Possible RHES alternative

I hate it when threads get really long; multi-page, lots of quoted text.
Oh well; better than top-posting anyway :-)
Here goes.
Craig White wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 20:55, Steve Smith wrote:
>
>>Craig White wrote:
>>
>>... major snippage
>>
>>>What this means is that people want to dance to the music without paying
>>>the fiddler as if the assemblage of this distro, the timely updates over
>>>a cycle of 5 years will be without cost and the people paying for this
>>>privilege are the actual purchasers of RHEL. I know I would feel like
>>>Freddy the Freeloader if I were to download and install it for someone.
>>
>>Given the circumstances, it was rather decent of Redhat to make the
>>SRPMs available for free download. I know if *I* took the combined work
>>of thousands of volunteers, slapped a draconian EULA on it and charged
>>hundreds or thousands of dollars per license, I'd feel like Randy the
>>Robber Baron ;-)
>>
> ----
> I absolutely agree with this except for one thing - the RHEL isn't the
> only package that you can get from Red Hat. Their RHL has been fully
> available for free download and use and Fedora is probably more
> accessible and extensible than any previous version of RHL and still
> free.
>
> Is Fedora fully functional yet? No - Mostly but not completely
>
> Would I use it on a new server for one of my clients yet? No
>
> Would I suggest that my clients use RHEL? Yes
>
> Would I insist that my clients use RHEL? No

Right with you so far; no arguments.

> Here's the problem in a nutshell. I install RH 7.3 on a client's new
> server. There are a bunch of security alerts on an exposes daemon - such
> as apache. I have to update it. I need someone to provide me the rpm
> updates or roll my own (or compile it from source).
>
> Silly me wants to get paid for my time so I have to charge the client to
> update this 'free' software (I like this idea by the way). I tell my
> client that he can subscribe to an 'update service' which will provide
> him with easy updates that minimize my time (hence his costs). That
> works but now the version reaches EOL and I must update completely. More
> time, re-configuration of new settings, etc.

I think we still agree. I'm not willing, though, to reinstall a
perfectly good server on a yearly basis. That's the time to decide if
it's worth forking over major cash, or switching.

> So Red Hat comes out with product with a commitment to maintain it for 5
> years...does that have value? You bet your sweet bippy. Does that make
> Red Hat akin to Randy the Robber Baron? I guess we each have to decide
> that question for ourselves and sometimes for our clients.

I agree that the maintenance of the release has significant value. I'm
more annoyed than angry and wouldn't argue that RH shouldn't be able to
do what they've done. It kills me to read all the Forbes and WSJ lusers
gushing about what a "smart business decision" Redhat made.

"Yeah! We're *still* more popular than SCO!" -- nice work, guys.

They went from being "so good" (free-software citizen-wise) to what they
are now. They had a great product available for free, and now it's
unaffordable unless you're a big company. I like their dists. I've
evangelized for it, invested time learning about it, etc. etc. and now
my (Redhat) choices are "way too expensive" or "perma-beta" (Fedora).
Perhaps I'll still use it on my personal machines, via Whitebox Linux,
and not lose my knowledge investment. I'd surely suggest Whitehat to
students rather than have them "pirate" RHES or spend three semesters of
textbook money on Free software.

OK, there's one more thing that bugs me about RH. About 6 months ago I
inquired about the possibility of a site license or a price break on 200
copies. The response was, paraphrasing, "go away, kid. You bother me."
I thought with the release of RH9 that they were "that close" to being a
desktop alternative to Windows and MacOS. The price quote I got from
them came in %60 more expensive per box than what Microsoft wants for
Windows XP plus Office plus Visual Studio plus a bunch of other junk. No
site license available, no educational discount. Redhat made Microsoft
look like Captain Friendly.

It hurts my brain when really smart people do Really stupid things, like
piss on the vast majority of their supporters.

> I gather that you are feeling screwed by Red Hat. I am very much in the
> undecided - it all depends upon whether the Fedora product gets legs,
> innovative extensions and gets longevity.

I don't feel screwed, but their short-sightedness makes my brain hurt
really bad. I'd also rather not have to learn the quirks of a new dist.
Netware 6.5 has enough weirdness to keep me busy,

> ...
> Of course, you can always opt not to feel like Freddy or Randy, but more
> like Bob Hope and tell Red Hat "Thanks for the Memories" (I know that
> you have been a Red Hat user).

I haven't really decided where I'm going yet. I'm wondering if Novell
will fill the sudden void in the Corporate Good Guy field; people seem
to really like SuSE. UserLinux, Bruce Peren's recent mutterings of a
Debian fork, may come through... I guess I'll wait and see. I'll also
grumble a lot in the interim. :-)

Steve