On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 14:45, Tim Kossack wrote: > Am Do, den 05.02.2004 schrieb Dave Jones um 19:25: > > On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 18:10, Tim Kossack wrote: > > > Am Do, den 05.02.2004 schrieb Robin Laing um 16:50: > > > > > > > Red Hat or SUSE for the enterprise? Hint: Bet the chameleon > > > > <http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/219249> > > > > > > i also wondered (and still wonder) why red hat has given up to compete > > > in the desktop-market. > > > > You shouldn't believe everything you read on slashdot. > > > > Take a peek at the frontpage of http://www.redhat.com for example. > > It's not even as if our commercial desktop offering is well hidden, > > it takes up half the page. > > > > Dave > > what i meant was that the mentioned companies invest far more effort into > usability and polishness of their desktop(s) (plugins, tools) than red hat > does (that is, if red hat prof. workstation doesn't offer more in this > respect than fc - and by that i don't mean access to rhn as well as > higher reliability). i should've written "red hat has _basically_ given > up...if i'm not mistaken, that was also the main point of the article. I feel that the RedHat products are based on "polished" GNOME desktops. Maybe you are talking about proprietary MP3 plugins, proprietary media players, proprietary windows emulation layers, etc. that the other companies includes in their offerings, in my opinion that doesn't make a "polished" OSS based desktop, it makes a proprietary OS, something that I am trying to avoid ;-)
