30
Is there a reason to pick Fedora over Ubuntu? (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
65 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Ubuntu is the leading distro, if I'm not mistaken. It's also compatible with Mint, Zorin, Xubuntu, etc, which are another leading distros than Fedora. Is it only for redhat users or secondary distro?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 3 months ago (8 children)

I'm curious why you'd say that. Ubuntu has made some weird decisions.

I dislike their DE. Snaps where a flop buy the vision was ambitious and cool if it had worked. And Id prefer a gnu system utils. But those are just reasons I don't use it.

So if you like a Ubuntu derivative, they're a fine vanilla distros. And they've always had deep ties with the FLOSS community and they are one of the primary reason we have a Linux desktop. So not sure I get the hate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I meant canonical is RhE best reason not to choose ubuntu.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Right, they provide the funding for the developers keeping one of the most accessible distros going so whats the problem?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Canonical’s engineering is poor. They build weird stuff, and they want to close Linux off through CLA and permissive licenses. They aren’t a trust worthy company.

    RH does more. RH is Linux for all intents and purposes.

    Fedora is better. At one time, Ubuntu was good, but that was 20 years ago. The Fedora community has done a great job of stepping up to make it a great desktop distribution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    I think with that argument its better to point out Fedora has taken pains to isolate itself from Redhat/IBM. Because while IBM has historically had great engineering, they are not know for great licensing. In fact the basically destroyed and entire enterprise ecosystem recently with the licensing changes to RHEL.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Yeah, the Fedora community revolted when RH tried to force Fedora to be what they wanted, and RH left Fedora to the community after that. 😆

    Moving CentOS upstream of RHEL? That was a good thing. RHEL didn’t have a true upstream, and now that is CentOS. The RHEL and the clones now have a central place to upstream code, and they now are the EL ecosystem instead of only RHEL. It’s created more diversity and has added more options.

    For example, Alma doesn’t have to be bug-for-bug compatible with RHEL. They can carry their own patches and add features which their base wants and only be binary compatible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    I can't recall the history exactly, but Red Hat was once free. Then it seems like I recall CentOS or Fedora replacing it as the FOSS fork. I'm old and my memory sucks. Anyone else recall?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yeah, RH Linux was free at one point. I remember getting CDs with a book in the ‘90s and when it was discontinued in favor of RHEL.

    Fedora was supposed to be the replacement for RH Linux. It was supposed to be what CentOS is today, a close upstream for RHEL, but the Fedora community had other ideas. 🙂

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent