Frank Cox wrote:
We have a lot of windows machines on all the same hardware as has broken
with fedora, and keep them all updated. I can't recall any of them ever
failing to boot after an update, at least in the post win2ksp2 era which
would be pretty close to the entire lifespan of fedora.
You know, Les, I'm really starting to wonder if you came in the wrong door
somehow by mistake.
This is the Fedora mailing list. Fedora is a distribution of a Linux operating
system which is by no means perfect, but is substantially more perfect than any
version of MS Windows has ever been or will be in the future (short of a
complete re-architecture and re-write that probably won't ever happen).
Beg your pardon, but I don't believe you would say that if you had
actually tried to keep any large number of machines running in
production over the last decade. Windows does have problems, but there
are well known ways to avoid them. There is no way to predictably keep
a fedora machine running and up to date with security updates for even a
few years.
This
is due in large part to a different security model and different priorities
than what are found in MS Windows development.
Linux inherits a reasonable security model by following the unix design
but that's not really the point. A machine has to boot up and run
before the security model matters much. After some fedora updates, some
machines don't boot up.
As you apparently have less problems with MS Windows (though I don't see how
that's possible in the real world)
The way it is possible is to run 3rd party anti-virus software and
strictly control the applications that are installed. The problems are
not in the core OS or device drivers. Personally, I'd prefer _not_ to
run Windows on these machines or ever give Microsoft any money again,
but the fact is that they work, have been working for years, and Linux
can't do what they do any better.
and you use a Mac for your personal
computer, you may be a lot happier and find more like-minded people on a
mailing list devoted to either MS Windows or Mac.
I don't like everything about the Mac either, but again their binary
device drivers 'just work' and have never been an issue. Unlike fedora,
I can depend on it to always reboot after an update and it's firewire
drivers have always worked, again unlike fedora. So when does the value
of having the linux firewire driver under the GPL kick in?
Again, this is the Fedora mailing list.
Are you sure you're in the right place?
Yes, I try to use the right tools for the right jobs and thus need to
keep track of what is available and usable. The right job for fedora
seems only to be to try to get some idea of what will be included in the
next stable RHEL/Centos versions - which I think is unfortunate. But,
as not entirely unrelated side effect of that, FC3 and FC6 were very
stable and usable for a large part of their supported lives - FC6 still
is if you ignore a recent but quicky fixed scsi issue. That makes me
believe that that fedora developers understand the issue and are capable
of delivering stability when it matches their agenda. So, I keep hoping
they will someday use the same approach all the time.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
