RH rips again Was: extend EOL for Red Hat Linux 9?
omni at omniphile.com
Fri Apr 16 18:40:46 UTC 2004
My feelings are similar to Guy's. I've been using RHL since 5.2, with
several upgrades along the way. Current system is running 7.3. I was
about to upgrade again when the ennouncement came. I'm pretty distressed
by RH's decisions, and am looking for an alternative to them now.
I'm not an "enterprise", so hundreds of dollars a year for their new
offerings isn't a good option for me. If I was a large company, it
wouldn't be an issue, but the money comes out of my personal pocket, not a
corporate operating budget.
I'm not a linux developer, and I need my system to work at all times, so
Fedora doesn't seem to be a good option either...though I'm not 100%
convinced of that yet, which is why I signed up for this list. Need more
RH seems to think that the only two options are "workstation" and "server".
My system is both. I use it as a workstation, but it also acts as a
server for my home network (which has several flavors of Windows, and
OpenVMS running on it). I'm basically my own ISP on a DSL line with a
single user. RH's cheaper "workstation" setup doesn't have all the parts I
need, and their more expensive server product is...more expensive (and
therefore not an option)...it also may be missing parts I need.
Fedora seems (correct me if I'm wrong please...) to be a development
system...a continuous beta release. Something that will change all the
time, require constant attention, and may be broken some percentage of the
time. For those with a hobby of software development, it's great. For
those who want RHL the way we've been using it for years now, I'm not clear
on how well it simulates RHL with RHN updates to close new security flaws
and other problems. Can someone who isn't a linux guru set up and maintain
a Fedora system as easily as doing the same thing with RHL? How do I get
from my current working RHL 7.3 system to the Fedora system? Can I just
upgrade? Or is this a "new build from scratch" situation? None of the RH
FAQ's seem to address these issues...they just try to sell me on RHEL and
tell me how great Fedora is to people who aren't exactly like me.
I don't mind running up2date frequently, but I don't want to have to get
into it more than that, except very rarely, and only then for educational
purposes. Basically I want something that works like RHL with RHN...but RH
isn't interested in selling that to me anymore. This has put RH into a
very bad light with me...I hate being rejected as unimportant and not worth
the time when I've been helping to support their getting to where they are
by being a long time customer. Even if my next job involves purchasing for
a large company, I'd still be a bit put off by RH and look hard for
alternatives. Rejecting people has long term effects that may not show up
immediately...even if I understand how greed might be prompting them to "go
where the money is".
Fedora may do what I need done, and if so, that will help mitigate my
feelings about RH somewhat. It may not. I'll keep reading what's posted
here and see if I can figure it out...while looking at other distros to see
if anyone else is picking up the ball that RH dropped.
-- Mike Bartman
At 08:22 AM 4/16/04 -0500, Harper, Patrick wrote:
>You can get RedHat Professional Workstation for around $40 at best buy.
>It is based on. You get RHN with it. This is what I am going to for my
>home box's that I do not want to run Fedora on
>Patrick S. Harper | CISSP RHCT MCSE
>Information Security Engineer
>patrick.harper at phns.com
>From: Guy Fraser [mailto:guy at incentre.net]
>Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 4:24 PM
>To: For users of Fedora Core releases
>Subject: Re: RH rips again Was: extend EOL for Red Hat Linux 9?
>Yes, that was my point.
>I have been purchasing RH box sets since 4.2, and RHN since 7.something
>to support the community.
>I knew RHL 9 would be discontinued, but I didn't expect that the whole
>RHL line would disappear and I would have to choose between an
>enterprise product or a loosly supported comunity based product.
More information about the users