How to improve my Fedora experience?

People in that category are termed as ‘sheeple’ in that they follow the herd and cannot find their nose unless someone else puts their hand on it.

Your comments tend to support the herd mentality.
I try to teach people to learn how to solve problems; and the open source and distributed development environment does require that users know how to think for themselves.

The fact that there are many different distros developed and seems to have been hundreds of them in the past indicates that some significant percentage of linux users are willing to learn, experiment, and organize the available software to meet their personal workflow desires.

This is a good thing and not a detriment. It encourages creativity and problem solving.

There is something I don’t understand here.
“flexibility” is like an offroad truck that can take you to some place another car cannot. But if you can’t start the engine of the offroad truck, it can be the coolest “flexible” thing ever but it is dead. Now, don’t tell me “fix it yourself” because I can read the manual, I can try some basic push and pull but I am not going to build a new engine. I can go and look for another truck.

Then again, Windows works perfectly fine until “the user” start playing with it. It is “flexibility” that kills Windows, not the opposite. With “linux” we are saved by maintainers and repos and the FEAR we have that each single button we press can unleash hell on our delicate machine, we got our lesson so we are cautious.

I think this is exactly why GNOME Is great. There are fewer options, they have a very specific vision for how it’s intended to be used, which makes it easier to test.

Totem doesn’t seem to be very actively developed. The last commit that wasn’t related to translations or Flatpak packaging is from September of last year: Commits · master · GNOME / totem · GitLab

They haven’t ported to GTK4 yet. They don’t seem very responsive to issues, either. I’m not really sure of the status of it.

Celluloid is a more actively-developed video player that has ported to GTK4. It’s not a part of GNOME Circle, though, and I wonder if it ever will be. It works great on GNOME anyway.

By design. Fedora can’t make it obvious because that would be illegal. I sympathize, and it’s part of why I held off trying Fedora for so long, but…there’s nothing they can do about it. Software patents suck.

The good news is that H.264 is going patent-free…this decade. That’s the last codec that really cripples the everyday experience (until 2017, it was mp3).

Me neither! The first time I did it, I did it wrong somehow. I screwed it up the second time, too. But eventually, I got it working.

I eventually decided that RPM Fusion is too much effort and decided to just use Flatpak because codecs work out of the box and I don’t need to do anything.

Fedora is only permitted to ship OpenH264 by the grace of Cisco. It’s the best we’ve got. Neal Gompa, a Fedora contributor, has asked for wider support in OpenH264 to improve the experience: Adding support for 10 bit depth video? · Issue #3616 · cisco/openh264 · GitHub

The situation is complicated, and everyone is just doing the best they can: H.264 Support in Fedora Workstation (by default) - #5 by catanzaro

I don’t know but RPM Fusion is made for people who already know everything, people who have already done the same stuff over and over. If we think of a sort of “elite club” that is fine. When you aim to sell your stuff to as many people as possible you cannot think in terms of “elite”. Car manufactures don’t build cars for race pilots or for mechanics.

See, I don’t know what the connection between Fedora and RPM Fusion is but the issue here is on the RPM Fusion side. They have some HTML pages with lists of more or less “cryptic” links. Like I said, when you have already seen stuff like that for 40 plus years, it is easy, when it is the first time that is NASA level. “Average Joe” needs a big button with “click here to install everything you need”.

Another “fun” thing is Debian doesn’t require anything, it has all the stuff by default BUT it looks like it was put together by me, read an amateur. So I could point Average Joe to Debian but then he would complain he cannot install the printer.

It is a difficult life.

Lovely car comparisons here, LOL. :grinning:

1 Like

Yes it is cool until it breaks.
Browsers are the most difficult thing ever and that is the reason why basically there are ONLY TWO of them, Firefox by Mozilla and Chromium/Chrome by Google. Everything else is a “mod” of those two. Yes, there are many other “browsers” like Gnome Web (Epiphany) but those project don’t have the man power to actually develop a browser for today’s Internet AND they depend on other major projects like WebKit (whose story I don’t know).
Back to KaOS, my opinion is the last think they need is to fork Firefox.

See, Gnome doesn’t have any “desktop”, doesn’t have any “menu” and doesn’t have any “panel”. There is the top bar but you cannot place anything on it, you cannot change or move.
The idea is you just open a window and that window “lives” in its own “virtual desktop”, so you don’t need to minimize windows, mostly you don’t need to resize them, you don’t need “widgets” because each window is a widget. You keep on switching up and down, left and right among virtual desktops and then windows.
So, given this design, it is rather obvious GTK applications are going to be “different” when opened in KDE Plasma and vice-versa.

Webkit is a fork of KHTML by Apple, which is a web engine written by KDE devs for Konqueror[1], a web browser originally released in 2000. Google Chrome forked Webkit and created Blink.

So actually, the most popular browsers in the world were built off the back off KDE dev’s work.

And hey, we’ll see how Ladybird goes…Andreas Kling worked on Webkit for a very long time (first for KDE, then Apple), so it’s in good hands.


  1. first comes the Navigator, then Explorer, and then the Konqueror ↩︎

1 Like

Debian is not hosted nor reside in the US so they can include many things that are not possible for Fedora.
Since Fedora is located in and is hosted and distributed in the US they are required to follow the sometimes very restrictive copyright, patent, and intellectual properly laws in their country. Each distro is limited by the laws within the jurisdiction where they reside and/or are hosted.

That is the real difference between what may be included by one distro and restricted from another distro.

  1. I dont know if they fork Firefox, I think thats a patchset. Also dont know if they still maintain that.
  2. You talked about many things but not related to my point with the window decorations.

I just opened an issue about that specific issue

Yes, I meant I don’t know what is happening with WebKit. For example, Gnome Web does not use it as it is but through a “port”:

WebKitGTK is a full-featured port of the WebKit rendering engine, suitable for projects requiring any kind of web integration, from hybrid HTML/CSS applications to full-fledged web browsers. It offers WebKit’s full functionality and is useful in a wide range of systems from desktop computers to embedded systems like phones, tablets, and televisions. WebKitGTK is made by a lively community of developers and designers, who hope to bring the web platform to everyone.

My guess it there is another “port” for QT and, being the world we live in, the two “ports” aren’t syncronized with the main project and to each other.

Funny story with the names! Thanks for the clarification, it really is crazy.

Do you know the relationship between KHTML, qtwebengine and Blink today? Falkon uses qtwebengine.

It’s the wildest open source fact I know. I was surprised when I found out Mozilla Firefox emerged from the ashes of Netscape Navigator, but when I learned about the whole KHTML lineage, that was pretty shocking.

I think qtwebengine uses Blink nowadays. The only browser still around using KHTML, as far as I know, is Konqueror, because that thing is still alive and kicking.

1 Like

From what I could see, it seems Gnome / GTK folks don’t care much of what happens outside their own domain.
My guess is they would answer your complaint by saying it is up to KDE to deal with GTK applications because they are going to be this way.

I don’t think “hosting” is the issue here, more the legal site of the headquarters, the legal representative, I don’t know the legal terminology in English. Ok, maybe having a “community” legally residing in the US is not a smart idea but, again, that is not the problem. The problem is there isn’t a button on a Web page hosted in Antarctica with “click this button to install the missing bits”. Fedora can say “We don’t know who placed this page in Antartica”, like they say “We don’t know that RPM Fusion exists”. We need the button. In case Fedora wants to become popular.

This is a misinterpretation of the situation. They cannot “distribute” the restricted software, but clearly can tell people where that software is available. Then it becomes the users choice to obtain the software from the other source. Fedora even tells users in their docs where the additional codecs are available.

See the links at the left side of this page.

Fedora makes available on their site all that they are legally able to ‘distribute’.

A perfectly good example of this separation is the agreement with cisco to distribute the openh264 software. It is not part of the fedora repo and is not directly hosted by fedora, but the software in that repo is compiled and signed by fedora (by agreement) so it is available for users.

1 Like

Ubuntu has a checkbox at install time that says “Enable Third-Party Codecs” or something like that, and it just installs them automatically. This is because Ubuntu’s legal team has decided they aren’t bound by software patent law, and I guess they haven’t been sued yet.

Red Hat’s legal team came to a different conclusion. You certainly aren’t the first to bring it up: Fedora, FFmpeg, Firefox, Flatpak, and Fusion [LWN.net]

Since that decision was made, developers have been asking if access to RPM Fusion could be preloaded in Fedora as well, always to be told that it is not possible. The question came up again in this conversation as well; Catanzaro responded:

For avoidance of doubt, Fedora Legal has decided we may use flathub but not rpmfusion. As I explained to you previously, they have also decided not to share their reasoning for this.

Fedora project leader Matthew Miller answered with a pointer to this explanation:

Flathub is a third-party repository which provides software for various Linux distributions. It doesn’t shape what software it carries around what Fedora does not. It fundamentally exists to solve a problem with Linux app distribution to which our policies around licensing, software freedom, and etc., are incidental. This makes it a different case.

It is fair to say that not everybody finds this explanation convincing. Kofler described it as “an absolutely ridiculous double standard”. “Maxwell G” called it “a pretty flimsy argument”. Petr Pisar tried to explain the difference: RPM Fusion specifically targets Fedora, while Flathub is not Fedora-specific, and that somehow makes a difference.

The logic behind this policy surely makes sense to somebody in Red Hat’s legal department, but it may have some unfortunate consequences in the Fedora user community. It is not hard to imagine that it could be causing a lack of morale among the RPM Fusion developers, who have worked for many years to address a key shortcoming in Fedora systems. If Fedora pushes its users toward the Flathub solution, RPM Fusion may eventually just give up, leaving no alternative to Flathub, which is a less-appealing repository for many. It is not at all clear that Fedora and its user community would be better off in that world.

1 Like

This is probably true, actually, at least with regard to the codecs. I thought Fedora specifically didn’t mention RPM Fusion to avoid some sort of legal repercussions given how not-obvious it is, but they have a pretty detailed guide here: Enabling the RPM Fusion repositories :: Fedora Docs

Mind you, I think libdvdcss is the sort of thing that might nail you for contributory copyright infringement/circumvention if you explain how to get it, which is also hosted at RPM Fusion.

1 Like

I doubt that.
libdvdcss has been available for years as open source and its purpose is to decode the encryption of DVDs. That encryption has not changed for many years as well.
In that specific case fedora is probably avoiding the potential of being charged with aiding in the infringement of IP rights.

As does fedora in the first boot setup. It enables about 3 different repos that allow installing drivers for nvidia gpus, chrome, and steam for gaming. This enables the repo but does not install any software at that point.

Yes I was being ironic.
Anyway, lets say Fedora informs Average Joe that some bits are missing because of patents and he can go looking for those bits on some Web site.
Lets pretend that the information are clearly and immediately accessible.
Now who ever manages that Web site becomes responsible of Fedora’s “user experience” and RPM Fusion is good enough for experienced user and it is not for Average Joe.

In short, we cannot say how to improve Fedora until we agree what Fedora’s goals are. If Fedora aims developers, sysadmins and technology fans, RPM Fusion is a bit annoying but it is ok.

I would also add that I don’t understand the “spins”. From here they look like “generic” Fedora with some DE or WM installed in its “vanilla” shape. The problem is when I am a tech guy I would probably want to “customize” that a lot, so I would probably go for Fedora “everything” instead. When I am “Average Joe” I don’t want “vanilla” stuff that does not work because I don’t even know how everything is supposed to be working and that makes distros like “MX” better suited for me because there is somebody who does the work for me or at least makes the best effort.

So in short I think Fedora should offer less stuff but more “curated”.
Again, it is ok for techies.
I choose Fedora because it works better for me.
Better than any other distro.
With all the “linux” quirks.