On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 09:15 +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote: > Hi All, > > I don't know if this has been posted on the list or not but situations > like this need to be looked at because it can only hinder the progress of > Fedora over time unfortunately. > > http://distrocenter.linux.com/distrocenter/05/07/11/2327245.shtml?tid=107&tid=127 I don't think this has been posted, and we definitely appreciate postings to this list of all review of Fedora. Rahul, for one, takes the effort to contact writers and set them straight on the facts. I can see what directions in that article I think need correction. I'm curious what you see? * Worrying about OOo being beta. FC is specifically cutting edge. Mincing words about beta in a release is contrary to the spirit and history of highly advancing open source. Beta and release are subjective terms. "While I've had no problems with it and no crashes, a beta release in what is considered to be a stable operating system feels out of place." * Totally not understanding the story behind patent infringing technologies. "Worse, Fedora Core 4 gets low marks for multimedia. I encountered an overwhelming number of bugs in this area. There is no support for proprietary formats such as Windows Media, DVD, and MP3, though having used past Red Hat/Fedora releases, I would expect nothing more. Previously, enabling these multimedia types was not a hard task, but this time, it's daunting." * Not even attempting to understand the difference between what is in the distro and what is supplied by other repositories: "I tried enabling these proprietary media files the same way I did this in previous Fedora releases, which was to install Apt4RPM, a great package management tool, and use that to install the necessary packages. That worked in previous Fedora releases, but not in Fedora Core 4." All in all, a very annoying read. Thanks for sharing with us. :) - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41 Red Hat SELinux Guide http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
