On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 19:29:23 -0600 "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > At 20:39 2/7/2004, Joe Klemmer wrote: > >On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 23:26, James Drabb wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > > It really must be me, I guess. I seem to be the only one who doesn't > >see this whole thing as RH "dumping" the home or small business user. I > >guess I've been at this to long or something. > > Joe: No, I have come to believe that most of us out here have a clue. > However, there are still hundreds or thousands of people who Just Don't Get > It [tm]. They will or they won't, but you'll have a hard time convincing them. > > > > 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. > > James: To me it sounds like Fedora has software freedom, costs $0.00, and > its security and stability will, over the long haul, be determined by the > community of developers, programmers, and users involved with it. That can > go well or poorly, but it DOES NOT automatically imply "poorly." That same > RHEL you suggest as secure and stable was built mostly by the same > community, and most of the packages in Fedora are the very same packages in > RHEL... they are just newer versions. > > Fedora moves forward more quickly than RHEL, thus of course over the long > haul an RHEL version with 24 months of use behind it will be more stable > than a current/recent Fedora version. However: telling me that a McLaren F1 > Formular racecar is faster than a BMW M5, while true, will not convince me > that the M5 is slow. You are talking differential or marginal > security/stability, not absolute. > > Hence the argument falls completely apart on a philosophical basis, and can > be discarded. > > On a practical level, I have now had a couple of Fedora boxes running stock > installs (and updates) as firewall/gateway machines for small businesses. I > performed exactly the same lock-down measures which I did on RHL-9 and > which I would need to perform on RHEL-3. Exactly the same. Both boxen have > now been online 24/7 for 30 days with no crashes, no bugs, no problems, and > no cracks. While this may not be a perfect test, no Windows computer I ever > met could say the same. > > Hence your argument can further be shown to have no practical merits. > > > > 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. > > Is that XP Home a full version of the OS, or an upgrade? Also note that I > just bought an RHPW box for $50 or so. Get your facts straight. wow I just noticed that. from COMPusa its $109.99 and from staples its $49.94 talk about a price break. Thanks for getting me to shop =) I'm going to do this. > -- > Rodolfo J. Paiz > rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.simpaticus.com > > > --
