Re: Future of Red Hat: Fedora or Enterprise?
From: Paul Bramscher (brams007_nospam_at_tc.umn.edu)
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.