yahso said:
i know, all the distros is doing the same thing, why did they call it Fedora Core "6" then?
I do not see the relation between what Ubuntu and Suse and Fedora Core.
There is a reason why you search in Fedora related forums first and then in more general Linux forums: not all distros do the same thing the same way as other distros.
AIGLX is not Fedora specific, you can get it with other distros and what makes it possible is also the new Xorg 7.1.
You know, proceeding down this path we can trivialize the jumps from Windows 9x (no SP) to Windows XP (no SP) and from Windows XP (no SP) to Windows Vista.
If we want to single out one thing that clearly and simply as well as concisely could differentiate FC5 and FC6 would be the fact that all applications have been re-compiled with the DT_GNU_HASH flag turned on and that this does affect their performance. We could ask ourselves then how much difference if any there is in FC6 from FC1 if we go down that same path...
Of course, if you compare the very latest FC5 packages (plus others you added yourself compiling from sources) to the earliest available FC6 packages you will see less differences, but I call it hardly a fair comparison.
Also, discounting the full implementation of AIGLX in FC6 (how it and compiz are well integrated with Metacity and Xorg and GNOME) compared to its beta status with FC5 seems a bit unfair to me.
Edit: one thing is to have thousands of applications in semi-final status, all semi-interacting between each other, a nice buggy experience (example FC5 + Xgl + Mesa patch) and another thing is to have a system where those applications have been optimized and modified to make them work together in the same environment. That alone would grant you the number jump IMHO.