[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora and the System Administrator

Jack Bowling wrote:
> ...
>>The argument that RH are now going to be financially viable because they
>>are not developing RHL any more really isn't convincing.  There is
>>something else happening here to which those of us outside are not privy
>>that is controlling this decision.
> Such an argument would be specious which is probably why I haven't seen
> it brought forth anywhere in these forums before. I wonder what messages
> you have been reading that I haven't?

Nearly everyone who has tried to justify it has done so by saying that
RHL was not a profitable product, and assumed that the boxed set and OS
were tied to each other.

> The argument that is incontestible is that RH needed to concentrate
> on the bottom line before it was too late.

If you say so.  I think it's funny that Red Hat often took the time
previously to say that they were profitable (certainly every time i went
to a presentation i heard this), and now they're saying that they
weren't then but they will be now...

> And I think you will see that RH wants to play nice with the
> "freeloaders" as well as the enterprise people.

True, and i'm glad they are.  :-)  The issue for me (and many other
people) as that i'm not either.

> Give Fedora some time.

I'm not talking about Fedora's quality, i'm talking about its target
market and stated objectives (http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html).
 I'm sure Fedora will do just fine - i just don't think it's appropriate
for the markets to which i'm referring (which coincidentally happen to
be the ones in which i currently use Red Hat Linux).

It doesn't matter how much time i give it - my problems with it will be
related to its objectives.  Criticising Fedora for not having a 12-18
month release cycle and not offering the right support options would be
like criticising a bicycle for not being a 4-door sedan.

A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: Why should i start my reply below the quoted text?

Attachment: pgp00019.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]