Re: [SLE] Redhat vs SuSE Debate
From: qrn=20E=2E?= Hansen (orn.hansen_at_swipnet.se)
Date: 10/03/03
- Previous message: Ben Rosenberg: "Re: [SLE] SuSE 8.2 appears to be Junk."
- In reply to: Gerry Doris: "[SLE] Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Next in thread: John Pettigrew: "[SLE] Re: Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Reply: John Pettigrew: "[SLE] Re: Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 18:34:39 +0200
You know, most of Linux is GPL'd or General Public License. An enterprise,
is not the general public.
Most individuals that run Linux, are enthusiasts and developers who are for
the most part running bleading edge software. This is where SuSE and Redhat
are suffering, because their stable releases is not enough bleeding edge to
attract this audience. So, in a way I understand Redhat wanting to split
these two sides. There is a third side, the Workstation side. Which is a
stable release, for an average Workstation that is not intended to be a
production server. This is what Linux has been for the most part, up to date
but is fast moving into the production server market.
fredag 03 oktober 2003 18:08 skrev Gerry Doris:
> For those of you who aren't aware...
>
> Redhat announced that they are discontinuing the consumer version (used to
> be called Redhat Linux). They are planning to provide support and
> assistance to the Fedora project but it will not be a branded by Redhat.
>
> They've stated that the Fedora version will be for hobbists and
> enthusiasts. It will have a very short life cycle and will contain
> bleeding edge package releases. If you want a "business" release then you
> have to pay for their enterprise versions.
>
> In other words, if you wanted a branded stable solid release (used to be
> Redhat Linux) that was suitable for SOHO or equivalent at a low cost (even
> $0), well, Redhat no longer provides this.
>
> This has resulted in a huge debate on the RH mailing lists. Many are
> stating that they're going to be moving to SuSE or at least seriously
> considering SuSE.
>
>
> Gerry
- application/pgp-signature attachment: signature
- Previous message: Ben Rosenberg: "Re: [SLE] SuSE 8.2 appears to be Junk."
- In reply to: Gerry Doris: "[SLE] Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Next in thread: John Pettigrew: "[SLE] Re: Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Reply: John Pettigrew: "[SLE] Re: Redhat vs SuSE Debate"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|