Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Fedora vs. Ubuntu

Filed under
Linux
Ubuntu

As newer Ubuntu users become more accustomed to their desktop experience, occasionally they decide to try something different—like Fedora. With my previous article, I took a stern look at OpenSUSE vs. Ubuntu. So in this article, I'll explore the differences between Fedora and Ubuntu, along with examining areas where each distribution excels or fails.

Installation Made Simple

One area where both Ubuntu and Fedora have done a great job is in making sure that the operating system's installation is as simple as possible. With both distributions, selecting the desired partitions and continuing with the installation is as easy as clicking "next."

Where things differ, however, is when you're selecting your ISO to download. Fedora provides you with the GNOME desktop, whereas Ubuntu relies on Unity. Both share some things, but for the most part, they're very different user experiences. Personally, I found Unity to be on par with a vanilla GNOME installation, as each provide much of the same functionality.

rest here




dear, dear

Geez, seems like anyone can write these days, blogs be blessed.

"Nothing against Fedora—it's fine—but it just simply doesn't have a well-defined niche these days."

Fedora is a LOCOMOTIVE for a LOT of open source software! A good deal of testing and development (if not most) for the linux kernel, Xorg, Wayland, Gnome and apps, systemd, KVM, libvirt, lxc (and even xen), openstack, freeipa, Libreoffice and COUNTLESS other projects equally important is done on Fedora; not to mention it is THE test bed and source of the "one true" enterprise distro (RHEL). How's that for a "well-defined niche"?

Maybe the author should learn how to "rpm -i adobe-repo.rpm" instead of writing a 2 page of whining.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

Linux on Servers

Debian, Devuan, and Ubuntu

  • My Free Software Activities in April 2016
    I handled a new LTS sponsor that wanted to see wheezy keep supporting armel and armhf. This was not part of our initial plans (set during last Debconf) and I thus mailed all teams that were impacted if we were to collectively decide that it was OK to support those architectures. While I was hoping to get a clear answer rather quickly, it turns out that we never managed to get an answer to the question from all parties. Instead the discussion drifted on the more general topic of how we handle sponsorship/funding in the LTS project.
  • Initial Planning For Ubuntu 16.10 Today At UOS
    Beyond the announcement that Ubuntu 16.10 won't ship with Mir and Unity 8 by default, many other items were discussed for the Ubuntu 16.10 release due out in October.
  • Ubuntu 16.10 Isn't Going To Use Mir / Unity 8 By Default
    Well, another setback for Unity 8 and Mir. Kicking off the Ubuntu Online Summit for Ubuntu 16.10, it's been confirmed that the Unity 8 desktop and Mir display server will not be the default for the desktop spin. Similar to the current situation with existing Ubuntu releases, Unity 8 and Mir will be available as an opt-in feature for users wanting to upgrade their desktop, but Unity 7 and the faithful X.Org Server is planned to be the default for Ubuntu 16.10 Yakkety Yak.
  • Devuan Beta Release
    After two years in development, a beta release of the Devuan distro has made it into the world (Devuan is a registered trademark of the Dyne.org foundation). Devuan is a very Debian-ish distro. In fact, it basically is Debian, with one notable absence. Devuan doesn't use systemd. In fact, that's its main claim to fame. Devuan was created to offer an alternative to Debian fans who were alienated by the controversial switch to systemd.

Leftovers: OSS

today's howtos