Justbill
Everything that didn't work in FC5 finall, works in Dapper flight 6!
GeForce FX 5200 works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Soundblaster "Live 24 bit" works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Kodak Camera works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Its funny that a final release would have as many problems as FC5 had, while a distro thats still in testing seems to be smooth sailing, at least for the hardware I was using.
I read someware that FC is RHEL "test ground", well, if they can't do any better than what they released on 3-20-06 as a final (FC5), I am sure I will never find a need for a Red Hat product.
Justbill
GeForce FX 5200 works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Soundblaster "Live 24 bit" works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Kodak Camera works in Dapper, didn't in FC5
Its funny that a final release would have as many problems as FC5 had, while a distro thats still in testing seems to be smooth sailing, at least for the hardware I was using.
I read someware that FC is RHEL "test ground", well, if they can't do any better than what they released on 3-20-06 as a final (FC5), I am sure I will never find a need for a Red Hat product.
Justbill
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
danleff
This just goes to show you what differences in hardware will produce in differing systems. My installation of FC5 was as smooth as your Ubuntu one. Both seem to be excellent distros, but I see your point.
Always check out your hardware with the distros hardware database to check compatibility before trying a specific distro.
But, I do agree with you, Ubuntu is a fine distro!
Always check out your hardware with the distros hardware database to check compatibility before trying a specific distro.
But, I do agree with you, Ubuntu is a fine distro!
Heffo_J
Justbill,
I was a very satisfied FC4 user (Danlef helped me get my wifi card working - thanks again). I awaited eagerly the new release of FC5 and I was very dissapointed with it. Kernel specific programs could not be simply download in Firefox and installed from its downlaod menu, as was the case in FC4. Extra (unexplained) steps and issues blocked the way. I acknowledge that Fedora/RH is jumpy about licnesing, but to get my madwifi to work again was too much a hurdle that I could not wait for someone to fix it for me. So I went to Breezy, which is okay but I really liked FC4. The "warm fuzzy" statements, and to sudo approach I found a nuisance after FC4, but I've learned to live with it. Incidently, Breezy saw my wifi card, meaning I didn't have to reintall everything again.
My 2 cents worth,
John
I was a very satisfied FC4 user (Danlef helped me get my wifi card working - thanks again). I awaited eagerly the new release of FC5 and I was very dissapointed with it. Kernel specific programs could not be simply download in Firefox and installed from its downlaod menu, as was the case in FC4. Extra (unexplained) steps and issues blocked the way. I acknowledge that Fedora/RH is jumpy about licnesing, but to get my madwifi to work again was too much a hurdle that I could not wait for someone to fix it for me. So I went to Breezy, which is okay but I really liked FC4. The "warm fuzzy" statements, and to sudo approach I found a nuisance after FC4, but I've learned to live with it. Incidently, Breezy saw my wifi card, meaning I didn't have to reintall everything again.
My 2 cents worth,
John
danleff
If you are referring to the kernel source package or related packages, you should be using Yum in Fedora to install these packages. Yum is designed to solve any dependency problems, by downloading needed packages.
You could have downloaded the madwifi packages for FC5 easily also.
But, I guess that's water under the bridge now.
It's also good news that Breezy saw the wifi card right off. One point for Ubuntu.
You could have downloaded the madwifi packages for FC5 easily also.
But, I guess that's water under the bridge now.
It's also good news that Breezy saw the wifi card right off. One point for Ubuntu.
