> Erm, no. Each Fedora release has brought in numerous technical > improvements. Virtualization, clustering, directory services, more and > more features and performance per release. That's a politicians answer. It's completely ignoring the point raised. It doesn't matter how many features a new release has if it doesn't even run properly on lots of systems. Most of the features are also irrelevant to most of the users. In F15 you could at least make the case that Gnome3 was relevant to users even if some hated it and chunks of the code were at best prototype state. (and I'd note the Phoronix survey data suggests that Gnome 3 is rather more liked than some might think from list traffic) But clustering and directory services, like forcing LVM on hapless end users are really irrelevant to most. LVM wasn't a big deal for those who knew better - disable it on install and your disk I/O improves, and its become vaguely relevant with crypto. All of this is painting the fences and hanging bling on a core product which is getting a bit wobblier every release It's bloated It picks bad user defaults It ships a default desktop which burns CPU horribly > And what? All the engineers at Red Hat develop new tech in Fedora. Where > do you propose those new technologies come from if Red Hat splits off? Perhaps the Red Hat engineers could QA their new technologies a bit more before including them ? I don't buy the "big problem" claim here. Several other releases have been a bit wobbly especially out of the box first release. Nor do a few crash reports in themselves form a statistically valid sample. I do think that as has happened a couple of times before now it's time Fedora spent a release or two being more conservative on new toys and fixing the ones it already has. > > Linux distros: > > http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/y > > Without knowing a *lot* about how this information was gathered, it's > meaningless. Ah the cult of Gnome defence - insert fingers in ears and keep shouting loudly "We can't hear you, we can't hear you, anything we don't agree with is biased" (to be fair I note you point to some sensible stats further down) > Red Hat as a company is poised to be a billion dollar company this year > (FY12). The FY 2006 earnings were $278.3 million.[1] That's a 4X > increase in just 6 years. That's *amazing* growth. RHEL is IMHO a good product, with well thought out services around it, but it's not Fedora, and I really don't want to think how 'we've redesigned all your init scripts and broken compatibility' would go down in a meeting with a major banking client. I suspect 'The door is that way, Sir, goodbye and tell the Oracle salesman to come in as you leave' > Look at things like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics, which > indicate that downloads and torrents are going up with each release, not > down. Be careful that downloads are a lagging indicator of success. They go up after you get it right not as, and they go down after you get it wrong, not as... Alan -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
