Quoting Edward Croft <ecroft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > I was eagerly anticipating the new version of Red Hat and the new > version of KDE only to find they dumped both KDE and Gnome for > BlueCurve. Ticked me off, by I adapted. Huh? All BlueCurve is, is a theme, icon and default application set for each KDE and GNOME. You still have _full_ KDE and GNOME. I don't see your point at all. In fact, I don't think you do either. > Now they are dumping the desktop and going to the server. Huh? What is Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS then? > Fine, I have all my RH servers here, but on the desktop, I may be > looking back to Suse. I had tried it on a spare PC once and it worked > well. Looks like I have to pull out my old PCs again and load Mandrake > and Suse so that I can evaluate them. Mandrake is like Debian Unstable on a bad day. But that's just me. ;-ppp SuSE offers similar to Red Hat now. They offer their "consumer" Personal/Professional as well as their "Enterprise" series. The _difference_ between Red Hat and SuSE, other than the fact that Red Hat is no longer shrink wrapping its "consumer" versions (hence Fedora) is that Red Hat is GPL-anal and SuSE is _not_. So if you're making a "big deal" about Red Hat's recent moves, I don't think SuSE offers a compelling "alternative" based on your own criteria. I'm not saying SuSE is "worse" than Red Hat, I'm just saying based on _your_logic_, they are "not better." As such, I can only deduce this is a "I hate #1" attitude. That is not fair to Red Hat just as it is not fair to Microsoft when people do the same. There are legitimate complains to make of Red Hat, just like there are for Microsoft (actually, a crapload for the latter in comparison), but I do not see this as one of those. Sorry. > Frankly, I feel that Red Hat is becoming the Linux version of MS in > dictating to you. I don't know so much if it is "dictating," but if you mean that Red Hat is following Microsoft's attitude of "volume focus, enterprise focus," yes, I agree. That's just smart business. Dislike them for it, but I see nothing "unethical" about it. [ NOTE: There are far more "unethical" things to pick on in the case of Microsoft. But don't beat them up for just focusing on volue. Again, that's just smart business. So Red Hat's a follower ... not the first, not the last. ] But unlike Microsoft, or even SuSE and many other UnitedLinux distros, Red Hat is _still_ "GPL-anal." Everything Red Hat does is basically GPL. All the projects the start, support and otherwise put at the _cornerstone_ of their product. Can't say the same for SuSE nor most of the UnitedLinux partners, from the Installer to their various, product-only nick-nacks. > I remember when going to Linux meant choice, And Red Hat has taken away "choice"? All I've seen is that they've made some hard decisions, but have instigated what it believes are more choices. The only thing they are taking away is the "free lunch." GPL is Freedom, not Free-of-Cost. > so I will exercise my right of choice and find another distro. And you have that choice, yes. How Red Hat fits either in or out of that choice, versus yesterday, today or the future, I have not seen you make that point yet, which you seem you must make. Again, I am confused. > I will still support Red Hat on the server side, Via Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS? ES? Or Fedora Linux? > but more and more I am leaning elsewhere for the desktop. So you will look at neither Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS nor Fedora Linux for the desktop? I'm a bit confused on your logic. > Ed Croft, RHCE Bryan J. Smith Linux+, LPIC-2, RHCE(9) -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.
