Speaking of which, what makes the new Anaconda better in this regard, compared to the old one? Why is it now easier to maintain, aside from no longer needing to develop both in parallel?
I already said, several times, that the problem with shipping a PC operating system is you're shipping a combination of several thousand moving parts and telling several billion people with several billion hardware configurations 'here is something that will probably work on your computer'.
Every Linux distribution ever released will fail to run X on some computer somewhere. You will never find one which didn't. The 'problem space' is so huge that individual changes in it are probably more subject to chaos theory than any simplistic notion of QA: you simply cannot conclude anything definitive about the 'quality' of one distribution compared to another, or one release compared to another, based on anecdotal evidence of 'well, my computer worked with X but didn't work with Y'. It's just not plausible. There are billions and of Xs and Ys. You have to go up to the scale of thousands of reports, or something like a solidly-triaged bug of the kind 'All graphics card of generation foo completely fail to work in X', before you can draw meaningful comparisons. And even *then*, it's tricky.
I understand that but I do have a bunch of intel centrino laptops that HAVE to be 100% linux compliant.
Everything from the gfx to wi fi has to function out of the box in every distro
Fedora 17 worked like a dream.
Fedora 18 my first experience I booted into the live_ram or live_session no longer remember the command and I went to firefox 16.02 (months ago) open youtube and watch a 50 minute html5 video = firefox dies, doesn't start again, entire graphical desktop environment dies, system dies.
and to be honest my experiences with it didn't become better
it was a punch in the stomach for someone who really liked f17, so yeah I understand that's probably working well for a lot of people but I my perception is my realiy and for me it failed.
And for the record, it *is* mostly working for me, once I worked out that I needed to manually install gstreamer1-libav to replace the older gst-ffmpeg - not strictly a Fedora problem since it's a third-party repo, but it did mean that none of my videos worked anymore. My complaints are with the way you're presenting this as a big deal, that people shouldn't be upgrading casually. I'm sure it's not your intention, but your messages are coming across with a strong subtext of "don't trust this release".
well birdie, maybe it is time for you to stop posting bullshit?
LINUX has stable APIs AND ABIs for more 20 years.
Internal constructs are neither APIs nor ABIs.
Please stop posting until you started to think. People like you with their 'give me. NOW' attitude and no clue at all make me sick.
I found this on the fscking Fedora homepage:
Good enough points to do a rewrite, huh? Guess the previous installer did suck...After many years of maintaining and developing the pre-Fedora 18 installer, the installer development team determined that a rewrite of the installer was necessary for a myriad of reasons, including the following:
The previous installer had an aging (around 13 years old) infrastructure that was difficult and time-consuming to maintain and improve, constraining new feature development. One current install team developer refers to the old infrastructure as "an incredible mess."
The performance of the old installer left a lot to be desired. Long-term tasks could not be performed in the background. This required long wait times and pauses throughout the installation experience. For example, as CPU and time-intensive tasks were processed, the UI would freeze for several moments until a given processing task completed.
The previous UI was not very responsive. This manifested in various ways, including a failure of the UI screens to redraw when the display was changed between a TTY and back to the UI.
The text-only version of the installer interface was a completely separate codebase, which increased the maintenance burden of the installer. This also increased the amount of work needed to implement new features as they would need to be written twice, once for each codebase.
The previous codebase was not written in a modular fashion. This caused issues where similar functionality in different modes (for example, GUI vs kickstart) used different logic and resulted in inconsistencies for users.
The automated kickstart mode of the installer was separate and incompatible with the UI modes of the installer. A separate utility, system-config-kickstart, was created solely to provide a UI for creating kickstarts since the existing UI could not be used for this purpose without a completed install.
The live media method of installation used a different codepath than the installer than the DVD method, causing maintenance and development difficulties and resulting in an inconsistent and at times buggy user experience.
The old installer's interface had a 'point of no return' past which any changes you'd made to your storage configuration could destroy data on your disk(s) and you couldn't go back to change it. Since the UI followed a linear path, this exact inflection point occurred close to the middle of the screen flow and required a rather discouraging pop-up dialog to explain the impact.
In previous versions of Fedora, the installer's interface followed a wizard design pattern , consisting of multiple linear screens with occasional nested modal pop-up dialogs. (See diagram below) While nothing is inherently problematic with wizards as a design pattern, the sheer number of screens required by the installer made it unwieldy. You could end up several screens into the process and need to go back and change something on an earlier screen, requiring a lot of clicking and screen flipping to go back and return to where you left off. Multiple modal nested dialog windows also made it confusing at times to interact with certain screens, in particular the partitioning-related screens.
How is that useful?
2. Switching DEs
Right. One can select spins for other DEs. In the case you want to mess with, say, Gnome3 and install E17, then why not also take the time to install Entrance (E17's Display Manager)? Problem solved and it looks a lot nicer too.