Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: > ... >>>At least with RHL we had *some* stability....*sigh* >> >>Which came at a cost. Who paid for that? > > We did, in a way. And many of us would still be happy to... > ... > Another guy at work has been trying to get us to go to a mixture of True64 > and Solaris. Now that RH is *more* expensive on x86 than Solaris, and my > boss is an old Solaris/SPARC admin....well, you get the idea. > > List price for Solaris 9 Workgroup server is $250 US. > List price for RHEL ES is $349 US. > > Damnit, I love RH and *really* don't like Solaris. *sigh* > > I know that RH is trying to stay profitable. I understand and wish them > the best. They've done an *outstanding* job. I just hope and pray that > they haven't shot themselves in the foot here. I know that we will be > trying to find an alternative before up2date stops working for RH9. :( That is a very interesting observation. Is RH aware that they have positioned themselves thus in the market? If i were Sun, i'd be taking a big marketing opportunity to throw a few extras into their solution (like clustering software, etc.) show how Solaris is cheaper than Linux and thumb their nose at everyone and say "We were right all along". Paul "Jef Spaleta has too many nicknames" Gear http://paulgear.webhop.net -- A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should i start my reply below the quoted text?
Attachment:
pgphFQlDoGoI4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
