Seifried writes “Changes in Red Hat Inc.’s business focus and support policies have forced me (and I assume many other administrators) to evaluate our options for the Linux operating system. Fortunately we do have choices, and ultimately can stick with Linux even if it isn’t Red Hat Linux.“
Reasons For Switching From Red Hat Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
No way the business I work for would switch. SuSE and RedHat are the only two distributions which Oracle officially supports. Because we have RedHat Enterprise Linux, we call Oracle and they deal with everything. No middle man and no worrying about the OS. In addition the kernel has been specifically tuned to allow Oracle to do Asynchronous I/O which is definitely a significant performance boost.
$395 a year is a small price to pay for peace of mind. Also, with up2date setup to automatically apply errata, we never have to worry about updating our servers because of the latest exploit. That means if there’s a security update beacuse of an exploit at 3am in the morning, I don’t even have to be awake for it to be taken care of, it just is, and that makes it all worth it to me…
SuSE is about the same price in the long run too.
It’s just unrealistic to run enterprise level databases on anything but SuSE or RedHat.
show Redhat what you think of their new Business focus and get a nicer looking system to boot 🙂
note, the last part is just MY OPINION, if you take offense to it in any way, please pretend you did not read it…thank-you.
I agree and disagree with Shawn. If I was running a large database, especially oracle then yes I’d cheerfully pony up the money and use an enterprise product. Unfortunately, like a lot of small/medium sized businesses I actually only need a handful of servers, and while important I have to justify to myself the money I spend on them. Spending several hundred dollars per box, plus several hundred per year on support contracts so that I can get security updates/etc while nice is hard to justify when there are alternatives like SuSE that are much cheaper.
Even though Red Hat’s offerings are a little bit more expensive, you do get piece of mind. Red Hat seems to be the defacto standard for development on Linux, as it seems that there is support for Red Hat in just about everything. Most people I’ve talked to find it very easy to use Red Hat’s software. Red Hat only puts stable packages into their Enterprise distro, so your know you have security, and stablity. Like some other poster said you won’t have to worry about exploits, as they are patches and deployed on your machines automatically.
and compile srpms of redhat enterprise
you will have a fresh enterprise redhat linux
Actually, SuSE is *NOT* much cheaper. Not if you buy their enterprise editions or even their ‘standard server’ depending on how you value their support or what features you need. Have you bothered to look at their licensing? SuSE requires an additiona licensee for each PC that you install their server product on, just like RedHat. The only difference I can find is that SuSE says that after the maintenance program ends for a PC you can keep the software on there, you just won’t be able to get any support for it. I don’t think RedHat allows this with the Enterprise edition, but I’m not sure.
And actually, if you look at SuSE’s comparable server offering, RedHat’s Basic RHEL ES at $349 is cheaper than SuSE’s $450…
Trust me, the business I work for has looked into this…
We’re a small business too, only about 9 employees. So you can’t claim that small businesses are different…
downloaded the free redhat 9 isos and installed them.
i don’t get any support that way.
now i’ll be using fedora, and i will download the isos and install those.
i won’t get any support that way either.
where’s the problem?
does this guy think that when OpenSSL bug foo is found that fedora isn’t going to release a new rpm that can’t be quickly solved via “apt-get dist-upgrade”?
where’s the problem?
i agree with the first post. if you have special circumstances, and NEED an official redhat..pay up.
or move to debian.
or use fedora.
deal.
Before someone mentions debian, and claims they’re an equivalent easily. They’re not. They have volunteer package maintainers that are the ones responsible for maintaining the packages, so you’re at the mercy just as much as you would be if you ran Fedora. Yes Debian maintainers typically help maintain security backported fixes for a while, but there’s no guaranteed schedule for it. No support contract stipulating response times, etc.
Or, you can learn something about Oracle, and run Debian STABLE, which is more secure, and 100x more stable then whatever Red Hat is.
While I do agree with most of the comments made (I pretty much share the same concerns as a longtime RedHat user and small office administrator), I think it is a bit premature to discard the Fedora releases. The problems with compatibility in server related package upgrades may not be as severe as the author thinks. Many important server packages (apache, samba, ftp, ssh etc) maintain compatibility in their configuration files. Thus having fixes in packages that are based on updated versions from the developers may actually be just as good as backporting these fixes. In adddition, the way that the test releases of fedora are currently handled is in no way different from the development cycle of say RedHat 8 or 9. I have very much the feeling that we can still expect solid stable realeses even under the Fedora label.
If you’re willing to pony up for Oracle, it would probably be wise to pay a little extra for RHEL and get a supported configuration.
Just go the standard edition of SUSE and just install the minimal?
you just won’t be able to get any support for it. I don’t think RedHat allows this with the Enterprise edition, but I’m not sure.
Same as Redhat, just no support. You could build the whole thing from SRPMs if you wanted and Redhat couldn’t say a word about it. Thats one difference you left out with SuSe, Builting from SRC is a no-no on suse still isn’t it?
Even if Fedora is stable and timely on the updates you get to re-install or upgrade your OS 2-3 times a year since older Fedora releases won’t be patched, instead the “fix” mentality is “upgrade the OS. This makes sense for testing/etc but if it’s a server… that’s a LOT of administrative overhead and downtime. This is not something I want to experience.
Unfortunately in the Terms and conditions it states:
If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer’s facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
is this Linux ?
i didnt mean to post ananamously.
Unfortunately in the Terms and conditions it states:
If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer’s facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
When running Oracle, redhat and suse are your REAL options, in an enterprise enviornment support matters. period, end of story. Redhat’s switch to an enterprise enviornment doesn’t bother me, there needs to be a linux distro to fill those shoes, they are letting the free version be developed by the community. As for smaller servers in the small/business range redhat, debian, suse, mandrake, etc all work great when configured properly.
all this boils down to two choices:
1. you need support
2. you do not need support
isn’t this the same argument we all had five years ago with linux vs. solaris (or aix or whatever)? those of us who had the chops and the time and the luxury of working in an environment where we could do our own support deep-sixed the proprietary unices back then. now, redhat is moving into the space that used to occupied by solaris and the cycle begins again.
obvious and inevitable, really.
where i work we will not pay for redhat e. when the move to another distro becomes inevitable we’ll probably migrate the whole place to openbsd (or yellowdog, if money for new hardware falls from the sky)
Buy Windows 2003 SBS.
Just kidding, though it is a fine piece of software, and now chance that they will shut down your “Windows Updates.”
Have you looked at Mandrake? Per-incident support is a nice thing to have available, though I do believe their Corporate Server is subscription based.
i dont need support with Redhat, i am currently using Redhat-9 and it runs great for me, as long as i can install patches & updates via up2date first or apt-get second and red-carpet third which i use on occasion. if i run in to problems i find an answer for it myself (which i allways do) and am looking forward to Fedora making their first relase #1 (Redhat-10) maybe with .deb too…
I too used RH since the 3.0 or 4.0 release. About a year ago I got tired off application dependency hell… mostly in terms of packages being installed that I don’t want. I went to LFS (www.linuxfromscratch.org) for my home tower. Now… 1.5 years later, I use only LFS. I can make a fast build and put it on a CD in a few hours… then deploy as I go. Need a mail server? Mine only has the core kernel and apps that make up true Linux and my mail daemon. Nothing else. Makes for a much more secure environment. As an IT/Linux consultant, I use LFS for all my clients. It means I’m dependent on any single company or distro. I know my systems much better than I ever did using RedHat. And, most of my competition are “distro-admins” that aren’t that familiar compiling everything from source and as such, I generate job security.
http://www.nccomp.com
Oh, for the record, SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 8 is available for $349 if you opt for a three month support contract instead of one year. I just assume that patches and such continue longer…
You know what always happens with my desktop, I buy redhat 8 when it first comes out, and love it then.. redhat 9 comes out and I say, screw it I don’t want to make a backup but sure enough as soon as that bit torrent hits guess what.. i can’t help myself. I install it.
So the way I see it, I update every 6 months anyway distros come out for fedora 2-3 times a year, and will support the old one for 3-4 months I think. So Its about the same time frame for those of us who can’t stand to not have the new foo-1.6 with the bar-2.2 speed enhancements. Plus yum / apt.
I’m still waiting for Fedora core 1.0 to be released b4 a decision but deep down I know I’ll never resist the slashdot bit torrent, I’m weak, so sue me.
As for a server i’ll let you guys fight over that, it all comes down to how much do you value your job IMO. When something is important to me I buy the best and be done with it. I am currently using a $350 pair of headphones I bought in 1992 (precision HD 580), I’ve rolled over the chord about 4,000 times with my chair but it still works and was worth every penny.
Thanks Redhat for your past, present, and future support of linux and open source software. Also, I wish your company success with your focus on the enterprise.
Thanks also for the fedora linux. I’m running fedora core test 3 now. I think that by opening up the development process for fedora we will see additional community involvement. I’ve already seen improvements, for example being able to update using yum. Also, the fact that there are no copyright issues with the RedHat name in fedora is a good thing.
Overall, this is just a win-win situation.
Linux is not the only choice, there are the BSDs to consider. If you stick with Linux but don’t like Debian, there’s Gentoo. There are plenty of choices out there.
Yes, Debian does use volunteers which DOES NOT hinder the quality of their distrbution. RedHat currently is headed in the direction of another Microsoft!
Umm, this person seems to understand leagaliese better than ./configure; make; make install.
I would consider this article a waste of time, and will send an invloice for the 15 minutes i have wasted reading it.
if he wants to avoid all learning curves and stick with deadrat ^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hredhat, then he should depart with his money and support the distribution that has burned through millions of dollars worth of IPO cash to come up with a below standard operating system that is slower than most others, but contains a gui based on gnome and is widely used in america.
Point: use something different, and learn that all of the big distribions are basically the same and have similar policies: they all have different names for the same tools, but different skins for their window managers.
ps. use slackware
I don’t mean to sound harsh, but perhaps you’ve jumped the gun a little, Seifried.
To me, the whole statement about errata and updates is just a way of covering their collective arses. Standard practice in business and even not-for-profit!
That said, I do have some squeamish feelings relating to no longer back-porting, however I’ll have to cross that bridge when I get to it.
To date, I’ve been using RH8 (just upgraded to RH9 this weekend – I didn’t really see a point, but I was bored.)
What I find invaluable is Ximian’s Red Carpet Express service. Toss the RedHat Network and replace it with RCE – it handles updates very elegantly (if you ignore anything related to spell checkers!) and I have faith in Miguel.
If Ximian Red Carpet is available for Fedora Core 1.0, then I doubt that there’ll be too many problems. I understand your sentiments in losing RedHat’s historically fantastic updates, however I’m also looking to the future with the excitement of knowing that Fedora community development can/will easily exceed the development and innovation that a singular company could afford.
Ultimately, RedHat has had to take a look at the “80/20 rule.” Why spend 80% of your time chasing 20% of your income?
RedHat currently is headed in the direction of another Microsoft!
Should have used 12lb test line, and trolled the lure at about 10 feet, the big ones are at the top.
I guess switching to BSD servers never entered his mind. I’d like to see him do some research on it.
There is a project to supplement the Fedora Distro after the 2-3 months that you are referring to with Patches and updates. So the lifetime will be longer than just the few months.
… and I agree it is too early to discard it. Give it a shot. I find all of the motion around it exciting. Just watch the mailing lists for Fedora. There is a lot going on.
I had this problem as well, only it was with one of our hosting providers. I like to keep our development boxes on the same OS as what we have in the wild. We had been on RH 9, but then our provider said they would only support RH ES starting in December, with Fedora not being an available option. So I switched providers, and switched to Debian while I was at it. FreeBSD was also a consideration. In the end I chose Debian because it has an available stable native Java 1.4 implementation, all other things being equal.
freeBSD is awesome, definitely a viable alternative, if not my first choice. stripped-down debian stable or LFS is really stable and safe as well. heck i’d use those before i used redHat for something like that. I never liked red hat, but that’s just my opinion. I’ve known other people that liked it just fine but it’s RPM dependancy hell that bothers me, system-wide updates are just about impossible.
RedHat is trying to sell itself in the enterprise, but the truth is that it is really a good desktop OS. It can autodetect the video card, monitor frequency, mouse, keyboard, sound card just as well as Windows. But it’s design is severly flawed for the server room. I find both FreeBSD and Debian much better designed for the server room. They allow you to install only once and then forever update. They also have much cleaner configuration files and don’t subscribe to the reinstall every 6 months mantra.
Honest questions: Is their a company behind a BSD? Would I get comparable support? What about software support for things like Oracle?
And what about certifications? Are their BSD certs?
Just some real questions because I would actually like to know.
P.S. Yes, I know both sides of the cert’s argument, are certifications really necessary, etc. That’s not what I am asking…so please, don’t bother, let’s just keep this on topic. =)
” It can autodetect the video card, monitor frequency, mouse, keyboard, sound card just as well as Windows”
Not true. The installation gives you major problems if you have a dual monitor system. Both RH 9 and Fedora gave me this problem.
SuSE and Mandrake, however, both handle this nicer than Windows by setting up the dual video cards during installation.
The Debian project does not GUARANTEE you anything. The fact is, it’s maintained by a bunch of volunteers. If they don’t update something, you have no one to sue, and frankly, no reason to complain, since you could just patch it your damn self.
In this case, you’re just as well off with Fedora. There is nothing magical about Debian that makes them support you forever, and I’m tired of people trying to make believe that’s so. At some point, stable _does_ get upgraded, you know? Breakage _will_ happen.
I like Debian. I really do. But, Debian is not some sort of pocket-knife solution to every problem. Some (many?) customers would like tech support they can call, would like to have graphical configuration tools, and someone who is ultimately responsible. Debian just doesn’t provide these things. RHEL does. Yes, it costs money. But, when you get down to it, is the money you’re saving worth the hassle?
You need to answer these things yourself. The author’s conclusions are based on a server situation, extreme unwillingness to spend money on a distribution, and extreme care for the utmost stability. Most of the people viewing this site can just ignore this article. It simply doesn’t apply to them.
Don’t leave RedHat before trying Fedora Core 1. That’s all I ask. Because, from what I’ve seen so far of it in daily usage, it is one hell of a piece of work. That goes for you, too, Kurt.
-Erwos
It might give you a problem with a dual monitor setup, but it install just fine on my system (Radeon 7500). It doesn’t automatically set up the second head, but that is a simple matter right after installation.
“Not true. The installation gives you major problems if you have a dual monitor system. Both RH 9 and Fedora gave me this problem. ”
That’s because RedHat simply doesn’t do non-open-source software, and the nVidia drivers are non-free. My setup worked fine, although I do admit I remember non-homogeneous cards having issues at some point (Radeon7200+G200 in my case). But, to be honest, that’s an awfully kludgy solution under any OS.
And, for the record, the graphical display configuration tool RedHat has does handle dual-head (but not TwinView). The file it produced looked like it would work, too. Didn’t try it since I wanted TwinView, though.
The original statement was more correct than you’re giving it credit for.
-Erwos
FreeBSD is hardly an option if you’re running Oracle. Their threading support has only begun to shape up starting in the 5.x series, and it isn’t considered stable yet by the developers. The support staff will just about refuse to look into specific issues even if you have a support contract unless you’re using a certified platform.
Oracle has not certified FreeBSD. The only certified platforms are Windows NT, 200x, Various Unixes, RedHat (enterprise versions, plus 6.2 or 7.3 I think) and SuSE (server editions only I believe).
They do not provide native FreeBSD binaries so you have to run Oracle using the Linuxulator, at which point you have to ask yourself why you’re running FreeBSD anyway.
In addition to the fact that you get a significant performance loss since FreeBSD doesn’t suport the Asynchronous I/O library and kernel stuff that RedHat does (don’t know if SuSE supports it). Additionally, large memory support is way farther along in RedHat/SuSE than it is FreeBSD.
However, I should note that I do run FreeBSD 4.8 as a (secondary) development desktop here locally, so I’m not a hater. I even maintain an adventure game engine for it
Yeah, sure, you can run Debian / Slackware, etc. then when you call Oracle about a specific problem they ask what platform you’re using, you tell them and they laugh maniacally at you and proceed to remind you that the support contract stipulates that you must use a certified platform. So much for that idea.
Red Hat provides a good service and the prices are resonable. Now consider this:
” Would you rather use a Microsoft product?”
Also if you can afford Oracle than you really cant be that poor.
300-400 dollars a box isnt that bad. What is the going price for a microsoft serer? I think it might go beyond that 300-400 dollar range.
Sorry for kinda going off topic but is it true that Red Hat(company) is valued at $2 billion (USD)?
My experience with their enterprise support was not good. Some of that was truly lame, and some was caused because of the product (RHAS) itself.
I admit I didn’t know about the auditing policy thing. Basically, RH takes the same draconian liberties as Microsoft. Exactly the same.
If you are using Oracle, FreeBSD is not the optimal solution (although it is running perfectly ok) but a lot of people don’t use Oracle. and for this kind of people, FB could be a real alternative.
First off, the author apparently is not using Oracle. His concerns are valid, even if i am not following them. Almost everything here runs Debian.
BUT we don’t use Oracle. If we would, we would shrug our shoulders and pay the bill for RH. Have you seen what basic Oracle for Enterprises costs?
Admittedly, it’s not hugely “obvious that if you go to http://fedora.redhat.com/ then click on “Participate” on the left-hand nav panel then on “Terminology”, you get a very good page explaining what Fedora will be doing w.r.t. packages – see http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/terminology.html
This actually addresses much of the author’s gripes about Fedora, namely that there’s a whole bunch of packages *outside* of Fedora Core that will be available, including “Fedora Extras”, “Fedora Alternatives”, “Third Party” and – mostly importantly – “Fedora Legacy” (although the phrase “adhoc basis” isn’t too reassuring…).
Not really. This still leaves me upgrading or reinstalling the OS 2-3 times a year since updates will be done for the current fedora primarily and not older ones. That alone is reason enough to avoid fedora for me and I suspect many other people.
Seifried, you do realize that a “reinstallation” of Fedora doesn’t take more than changing your yum sources and typing “yum update”, right? No harder than Debian.
-Erwos
The choices Red Hat is giving the author obviously mean that Red Hat doesn’t believe it is making money selling into his slice of the market, and wants to focus on the enterprise market.
That’s fair enough. Red Hat isn’t compelled to sell something they don’t want to sell. (And, it’s the author’s choice not to buy their enterprise package.)
Looking at this from the business owner’s point of view, the important thing is access to the right kind of support. Ditching Red Hat and relying on your in-house admins poses the risk that your admins will jump ship, or run up against problems that stump them. On the flip side, a business might buy Red Hat support and never have a reason to call them.
Are you donating money or time to RH? R&D doesn’t grow on trees. You have to pay your people so they can live. RH is simply trying to stay alive. After all these years they finally show a profit. Damn them. Fedora is simply the free side of RH. What comes out of the Enterprise development will trickle down to Fedora. Trickle down economics for Linux.
Leaders in the industry have to listen to business consultants that say “Increased revenue or decrease cost(people).” RH can never be Microsoft. Microsoft can be RH if they release all thier source code.
RH gives Linux legitimacy.
Another thing. RH success is what is driving Microsoft to spend in excess of $8 billion in R&D. Competition is the driving force behind our representative democracy. Microsoft is going to get better because of RH and the rest of the Linux community.
Why does redhat care again? This customer probably provided virtually $0 to redhat anyways, so if they switch big deal. If you run a business and can’t put up the $$$ for Redhat Enterprise then your not hurting anyone by switching anyways.
People have to put food on the table you know. All the kernel programmers redhat employs do not come cheap.
Se people here arguing about wich distro has Oracle support, wich has support you can call etc. HELLO freebsd is used by some of the biggest companies (yahoo is one). What about debian, read some magazines and se what they test servers with debian/redhat- se also netcrafts list over the most used webserver linux, well RedHat and Debian.
If you know linux, even with openssl attacks, heard of firewall,se-linux,lids,”trused debian” bsd`s security level- every system is as good as YOU make it- host.allow etc?
Seifried, you do realize that a “reinstallation” of Fedora doesn’t take more than changing your yum sources and typing “yum update”, right? No harder than Debian.
If you would read the article, it’s not that the process of upgrading that is the problem, but the result, such as (according to him) broken configuration files, changed behaviour, changed default settings and such.
Just wanted to pass along that Dell will not support Fedorah. So i cant call them for help? Didnt anyway thats not what support meant. It means now that I will not have supported drivers for my Raid card..that means i will not have any updates to Open manage. That means i will not be able to do RAC upgrades…That means that my 15 boxes are will stand sill as far as bug fixes that are certified from Dell. This is bad.
Of course i can pay for enterprise
That was something I hadn’t covered since I buy whiteboxes primarily (i.e. generic PC’s). This is a nasty problem, I can’t see any vendor officially supporting fedora, simply to many changes going on, bleeding edge, etc. For generic hardware though this shouldn’t be as much of an issue. As far as me giving money to redhat I have bought more then a few box sets (a dozen? more? I keep the stickers and throw pretty much everything else out). I’m willing to pay for Linux, however yearly subscriptions, with rather abusive (to the customer) licensing terms make me quite leary of going the redhat enterprise route. As far as reinstall goes what happens when it doesn’t go 100% smoothly on a remote server? Not something I want to chance 2-3 times a year.
“”Not true. The installation gives you major problems if you have a dual monitor system. Both RH 9 and Fedora gave me this problem. “”
“That’s because RedHat simply doesn’t do non-open-source software, and the nVidia drivers are non-free. My setup worked fine, although I do admit I remember non-homogeneous cards having issues at some point (Radeon7200+G200 in my case). But, to be honest, that’s an awfully kludgy solution under any OS.”
That’s fine. I don’t own a single nVidia driver. Simple point is: Installation borked using my video card setup. SuSE and Mandrake, however, handled it fine.
However, I tried Fedora about a month or two ago, and there was a blank space where dual monitor systems could be set up, with essentially a to-do message in there. If they have fixed that, that is good. But both Test 1 Fedora and Red Hat 9 both failed to boot into X after installation because of the dual video cards. However, Fedora is still *beta* software, and hasn’t been released compltely yet.
Cisco VPN’ing through an OpenBSD firewall running PF hangs the machine! Bad Bad Bad.
I don’t see the point. Linux is free, but Linux support is
not, and it will never be. One can choose option that suits
her/him the best. That has allways been the case with Linux.
Author of the article should maybe try AIX, Solaris or HPUX.
DG
I have a few Cisco VPN clients (2K, XP and OS X) running behind my OBSD 3.3 firewall and everything is working great.
Yes, it sounds like your problem is bad, but I don’t see what that has to do with this topic.
Oh, and my OBSD box is also a VPN device with tunnels to Netgear, PIX and OBSD systems – works smoothly.
Back on topic:
We are facing this same question “Should I stay or should I go?”.
We are a small consulting company without the resources to constantly roll our own distribution. We’ve been using 7.3 for quite a while and are concerned about the future lack of patches.
We’d like to get more of our customers using linux, but see support for commercial apps being key. Not really Oracle, although that is what has been mentioned a lot, but Domino is a big one, as is Backup software (Arcserve, BackupExec).
If we are just selling pure OSS solutions (apache web servers, postfix MTAs, etc) then it really doesn’t matter which distro or whether we use BSD or Linux. But with our available time at a premium, we need to decide to focus our skills on one platform, whichever that is.
The costs of sticking with RHEL or going to SuSE Server is something we would need to pitch to a management that is already uncomfortable with our use of Linux – but before it was free and we were given some free reign to concentrate on solutions not on platforms. With SBS2K3 being so cheap now, we are going to have a heck of a time convincing the powers that be that we should stick with Linux even though the entry costs are so much higher.
I’m afraid that pitching distros that don’t have major vendor backing just isn’t going to fly.
Dual monitor support is now there in redhat-config-xfree86, and looks quite nice if you ask me. You have the option of choosing to span monitors or have different desktops entirely.
Note, I don’t speak for Red Hat here in any comments.
This guy is a whiner. If he truly “does 100% of [his] business” using RedHat 9, he should just cough up the money for Advanced Server. RedHat needs to turn a profit, after all.
Does it handle it correctly on installation?
And does it handle more than a dual monitor setup correctly? Let’s say, 3 monitors?
Here is my formula …
If the license cost $345 that is 345/365 and if let say you have 10 servers … that will make … $9.4 daily for all your servers. I bet you would already spend that much upgrading/debugging/worrying for nothing daily !
If you are not making more than $10 from your servers daily then it is time to ask yourself if you are in the right line !
i currently run a server with RH9 and i use APT for updates, can someone explain me why YUM is better? can i still use APT with fedora?
(excuse me but this is the first box i set up now i only use Debian and Gentoo so i’m not so much into the RH machine…)
Steve has a point. There simply isn’t enough support in Linux for commercial software in general. Comercial software that is a nessecity. I love Debian but wine is way too flakey (yes even CrossOffice and WineX) to run apps that I constantly need like Ansoft Designer SV, etc. In fact a great majority of engineering apps out there are not well emmulated under Linux. Has anyone managed to get PADs or Orcad up and running under Linux? How about Autocad? I when I saw running, I mean running well enough to do all the simulations and to handle large projects that you often see. I’m sure server software is the same way.
“I when I saw running”
When I say I mean…. :-p
Unfortunately in the Terms and conditions it states:
If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer’s facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
is this Linux. is this what Linux is going to be.
isnt this practically the same eula that microsoft uses.
“They do not provide native FreeBSD binaries so you have to run Oracle using the Linuxulator, at which point you have to ask yourself why you’re running FreeBSD anyway.”
Linux emulation at FreeBSD is generally known to be faster. I can’t state proof, but, if it works, it’s faster.
Who cares if it’s not certified when it runs and runs faster? Such rules do not apply in this situation when you’re sure about the possibilities.