On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 22:29, Vincent wrote:
> 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.
First, let me state that I do despise MS, and I am playing devils
advocate. However, let us look at the cost over 5 years for RHPW and MS
Windows XP Home. We need to assume that RH will support RHPW for 5
years and not drop support like RH 9.
RHPW year 1: $50
RHPW year 2: $60 for updates
RHPW year 3: $60 for updates
RHPW year 4: $60 for updates
RHPW year 5: $60 for updates
----------------------------
$290 over 5 years
MS XP Home year 1: $99
MS XP Home year 2: $0
MS XP Home year 3: $0
MS XP Home year 4: $0
MS XP Home year 5: $0
---------------------
$99 over 5 years
Do you see the price difference?
I personally would not use MS at home if you forced me to. I just wish
that RH did not abandon the home user or SOHO user.
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
