Preston Crawford said: > On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 07:35, William Hooper wrote: >> >> This has already been disproved, but you seem to like repeating it. >> > >> > On the box (I was in Best Buy looking at this the other day) it says >> > specifically the server utils or something to that effect aren't >> > supported. Just because I can download an RPM somewhere doesn't mean >> > it's supported. Fedora comes with MySQL and Apache and rudimentary >> > utilities to start them up (and in the case of Apache manage them). >> >> Sigh, again Apache is included. Think beyond the box. > > If there's a bug in Apache will they fix it, though? And once again, > what about Samba, NFS, etc. And when I speak of these things I'm not > just talking about them being included, but also the accompanying little > widgets that help you manage them. I'm not sure how to put it any plainer, RTFWP: http://www.redhat.com/software/workstation/ http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/comparison/ >> > So the cost of running this is at least $100 per year. Sorry. SuSE >> (for >> > now) charges $80 per Pro distro with free updates. I would go back to >> > SuSE before I'd pay $100 a year for updates and half supported server >> > software. >> >> So, it seems you *don't* want to pay to support Red Hat. That's fine, >> that is what Fedora is for. You just need to get that through your head >> rather than just coming up with excuses about why you don't want to pay >> them. > > I'm not coming up with excuses. I'm explaining to you that I don't find > find $100 per year to be a reasonable price to pay. Red Hat, once again, > is a company and not a charity. And as I've stated earlier I've > supported OSS to the tune of hundreds of dollars spent on my personal > box alone over the years. I just don't want to be FORCED to pay a price > I don't think is reasonable. Who is FORCING you to pay anything? > You can't get that in your head, though. > You think that if I don't want to buy RHEL, then I must be some kind of > leech, who doesn't want to support OSS. I do. I just don't want to be > forced to pay that price to do so. Who called you a leech? Use Fedora, contribute to the community. >> > Sorry. I'll go to another distro before >> > I do that. >> >> It's called a "community based" distro. If you don't like that, Fedora >> isn't for you. > > ???? What does that have to do with this discussion? I'm not part of the > community if I'm not beta testing Mozilla 1.6a? Debian is community > based as well and they don't "require" or badger their users into > running unstable. Who said anything about beta testing a particular package. Beta test the DISTRO. >> > Maybe I'll go back to RH9 and pay Progeny $60 per year for >> > updates. Or maybe I'll go back to SuSE. Either route's a better deal >> > than that. >> >> There must be something that made you switch. No one is holding a gun >> to >> your head saying you have to use one distro or another. > > People like you make using Fedora less attractive, that's for sure. If > THIS is what this community is going to be like, then Fedora is doomed. Oh, goody, I'm the whole community now? Cool! >> > Red Hat isn't a charity. >> >> I agree. >> >> > If they want my money they're going >> > to have to offer me a better deal than a $100 a year Red Hat tax. >> >> If you aren't willing to pay it, then you aren't in their market. Use >> Fedora and quit complaining about how much RHEL costs. > > Thanks for the lecture, dad. Any time. Now if you would just get the apache, nfs, samba thing through your skull. >> > At >> > least with Microsoft the tax man only comes calling every 5 years when >> > the EOL a product. >> >> Trolling won't help. > > That's not a troll, that's a fact. If I buy Win2k Pro, for example, I > can get it for as low as like $200 OEM. Your OEM copy of Win2k Pro includes and Office Suite? Web Server without arbitrary limits on the connections? All the source code so that you can easily modify it, or pay someone else to support it for you? Any off-handed comment that just says "well, Microsoft is cheaper" is a troll. If you want Microsoft, go buy Microsoft. >> > I really like Fedora and I support Red Hat and its decision fully, but >> I >> > won't use their software if Fedora becomes beta testing playground and >> > there isn't any step between that and a $100 a year tax. Sorry. >> >> You need to grasp the concept between a beta and a release. The >> community >> needs to test the FC beta's so that the release is a better distro. If >> you want a commercially tested and supported distro you need to pay >> someone else to do this testing. > > No, I don't want a commercially tested and supported distro. That's why > I was fine with Fedora. It seemed like a nice balance. I could run some > testing packages, some "stable" packages, but either way since the > entire distro itself wasn't being tested by Red Hat I knew there might > be some glitches and so essentially I'd be helping to test the distro > and how it's put together. I think it's fine to participate in that > manner without having to run Gnome 2.5a and Mozilla 1.6a. Again, who said anything about betas of particular software. I specifically say FC beta, not Mozilla beta or Gnome beta. -- William Hooper
