Fedora 16 KDE

Fedora 16 was released a while back, and I’ve finally gotten around to checking it out. For this review though I’ve opted for the KDE version of Fedora. As you may already know, Fedora comes in multiple spins including GNOME, Xfce, KDE and others.

If you’re interested in checking out other versions of Fedora, you can see a full list on the Fedora Spins page. There are ten different versions of Fedora listed there, so chances are that you’ll be able to find one that might work well for you.

Fedora 16 KDE Desktop

Fedora 16 KDE Desktop

Software Manager

Software Manager


What’s New In This Release

Here’s a sample of the new features in this release:

KDE 4.7
DigiKam 2.0
Updated KWin
New shutdown dialogue

One of the things that annoys me about Fedora is that it’s more of a headache to track down the new features that are specific to each spin. The Fedora developers do not do a good job of easily documenting them the way the Linux Mint developers do. It would be extremely helpful if the Fedora folks would have a What’s New section or link on the page of each spin.

Okay, my griping aside, I’ve listed what I could dig up on Fedora 16 KDE. There’s not a huge amount of stuff to get excited about in this release.

KDE 4.7 does have some interest features. If you aren’t familiar with it you should check out the KDE 4.7 announcement page to familiarize yourself with all of the new stuff.

The DigiKam update adds geotagging, face detection and recognition, and some other new features.

The shutdown dialogue will be useful for those running multiple operating systems since it lets you choose the next OS you want to boot into and run.

Next, I’ll look at the hardware requirements and I’ll show what the install routine looks like in this distro.

Hardware Requirements & Installation

Hardware Requirements
Here’s what you’ll need to run this distro:

  • a CD or DVD drive, and the capability to boot from this drive.
  • a 400 MHz processor or faster
  • at least 1 GB of memory (RAM)
  • at least 10 GB of permanent storage (hard drive) space.

Installation
The install is easy, as you’d expect. The screenshots below walk you through the install, from beginning to end.

Install 1

Install 1

Install 2

Install 2

Install 3

Install 3

Install 4

Install 4

Install 5

Install 5

Install 6

Install 6

Install 7

Install 7

Install 8

Install 8

Install 9a

Install 9a

Install 9b

Install 9b

Booting & Login

Pages: First | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last | Single Page



Comments

  1. Leslie Satenstein says

    One question for the author. By what procedure do you rate a distribution or a user interface? This is not a criticism question, but an interest to know if you have a list of or a matrix of requirements, against which you assign points, and at the end present your rating.

    If so, can you share the list?

  2. Leslie Satenstein says

    I found that using the repros from outside of the USA, that Fedora is complete with all the codecs and software that you would find in any other distribution.

    I have also found that Scientific Linux 6.x is consistently further advanced than is Centos, and each release has support to 2017. That is six years hence.

    SL6.2 is my RPM distribution after Fedora. And I agree with the author, the ballon wallpaper was the major attraction of F7. I sure miss some beautiful wallpapers for desktops. SL6.2 has some beautiful wallpaper scenes, that make working with this linux version most enjoyable. SL is supported by a few universities. It too can have all the additional codecs, and applications

  3. elias k says

    so your conclusion is that the distro is.."blah" ?? define "blah" please

    also, you didn't encounter "a lot" of problems? could you share with us the ones you did?

    really, what kind of review is this??

  4. Brian Masinick (@mas says

    I have found Fedora to generally be a solid system, and if you prefer mostly "free" software, defined as having software that has the source code available, Fedora does a better job with this than most other systems.

    Reliability is generally good, but I've had a few versions of Fedora that have problems correctly detecting hardware, and in a few cases, inexplicably, it had problems partitioning the disk, even though the partitions were largely set up already. These are problems that rarely show up; Fedora generally does well with them too, but I've had a few builds in the past that were a total bust.

    I have no problems with the background images. Fedora 7 – which now seems like ages ago, had one of the coolest "hot air balloon" themes. The recent themes have been somewhat bland in comparison, but frankly, I install my own wallpaper anyway, so that is not a factor for me.

    What is a factor is the ease in configuring whatever hardware I use. I cannot speak for this particular release, but I had a disappointment with a recent release (either 14 or 15, can't remember offhand which one it was any more).

    Performance of the installed system is an area where Fedora doesn't distinguish itself either; I'd say that it is generally "middle of the pack", neither at the bottom, compared to other major distributions, but rarely near the top in boot time, memory usage, compared to comparable software installed on the same system, and overall feel and responsiveness. It usually works fine, at least on releases where it cleanly installs, but it does not stand out. That may be a result of the default configuration of SELinux, which is usually configured by default, unless you disable it.

    That same factor, SELinux, is one area where Fedora really stands out. If you want to configure a highly secure system, Fedora is at the top of the heap in this area. I've never encountered another Linux distro that puts more emphasis in this area than Fedora, except for its commercial counterpart, Red Hat Enterprise Linux or a Red Hat derivative. For a server configuration, you can't beat it. For a desktop implementation, it's less clear that you even need it unless you are preparing workstations in an office environment.

    So who ought to use Fedora? Based on the description and feature set where Fedora stands out, a work environment, either where you want to test out future implementations that will go into the enterprise edition, resulting in future Red Hat Enterprise Linux releases, is a clear candidate for Fedora. If you want Red Hat but can't afford it or you want to test it first, this is the one. CentOS tends to lag Red Hat Enterprise Linux in releases and features, so it is way behind Fedora in features, but tends to be more stable. Both are free, so they are good choices where stability, security, and cost have to be weighed in; choose CentOS for stability; choose Fedora to test out the latest software; choose Red Hat Enterprise Linux for commercial support.

    If all you want is a straightforward KDE implementation, I'd opt for Kubuntu, if you want the latest; it is at least as current, if not more so, than Fedora, especially if you either wait for the 12.04 release coming out in April, test the current release that is over halfway through the testing cycle, or use the 11.10 release (and get PPA – Personal Package Archives to get newer software).

    For something with more "non-free" additions, PCLinuxOS has a pretty good release; for something aging, but extremely stable, SimplyMEPIS is timeless; it always works. With Debian back ports or MEPIS Community Repository package updates, you can keep key packages reasonably up to date without having to spend a lot of effort doing so.

    Any of these alternatives are more appropriate for home use; Fedora, to me, is more for developers, enthusiasts, and office use.

Leave a Reply