Re: Why is Red Hat Better?

[Alan Mead <adm ipat com>]

At 09:56 PM 9/21/99 -0400, Bob Rankin wrote:
>Need some opinions...  
>
>I note that Red Hat has 55% of the Linux market.  What makes Red Hat

I'd be interested to know where you read this.  Since so many Linux users
run, or have run, more than one distro, I'm always curious to see how
distros get counted.

I think no one can really answer your question and I would urge you to
download RH or buy a $2 CheapBytes CD and try it yourself.  I like RPM but
that, or an equivalent, is found on most distros today.  I've heard that
Caldera may have an easier install if you are switching from Windows to Linux.

I think Red Hat's offer of free or purchased technical support was novel
and welcomed.  But there are other choices now.

But aside from the install and tech support, different flavors of Linux
probably differ most in their emphasis.  But this is near meaningless in
most cases because Linux software is mostly free and mostly compatible so
you can usually download and customize your distribution.

The distros do try to bundle commercial software and you could look at
that...  But I wouldn't choose RH on that basis.

>Will the IPO cash infusion enable Red Hat to enhance their product to
>a degree that will give it near-total dominance in the Linux arena? Or
>will open source always level the playing field?

As long as Red Hat releases open source software, they can only approach
"near-total domination" of the population of people who see their
marketing.  There will always be people who disagree and are free to change
RH and re-release it.  Since Linux came to it's current position without
any marketing, I don't see distros like Mandrake or Debian disappearing.
---
Alan D. Mead  /  Research Scientist  /  adm ipat com
Institute for Personality and Ability Testing
1801 Woodfield Dr  /  Savoy IL 61874 USA
217-352-4739 (v)  /  217-352-9674 (f)