

OpenSuSE is to SuSE what Fedora is to RedHat

Opensuse = free
Fedora = free

Suse enterprise = costs money
Redhat enterprise = costs money

[cpickering]

personally, i favour Ubuntu over FC or oS. Simply because I like being able to run

apt-get install software

Yeah granted I could run YUM, or run apt-get on fc and vice versa, but Ubuntu just has more standing at the moment. Its clean, its smart, the install is only 1 ISO, and the people who use it, and help are just more friendlier

[jbennet]

i prefer debian etch netinbstall to ubuntu (install like 100mb then use APT-GET) as its faster

[cpickering]

i prefer debian etch netinbstall to ubuntu (install like 100mb then use APT-GET) as its faster

I use that when building servers. I'd never put Ubuntu on a server, it just aint ready. But for someone who is bridging into using Linux on the desktop, Ubuntu is far easier then debian.

My mac's all run debian, cos im hardcore, roffle!

[jbennet]

i agree about ubuntu and servers. I hate sudo myself
Only reason i prefer debian over ubuntu is i think its faster as it runs well on 128mb ram machines

[TheNNS]

Ubuntu came from debian, so they're similar. I'd choose ubuntu because it's so easy to use, but if you want to learn more about linux, use suse or fedora

[roryt]

Thanks for all the great advice guys

[jbennet]

if you like easy distros like fedora and suse give mandriva free or PcLinux OS a try.

[roryt]

if you like easy distros like fedora and suse give mandriva free or PcLinux OS a try.

I will give them a try but I am not sure about running something with the letters PC in it. lol

[jbennet]

PCLinux OS is a fork of mandriva. Download bigdaddy (its a livecd with the otpion to install so you can try it out first)

[John A]

... or you could try something more hardcore; I recommend Slackware. I've said this before, and I say it now: although it's not what a lot of people would call "easy", it teaches you far more about Linux in a few weeks than many other distros teach you in a year.

A lot of this is due to the fact that you often have to go about manually configuring things, though it's well documented, it gives you a chance to see the guts of Linux rather than some fancy GUI that's provided by distros like Ubuntu, Red Hat, SuSE, and the like. If you don't need to get work done immeditately and can spend some time tinkering around, try it.

[jbennet]

i liked slackware 9 but dont use the newest one as it needs t5oo much ram for my pc

also ive kinda come to like apt-get so nondebian distros have kinda become a nono for me

[cpickering]

Slackware is hardcore!!

I remember using slackware on my old olivetti pentium 100 machine with 16mb of ram. I was also in bash running BitchX (Yes its an irc program not a swear) connected to EFNet at 14.4Kbps

[jbennet]

where we are in scotland for holidays the net is 28kbps dialup which sucks so bad....

[jbennet]

i used to have a PMMX 166mhz Olivetti. it was grey and what would now be called a small form factor case

[TheNNS]

FreeBSD is hardcore, honestly. If you want to be a hacker, this will teach you how to be a hacker.

[jbennet]

openbd is more hardcore

[TheNNS]

Pure UNIX is even harder core. Text base UNIX, that is.

[jbennet]

but UNIX (generally) isnt free e.g AIX, SystemV, HP/UX all cost megabucks (well, solaris is kinda free i suppose)

[Ravenous Wolf]

can i append a question to this? I dont think I am hijacking and it would be better to append the question here rather than start a whole new thread.

Is there a version of linux that is really fast, can do a great variety of software like chess, wordprocessing, databases, java web browser and so on in a GUI but is still reasonably hardcore enough to teach one some linux(i mean not do things via a GUI but in the CLI. Of course the software should run in a window once opened.)

sorry if this sounds like a stupid question. but i am new to linux. very new.

[TheNNS]

Debian is very fast. If you have a fast computer, I recommend SLED 10.