Just read this posting and had to congratulate you on a "clear", "level headed", "unbiased" and sensible response.
I am a Linux newbie (I prefer novice) I work for an IT company selling solutions, primarily MS based. Four years ago one of our engineers showed me Linux my immediate response was "what a crap system" this was based on my personal memory's of VIC20 and ZX Spectrum which were only enjoyed by so called "geeks" who had the time and patience to sit, learn the code and figure out how to repair any bugs. This tended to give them (the ones I knew and met) the opinion of "I'm better than you" with the added annoyance that they would not share that knowledge as this would undermine their stature and allow the "plebeians" into the fold.
Linux has moved on in leaps and bounds and is now moving in the realms of the general public, in 95% on cases it works "out of the box" and with GUI based apps is appealing to joe public. Like most windows users I want programs that I install to 1. Load 2. Work, so far I have only come across two products Open Office and Cross over office both products install with a nice graphical interface so the user can see something happening, don't cry about dependencies (apart from open office wanting Java but you can skip that without a refusal to load and run) this is the way forward if Linux is to really take off plus two sides of the coin will be happy joe public can use it with little or in some cases no knowledge and geeks can mess around because of the open source.
I have been using RH9 for the past 4 months and have just started using Fedora I am an 89% happy user (but that is more lack of knowledge than anything else) on the whole most of the community is helpful although there are still some users who look down their nose at novices like me.
Keep up your open attitude what a refreshing view.
Regards
Pete
On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 06:26, Chadley Wilson wrote:
Vincent I have to agree with James on most of these points, On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 07:35, Vincent wrote: > On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 23:26:21 -0500 > James Drabb <JDrabb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > He does have some good points. Linux is starting to cost MORE then a MS > > solution. What Free version of Linux can I use that is supported by > > vendors? I don't need paid support. Basically, I have to spend $1,000s > > on RHEL or SuSE EL. I do like FC and have been using it at home since > > the beginning of Fedora. However, IMO, it is not stable enough for a > > production system since it is constantly being developed. Also, I don't > > know why RH gets their "Enterprise" versions certified and not Fedora. > > Doesn't RH have total control over FC? IMO, the best and most fair > > thing for RH to do would be to have a "base Red Hat Linux" that gets > > certified and then have different versions based on that. There would > > be the certified and free/community supported Fedora. Red Hat does not > > offer any updates or services for this version. Then there could be the > > paid versions that have updates and different levels of support up to > > Enterprise grade 24x7 support. This seems more fair to me since Red Hat > > is based on tons of software that they did not develop and RH now has a > > lot of free Fedora volunteers doing work for them that they can roll > > into their "Enterprise" line. > > Red Hat gives all the code away free of charge just like users do. Why exactly > are they required to do more for us than anyone else? Because they have money? > They just had thier first profit last quarter ever and that appears to be direcly > attributed to its new sales model. The new sales model is great (Well done Redhat) but they could do much much better than $110, in South Africa its time 8 so the cost for me is R880 but by the time I get this package shipped and delivered it worked out R1500 I can by WindowsXP for R990 it is stable for my home and office I never have a crash, Packages just install and whats more I dont need to spend hours downloading this devel package and that binary and worry about I mean what does the average joe soap know about that. And yes When he compares the prices. He looks to MS-Windows. Linux should be 90% cheaper than Windows All round. Look at codeweavers by the time you have bought codeweavers crossover office you might as well go and buy windows to run your windows program it cost the same and at least with windows theres no debugging involved in making the thing work. > > > Most companies can get MS Windows rolled out cheaper then Red Hat/SuSE > > Linux and Linux IS FREE! It seems like RH and SuSE are turning Linux > > into an OS that is no longer a cost effective alternative to MS and now > > only a cost effective alternative to expensive Unix. Precisely The distro including Mandrake have lost focus with there price they are targetin the coorporates and have forgotten the smaller guys > > This is true it is getting to be more expensive which sucks, But on the > other hand it is also getting to be a better product than Windows in many areas. Yes but for 16 weeks labour in front of a screen to get jobs done because half the stuff doesnt work out of the box, 90% of it requires updates and tweaking. Not to mention how much slower linux is than windows. So now I cant load it on the old PC and have GUI because it needs at leased a 32MB VGA card to RUN properly. Quite honestly half the point is that I save on the software to have bigger better hardware. Now I have to by the smallest thing possible because for my needs [every one needs customising] I need a distro (R1500) then Crossover to run SQL clients (R900) then you need the cros over plugins for quick time (R300) and so on and so forth. At the end of the day the software costs more than the hardware. The manufacturers of hardware have the development costs just as the software guys and they have one perk 20 % of chips manufactured fail and after sales they get more come backs a software guy completes his software and put it on a cd and sells it. When problems arise he writes a patch.So how can software cost more than the hardware? > > > > > I know it sounds like I am coming down on Red Hat, though I do want to > > state that I have used RH Linux for a long time now and find it the best > > Linux distro to use. I just am not happy how RH dumped the home user > > and the small business user. Even on the RH web site, they make Fedora > > sound like a toy to tinker with compared to Red Hat "Enterprise" Linux. > > That is kind of the point isn't it? RH can't be everything to everyone, They > tried that and it didn't work. So they are trying to get us to make a decision. > do we want new software, or stable software? When you mix them its hard to get > either. Well look at what MS has achieved no matter what you all say, I have work this indutry since I was 16 I have played with all of it. I'm not bias at all. MS is incredible they have their software on over 80% of the worlds computers. Linux has become the alternative to ms for the majority. Some twisted people with faulty hardware who and no clue have blame MS for the installations. I have adminstered windows networks for a long time MY servers deal with the laods and there are no problems with the PCs everything is 100% stable. Sure PC break and need fixing and data is damage and need recovery. The ethos that made linux what it is today is cost benefit. LINUX is no more than a cost advantage. You need to take you nose of the mailing lists and look at the whole market.No every linux user has email access. > > > http://www.redhat.com/solutions/migration/rhl/ > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux > > "If you require a reliable, secure, high-performance platform designed > > for today's business environment, then the next step is to choose the > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux version for your specific workloads and usage." > > > > The Fedora Project > > "If your interest in Red Hat Linux is to interact with the Linux > > community and contribute to the development of a general purpose > > operating system from free software, then the Fedora Project is for > > you." Here you are missing the point, the people who assist you (RH) in knowing what is in demand are those trying to get it working by means of comunication throught these various lists. What about the Mrs Jones who is poor who has three kids and and is still paying the bond. Shee need a tool to write a letter and send mail and do some online grocery shopping. The kids want to play some games and Dad wants to tweak the PC and measure its performance so that he can go to work and brag. > > > > > > Now What IT manager is going to ever choose to use Fedora. What small > > business is ever going to choose to use Fedora with statements like the > > above. To me it sounds like RHEL is secure and stable while Fedora is > > not. No sane Microsoft administrator will ever can MS for any Linux because no has complete network migration schemes, Yes even redhat still have ground to cover. They still need to do a lot of research to justify their pricing. They should use obsidian systems in SA to come and see just how many business will change but cant due to current infrastructures in place with MS. > > > > Also, RH no longer has a Linux available that is cost effective compared > > to MS. You can get MS Windows XP home for $99, while Red Hat > > Professional Workstation is around $110. > You pay to much for MS we are paying R990 which is approx $75 MS Windows XP Pro is cheaper > > then RHEL WS. This pricing point is actually hurting Linux. More > > home-users, IT manager, etc are familiar with MS then with Linux. If > > they look at trying a switch to Linux and see that it now COSTS MORE, > > most will not make the switch. Absolutley, We dont mind paying its how much that we mind. It must be super cheap compared to MS > > even when thier networks are hosed by the worm-of-the-month? > My windows machine and apps crash 10 fold the times my Fedora machine does. You should have me look at that for you sounds like driver issues > why should I fork out $99? > > Is XP home still $99 after you buy office, a firewall Home has built in firewall You dont need a personal firewall just keep your system updated and yes AV is extra but its also becoming necessary for linux and it is also extra there. > , anti-virus, etc, etc? > The cost is not just what you get in a box. Think of how much you save by > having virtually every peice of software you can imagine for free with source > code, Isn't that worth more money? It is to alot of busineses. Sure I agree one installation everything installed what more do want. a bit of config here and there, and away you go. Chad > > > > > > > But it doesn't matter anyway... My comments on NF were generally > > > mod'ed as flamebait and Bruce is going to do what he wants no matter > > > what. > > > > Sorry for my rantings : ) > > > > Jim Drabb > > -- > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > The box said: "Requires Windows 98/2000/NT/XP or better." > > So, I installed LINUX! > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > James Drabb JR > > Senior Programmer Analyst > > Davenport, FL USA > > > > > > -- > > fedora-list mailing list > > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >
Regards Peter Cannon peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
