5 ms·

Fedora uses more stock and Red Hat is a far, far bigger contributor to Linux and OS as a whole (especially the kernel and systemd). Fedora stays more true to th

Fedora uses more stock and Red Hat is a far, far bigger contributor to Linux and OS as a whole (especially the kernel and systemd). Fedora stays more true to the only OSS ethos. IMO Fedora is the better pick. If I had to use Ubuntu I would fight to use Debian instead.

jjtheblunt 2y ago
exactly same sentiment here
zifpanachr23 2y ago
I agree very strongly with your take. Fedora (and RHEL of course) ooze professionalism in a way that no other distro ecosystem does to me. It's rock solid AND comes with relatively new packages, AND they are close to stock. I also appreciate their willingness to put themselves forward and show leadership when it comes to adopting (or creating) new technologies that can make the platform better. I think most professionals can agree at this point that despite little qualms and some early hiccups here and there, technologies like systemd and wayland (and others) were probably good ideas in the long run, and Fedora was consistently way out ahead in promoting and adopting them. I also tend to trust Red Hat (and yes even IBM) more than I do Canonical for a number of reasons.
- akdor1154 2y ago
  > Canonical gives off some weird vibes and those in the know will understand what I'm talking about. You're probably trying to write fairly and without throwing shade, but the result is this gives off vibes of FUD. Can you be a bit more specific about your issues with Canonical?
  - zifpanachr23 2y ago
    You're right and I apologize for that and don't want to discourage anybody from doing business with or working with or for Canonical. All I'll say is that the recruitment process alone, if it's still as bad as it used to be, is a major red flag and deal breaker w.r.t what it says about the overall culture. Maybe things have changed and so people should really take my opinions about them with a grain of salt.
    - scheme271 2y ago
      If you're referring to the recruitment asking questions about your high school performance and how you ranked locally and regionally in high school in various subjects, that's still a thing. Even for positions where that shouldn't matter.
      - CIARobotFish 2y ago
        I'm willing to put up with a lot during an application process, but not Canonical's circus. If applying for a job at a company tells you anything about the company's culture then I don't think I would ever want to work there.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - burkaman 2y ago
        There are no positions where it should matter. Even if there were a genuine reason to care about high school grades (there isn't), asking about relative ranking doesn't make any sense unless you have detailed knowledge of the specific school they went to. It's like asking a candidate to rank their programming ability compared to their current colleagues. What possible information could you derive from this? Example application: https://canonical.com/careers/4676649/application https://canonical.com/careers/4676649/application > How did you perform in mathematics at high school? Predefined answers are "Top 0.01% in the region", "Top 5% at school", "Top 10% at school", etc. > Please share your rationale or evidence for the high school performance selections above. Make reference to provincial, state or nation-wide scoring systems, rankings, or recognition awards, or to competitive or selective college entrance results such as SAT or ACT scores, JAMB, matriculation results, IB results etc. We recognise every system is different but we will ask you to justify your selections above. These are required questions. Even if I were literally in high school, I'm not sure how I would be able to answer these. "Make reference to provincial, state or nation-wide scoring systems, rankings" - do these exist in the US? If they do I've never heard of them.
- fpoling 2y ago
  Fedora often updates kernel and that already broke laptop support (Thinkpad X1 Gen 13 bought a year ago) for me twice requiring to revert to older kernel. Also few years ago a kernel update made a laptop that was 7 years old non-functional. Eventually I had to install Debian as lack of security updates for the kernel was very problematic.
  - zifpanachr23 2y ago
    It is true that Fedora tends to run recent kernels and so that's definitely something folks should be aware of.
    - fpoling 2y ago
      Fedora updates kernel to the latest version typically within 6-8 weeks from the release.

jjtheblunt 2y ago

exactly same sentiment here

zifpanachr23 2y ago

I agree very strongly with your take. Fedora (and RHEL of course) ooze professionalism in a way that no other distro ecosystem does to me. It's rock solid AND comes with relatively new packages, AND they are close to stock. I also appreciate their willingness to put themselves forward and show leadership when it comes to adopting (or creating) new technologies that can make the platform better. I think most professionals can agree at this point that despite little qualms and some early hiccups here and there, technologies like systemd and wayland (and others) were probably good ideas in the long run, and Fedora was consistently way out ahead in promoting and adopting them. I also tend to trust Red Hat (and yes even IBM) more than I do Canonical for a number of reasons.

akdor1154 2y ago
> Canonical gives off some weird vibes and those in the know will understand what I'm talking about. You're probably trying to write fairly and without throwing shade, but the result is this gives off vibes of FUD. Can you be a bit more specific about your issues with Canonical?
- zifpanachr23 2y ago
  You're right and I apologize for that and don't want to discourage anybody from doing business with or working with or for Canonical. All I'll say is that the recruitment process alone, if it's still as bad as it used to be, is a major red flag and deal breaker w.r.t what it says about the overall culture. Maybe things have changed and so people should really take my opinions about them with a grain of salt.
  - scheme271 2y ago
    If you're referring to the recruitment asking questions about your high school performance and how you ranked locally and regionally in high school in various subjects, that's still a thing. Even for positions where that shouldn't matter.
    - CIARobotFish 2y ago
      I'm willing to put up with a lot during an application process, but not Canonical's circus. If applying for a job at a company tells you anything about the company's culture then I don't think I would ever want to work there.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - burkaman 2y ago
      There are no positions where it should matter. Even if there were a genuine reason to care about high school grades (there isn't), asking about relative ranking doesn't make any sense unless you have detailed knowledge of the specific school they went to. It's like asking a candidate to rank their programming ability compared to their current colleagues. What possible information could you derive from this? Example application: https://canonical.com/careers/4676649/application https://canonical.com/careers/4676649/application > How did you perform in mathematics at high school? Predefined answers are "Top 0.01% in the region", "Top 5% at school", "Top 10% at school", etc. > Please share your rationale or evidence for the high school performance selections above. Make reference to provincial, state or nation-wide scoring systems, rankings, or recognition awards, or to competitive or selective college entrance results such as SAT or ACT scores, JAMB, matriculation results, IB results etc. We recognise every system is different but we will ask you to justify your selections above. These are required questions. Even if I were literally in high school, I'm not sure how I would be able to answer these. "Make reference to provincial, state or nation-wide scoring systems, rankings" - do these exist in the US? If they do I've never heard of them.
fpoling 2y ago
Fedora often updates kernel and that already broke laptop support (Thinkpad X1 Gen 13 bought a year ago) for me twice requiring to revert to older kernel. Also few years ago a kernel update made a laptop that was 7 years old non-functional. Eventually I had to install Debian as lack of security updates for the kernel was very problematic.
- zifpanachr23 2y ago
  It is true that Fedora tends to run recent kernels and so that's definitely something folks should be aware of.
  - fpoling 2y ago
    Fedora updates kernel to the latest version typically within 6-8 weeks from the release.