This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C02397.DDCFF080
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am just saying that Debian provides a very robust apt-get soution for =
free. I have no problem with RedHat making money, but charging money =
for updates seems weird to me. I know you can still update manually, =
but why charge for this new feature? I would gladly pay redhat for =
support, but not updates. I mean even M$ doesnt charge for NT service =
packs. Am I looking at this thing the right way? I am no businessman =
and I have nothing against companies like RedHat finding ways to make =
money and putting out pretty decent software. But this still rubs me =
the wrong way. Maybe someone could enlighten me. =20
- Joel
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Lucas Vogel=20
To: 'plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us'=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:29 PM
Subject: RE: redhat tries apt-get
So what's the big deal?
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Dudley [mailto:joel@silverw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:13 PM
To: plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
Subject: redhat tries apt-get
Looks like RH 7.0 is going to make a stab at the whole apt-get idea =
in 7.0, but you have to pay for it? What is up with that?? One more =
reason for me to switch to Debian.
- Joel
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C02397.DDCFF080
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am just saying that Debian provides a =
very robust=20
apt-get soution for free. I have no problem with RedHat making =
money, but=20
charging money for updates seems weird to me. I know you can still =
update=20
manually, but why charge for this new feature? I would gladly pay =
redhat=20
for support, but not updates. I mean even M$ doesnt charge for NT =
service=20
packs. Am I looking at this thing the right way? I am no =
businessman=20
and I have nothing against companies like RedHat finding ways to make =
money and=20
putting out pretty decent software. But this still rubs me the =
wrong=20
way. Maybe someone could enlighten me.
- Joel
----- Original Message -----
From:=20
Lucas Vogel=20
To: 'plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.ph=
oenix.az.us'=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, =
2000 8:29=20
PM
Subject: RE: redhat tries =
apt-get
So=20
what's the big deal?
Looks like RH 7.0 is going to make =
a stab at=20
the whole apt-get idea in 7.0, but you have to pay for it? =
What is up=20
with that?? One more reason for me to switch to =
Debian.
-=20
Joel
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01C02397.DDCFF080--