3 ms·

Fedora is considered the bleeding edge of Redhat distros. Always has been. If you want stability and long term support then consider CentOS or Scientific Linux

Fedora is considered the bleeding edge of Redhat distros. Always has been. If you want stability and long term support then consider CentOS or Scientific Linux. That said, the last seven Fedora releases have been totally stable for me both running inside Virtualbox and on bog standard Dell hardware with nvidia GeForce GPU's. I guess YMMV depending on how exotic your hardware is, but that's my general experience with Linux full stop (or any desktop OS for that matter, Windows too).

blinkingled 11y ago
Yeah, I am an old timer when it comes to Linux and so am perfectly aware of it all. CentOS or derivatives don't support recent hardware, has _way_ too outdated s/w stacks and so it's something you use on servers, not laptops or workstations. On the other hand Fedora is so bleeding edge and broken that it is pointless. Ubuntu/LTS supports most hardware without all the instability and I was merely pointing out that there isn't such an option with Fedora and many people find that a non starter.
- teh_klev 11y ago
  Apologies if I came across as a wee bit patronising didn't mean to, I too am an old timer and been around the distro block more times than I can remember. I settled on CentOS and Fedora because I mostly buy Dell kit and by and large it's always worked with little or no fuss, even brand new laptops which are often a friction point. CentOS is also our production distro at work, so it makes sense for me. That said I've built a brand new machine from components (Core i5 Devil's Canyon on an Asus Z97-K mobo with an Asus GeForce GTX 750 Ti graphics card - not exactly bleeding edge, but still fairly new spec -wise for me) so I'm going to see how well CentOS & Fedora get on with that.
  - blinkingled 11y ago
    Yeah, it's better now a days with CentOS 7.x releases than it was with the 6.x ones when it comes to hardware support - but I still had issues for example with suspend/resume not working and Virt manager having issues because the Haswell Xeons weren't tested with Centos 7. Minor issues but for desktop you prefer something that works great.
- SEJeff 11y ago
  Funny, CentOS 7 was based on Fedora 18-20ish. You'd be hard pressed to find non-exotic hardware that it doesn't support. Also, RHEL is supported a LOT longer[1] than Ubuntu's LTS[2] releases (5 years for Ubuntu vs 11+ for RHEL). As to new software, there are now software collections[3], which render that more or less a moot point. [1] https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata [2] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS [3] https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/ https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/
  - blinkingled 11y ago
    Yes, the situation is lot better with CentOS 7.x but still the kernel/DRM and Xorg are a lot older and getting those upgraded to something newer is a pain. I guess I should give the latest release a try - initial 7.x release had my Haswell CPU untested, suspend resume not working and there were some packages missing and/or older (FreeRDP/thermald were couple of them). Thanks.
    - SEJeff 11y ago
      7.1, and 7.2 especially on the desktop, are MASSIVELY better (disclaimer: I'm on the RHEL 7.2 private beta program).

blinkingled 11y ago

Yeah, I am an old timer when it comes to Linux and so am perfectly aware of it all. CentOS or derivatives don't support recent hardware, has _way_ too outdated s/w stacks and so it's something you use on servers, not laptops or workstations. On the other hand Fedora is so bleeding edge and broken that it is pointless. Ubuntu/LTS supports most hardware without all the instability and I was merely pointing out that there isn't such an option with Fedora and many people find that a non starter.

teh_klev 11y ago
Apologies if I came across as a wee bit patronising didn't mean to, I too am an old timer and been around the distro block more times than I can remember. I settled on CentOS and Fedora because I mostly buy Dell kit and by and large it's always worked with little or no fuss, even brand new laptops which are often a friction point. CentOS is also our production distro at work, so it makes sense for me. That said I've built a brand new machine from components (Core i5 Devil's Canyon on an Asus Z97-K mobo with an Asus GeForce GTX 750 Ti graphics card - not exactly bleeding edge, but still fairly new spec -wise for me) so I'm going to see how well CentOS & Fedora get on with that.
- blinkingled 11y ago
  Yeah, it's better now a days with CentOS 7.x releases than it was with the 6.x ones when it comes to hardware support - but I still had issues for example with suspend/resume not working and Virt manager having issues because the Haswell Xeons weren't tested with Centos 7. Minor issues but for desktop you prefer something that works great.
SEJeff 11y ago
Funny, CentOS 7 was based on Fedora 18-20ish. You'd be hard pressed to find non-exotic hardware that it doesn't support. Also, RHEL is supported a LOT longer[1] than Ubuntu's LTS[2] releases (5 years for Ubuntu vs 11+ for RHEL). As to new software, there are now software collections[3], which render that more or less a moot point. [1] https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata [2] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS [3] https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/ https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/
- blinkingled 11y ago
  Yes, the situation is lot better with CentOS 7.x but still the kernel/DRM and Xorg are a lot older and getting those upgraded to something newer is a pain. I guess I should give the latest release a try - initial 7.x release had my Haswell CPU untested, suspend resume not working and there were some packages missing and/or older (FreeRDP/thermald were couple of them). Thanks.
  - SEJeff 11y ago
    7.1, and 7.2 especially on the desktop, are MASSIVELY better (disclaimer: I'm on the RHEL 7.2 private beta program).