An amazing thing I get to do while being involved in a tech business is test out the large number of Linux distributions and the entire open-source ecosystem. As we are slowly switching over to Red Hat Enterprise Linux, exploring what Fedora^® has to offer was imperative, and it wasn’t long before I stumbled upon Ultramarine Linux – a Fedora derivative that promises to stay out of your way.

Both distributions, forged from the same Red Hat lineage, promise stability and cutting-edge innovation, yet they diverge in ways that resonate deeply with a typical tech business’ workflow. In this account, I recount my exploration of both the distributions, dissecting their technical underpinnings, usability paradigms, and practical implications – all through the lens of a leader balancing developer needs with operational pragmatism.

The genesis – A shared foundation

My journey begins with Fedora, a stalwart in the Linux galaxy, renowned for its bleeding-edge ethos and robust community backing. Sponsored by Red Hat, Fedora serves as a proving ground for technologies destined for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Its semi-annual release cycle – currently at version 40 as of August 2024 – delivers the latest Linux kernel 6.8, alongside fresh packages like GNOME 46 or KDE Plasma 6.2. This cadence ensures we’re always riding the crest of innovation, from Btrfs as the default filesystem to SELinux enforcing security at the kernel.

Enter Ultramarine Linux, a Fedora-based spin crafted by Fyra Labs in Thailand. Conceived as a spiritual successor to Korora Linux, Ultramarine inherits Fedora’s core – same kernel, same package base – but layers on a veneer of user-centric tweaks. My first encounter with Ultramarine 40, dubbed “Lost Umbrella,” revealed a distribution that doesn’t stray far from its progenitor but refines the experience with pragmatic defaults. Both systems share the RPM package format and DNF package manager, ensuring a familiar toolchain, yet Ultramarine’s deviations piqued my curiosity.

Architectural divergence – Tweaks under the hood

Kernel and performance

At their core, both Fedora and Ultramarine leverage the latest Linux kernel – say, 6.8 at the time of writing – offering stellar hardware support for our Intel Xe graphics and NVMe drives. Fedora sticks to a vanilla kernel, optimised for stability and upstream purity, which suits our developers who thrive on predictability. Ultramarine, however, spices things up with the System76 scheduler, a process prioritisation tweak that enhances desktop responsiveness. In my tests, running a VirtualBox VM with 4GB RAM, Ultramarines Budgie edition shaved a few milliseconds off application launch times – negligible for servers, but a boon for our UI designers juggling multiple tools at once.

Filesystem and storage

Both distributions default to Btrfs, bringing snapshot capabilities and subvolume management to the table. Fedora’s implementation is stock, requiring manual configuration for advanced features like compression. Ultramarine, true to its “just works” mantra, pre-tunes Btrfs with sensible defaults – think transparent compression enabled our-of-the-box. For a tech business, where disk space is premium, this tweak is sure to save a few gigabytes without lifting a finger, though Fedora’s flexibility lets sysadmins tweak LUKS encryption to the exact required specifications.

Desktop environments – Aesthetic and functional frontiers

Fedora’s minimalist canvas

Fedora Workstation ships with GNOME as its flagship desktop environment – version 46 at the time of writing – offering a sleek, distraction-free interface. Its Wayland session, now mature, delivers buttery-smooth graphics on our 4K displays, though X11 remains an option for legacy apps. Alternative spins like KDE Plasma or Xfce are available, but they require a separate ISO or post-install setup. For most of our team, GNOME’s stock experience is a double-edged sword: its simplicity boosts focus, but its lack of pre-installed codecs (due to U.S. patent restrictions) means extra steps to play MP4s or MP3s.

Ultramarine’s polished palette

Ultramarine takes a bolder stance, offering four curated editions: Budgie (flagship), GNOME, KDE Plasma, and Xfce (Pantheon was dropped in the current version). Installing the Budgie variant felt like unwrapping a gift – custom wallpapers, a Zsh shell with a snazzy theme, and the Starship prompt greeted me. Budgie’s lightweight design, paired with Ultramarine’s tweaks (e.g., pre-configured Flatpak support), made it a hit with some of our front-end devs.

Unlike Fedora, Ultramarine bundles multimedia codecs by default, sidestepping U.S. legal constraints thanks to its Thai origins. A quick dnf install vlc on Fedora versus Ultramarine’s out-of-the-box playback of H.265 videos highlighted this gap starkly.

Package ecosystem – Repositories and accessibility

Fedora’s purist approach

Fedora’s package ecosystem is a fortress of open-source integrity. Its repositories – roughly 60,000 packages – prioritise free software, eschewing proprietary drivers or codecs unless you enable RPM Fusion manually. This purity aligns with our open-source ethos, but can quickly become a hassle when onboarding newer users.

Installing NVIDIA drivers or Flathub requires a dance of commands: dnf install https://rpmfusion.org and flatpak remote-add flathub. This could be an issue for some large teams but otherwise manageable for small-medium sized ones.

Ultramarine’s pragmatic expansion

Ultramarine flips the script, pre-enabling RPM Fusion, Terra (its custom repo), and Flathub. This trio expands the software catalogue significantly – think proprietary NVIDIA drivers, Steam, and Spotify alongside LibreOffice. On a fresh Ultramarine install, I fired up GNOME Software and had Slack running in minutes, no terminal required.

The Terra repo adds bespoke packages, like tweaked Budgie applets, enhancing the desktop without bloating the 5GB base install. For me, this streamlined process is a godsend, though it trades some of Fedora’s ideological purity for convenience.

Installation and migration

Fedora’s Anaconda ritual

Fedora’s Anaconda installer is a battle-tested workhorse – intuitive, with options for custom partitioning or LVM. Spinning up a Fedora 40 VM took around 15 minutes, but post-install tweaks (codecs, drivers) added another 10. For existing users, upgrading between releases (e.g., 39-40) via dnf system-upgrade is seamless, though kernel updates demand a reboot – a Fedora quirk that irks our uptime-obsessed backend lead.

Ultramarine’s refined path

Ultramarine inherits Anaconda for now, mirroring Fedora’s install flow, but its “Readymade” installer looms on the horizon for version 41, promising broader hardware support. What sets Ultramarine apart is its migration script: bash <(curl -s https://ultramarine-linux.org/migrate.sh)>. Running this on a Fedora box swapped in Ultramarine’s repos and defaults in under five minutes, preserving my GNOME setup. The catch? No fancy wallpapers or desktop tweaks come along – you’re still on your own to install Budgie or Plasma.

Stability and updates – The bleeding edge balance

Both systems ride Fedora’s six-month release cycle, with Ultramarine trailing by a month or so (version 40 dropped in May 2024, post-Fedora 40). Fedora’s “bleeding edge” reputation holds – kernel 6.8 brought early NVMe quirks we had to patch – but its rigorous testing keeps breakage rare. Ultramarine inherits this stability, layering on its tweaks without compromising the core. Our uptime logs show parity: 99.9% across both, with Ultramarine’s Zsh and scheduler adding flair, not flaws.

Practical implications – a leader’s verdict

For our business, Fedora is the purist’s choice – rock-solid, developer-friendly, and unadulterated. Its learning curve suits our seasoned coders, but onboarding novices sometimes feels like handing them a puzzle box. Ultramarine, by contrast, is the pragmatist’s ally – polished, accessible, and ready to roll. Its pre-configured ecosystem shaved hours of setup time, letting the team dive into prototyping while devs tinkered with Flatpaks.

Yet, there’s a trade-off. Fedora’s minimalism offers ultimate control – our sysadmin sculpted a bespoke server setup with SELinux policies that Ultramarine’s defaults couldn’t match. Ultramarine’s convenience, meanwhile, risks diluting that granularity. If I’m picking for a solo dev rig, Ultramarine’s Budgie edition wins for its elegance and immediacy. For our production servers? Fedora’s raw power and upstream fidelity reign supreme.

In a nutshell – two stars, one constellation

This odyssey through Fedora and Ultramarine Linux reveals not rivals, but siblings – each shining for different crews. Fedora is the engineer’s canvas: vast, unopinionated, and demanding mastery. Ultramarine is the artist’s palette: refined, opinionated, and inviting exploration.

As a rising leader, I would park Ultramarine on a laptop for its user-friendly system, while Fedora anchors our CI/CD pipeline. In the Linux cosmos, both have a place – it’s just a matter of where you’re aiming your ship.

Fedora and the Fedora Logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Red Hat, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and other countries.