Re: Future of Red Hat: Fedora or Enterprise?

From: Paul Bramscher (brams007_nospam_at_tc.umn.edu)
Date: 04/04/04


Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 22:08:40 -0600

Let me clarify though -- at home I think Fedora makes quite a bit more
sense that at work, where support is to be expected. So I have to shop
around for the best linux support package at work, whereas it's less an
issue with regard to what I run at home. In fact, I don't WANT to pay
for support when it's coming out of my own pocket...

Paul Bramscher wrote:
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
>> This 'core linux demographic' you are talking about is just what
>> Fedora is all about. Its leading edge packages ( which we all want ),
>> its got a short release cycle ( which we all want ), it has yum (
>> which I like ), and its not overly dependant on internal Redhat policy
>> ( may I hint at commercial leverage ). Most Linux enthu's dont want a
>> Distro that dossent support their latest gadgets and dosent run with
>> the latest eye candy, dosent offer an easy upgrade to the latest KDE /
>> Gnome release etc.
>
>
> My needs may differ substantially from many other Linux enthusiasts. I
> don't often upgrade my computers (my money is spent on a home mortage,
> wife and kids), and so don't need to constantly play with bleeding-edge
> device drivers. There's already enough functionality in KDE/KOffice to
> suit my needs -- as it currently stands I probably utilize only 10% of
> the commands/configuration at our disposal now. I have neither the time
> nor the interest to reinstall every new version when it's immediately
> available. As a comptuer hobbyist who began on the Apple //, I'm no
> longer as driven by the bleeding edge -- been there, done that, spent a
> lot of money and time at it, for 20 years...
>
> So why do I use Linux then? I want a secure, open source OS for LAMP
> development. I'm a professional SAMP (Solaris at work) programmer. I
> want my infrastructure not to change all the time. My emphasis is on
> writing algorithms, web-based security programming with PHP, complex
> mySQL databases, etc. The latest candy isn't so important to me. A
> stable, current/patched apache/mySQL/PHP, secure OS, SSH telnet and sftp
> are about all I need. KOffice and Mozilla are handy on my home linux
> servers. I'd frankly like to install an OS and never upgrade it again,
> only applying security patches to it or getting new applications for it,
> into perpetuity. It's time consuming to constantly upgrade, re-write
> broken code, etc. Difficult to move forward if it's also a battle to
> maintain the present at the same time.
>
>>> Looks like SuSE remains the better choice among the corporate linuxes
>>> at this point.
>>>
>>
>> Aaah.. well. your last question was 'What is readhat doing for the
>> linux enthu at home - and now you have used that argument to say -
>> SuSe is the better choice for the corporate ..'.
>>
>> So what are we talking about ? Linux user@home or Linux user@work ? ;-)
>
>
> I said "among the corporate linuxes" not "for linux for a corporate
> environment." That is, if you're a home user and want to chose between
> the big corporate distros (SuSE or Red Hat) SuSE has a more afforable
> and supported distro at the moment (SuSE Professional).
>
> Since it looks like Microsoft and Sun are going to mend their ways and
> go after Linux, I've decided it's good policy to download the distros
> now and burn your ISO's before it's illegal to run linux or something...
>
> Anyway, I tried Debian on a spare PC and it sucked. There was a page
> full of dependency issues when I tried to install. The damned installer
> should take care of that for me -- I had already spent half an hour
> picking out my packages. How am I supposed to know what needs what? So
> Red Hat and SuSE have an upper-hand here.
>
> I installed Fedora last night, and was forced to do it in text-only mode
> for some reason. RH9 had no problem, bit Fedora didn't like the ancient
> PC I was using apparently. Still, it was easy and X/KDE had no
> problems with the video card once installed.
>
> You might be right about Fedora though -- at this point I'm thinking an
> unsupported linux is really the way to go. It'll be less driven by the
> profit model, and their business cycle (rather than my own) -- major
> reasons why I dislike Microsoft.
>



Relevant Pages

  • RE: Windows 98 box is owned
    ... even though I still have to convert my wife and parents over to Linux, ... > longer have support in the future. ... Windows PC's require a lot of overhead to keep ... >>2) Install ZoneAlarm. ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • Re: [SLE] SuSE 9.2 politics and installation questions
    ... > been implemented on SuSE distribution after the merge with Novell. ... personal support, then your best choice may be SLES 9, but if you don't ... some packages missing from the CDs. ... has a DVD drive to the server to do a network install to your desires. ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: Is SuSe ready for me yet?
    ... They astounded me with their ease of install and use. ... If you install the suse 'evaluation' version of 10.0 or be sure to ... A year in linux time is equivalent to many years of windows time. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Is SuSe ready for me yet?
    ... They astounded me with their ease of install and use. ... If you install the suse 'evaluation' version of 10.0 or be sure to ... A year in linux time is equivalent to many years of windows time. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: [opensuse] Yast update log location? - SOLVED
    ... The Announcement that Suse 9.2 is no longer supported with updates came last week. ... and hopefully the recent M$-Novell deal will make a future version that is easier to use/operate without losing the strengths of Linux. ... I've installed and used 6 different Linux distros as a separate distro, since it is different enough from the community versions of 8, 9, and 10 that I have tried). ... It was obvious that SLES 10 is a commercial product by its install and its default configuration. ...
    (SuSE)