Linux.com reviews Novell’s SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9. It includes many custom performance features that SysAdmins have been hacking in by hand for years, everything is controlled through a GUI, and it supports an amazing array of hardware on three separate platforms.
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 review
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This, and the 9.2 release will temp quite a few people. I didn’t think I would buy Suse 9.2 because I have a 9.1 with updated KDE, etc… but earlier on, I had the chance to read the box-printing of the new 9.2 and ended up buying it… I know it is not a mile-stone or something, but you can really see how Novell/SuSE mean serious business these days — there seemed to be so many nice little touches to the 9.2 that I felt I should try it out. I did have the Live CD already but didn’t get much out of it beyond the eye-candy. I will install it later on, so I can’t comment on it now. Having read this article, I will give the SLES9 a go as well these days…
Hi
That should be tempt =).
(Sorry, felt like wasting this post).
Personally, I don’t know why people seem to worship the very ground below Novell – I see them as just another company out to hitch a ride on the Linux bandwagon – and not that great a company in terms of R & D, and new and innovative technology from what I can see (although when I get Beagle to build, that may change).
Bye,
victor
I don’t like the idea of having to rely on a single vendor for support and update services, but fortunately Novell/SUSE has been reliable in the past.
What an inane statement why else would you select a major distro such as Suse or RedHat but for single vendor support.
Compare that to Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition, which is nearly three times as much and you must pay per-seat licensing for client machines.
The client license which is covered when you buy windows XP/2000 professional for your desktop systems. Not a very non-partisan article.
The client license which is covered when you buy windows XP/2000 professional for your desktop systems. Not a very non-partisan article.
Who cares what the client license is called – you’re still paying for it. Windows XP Pro is *far* from cheap at full price; certainly miles from some desktop flavour of SuSE.
Windows Server 2003 requires CALs — client access licenses. That is above and beyond whatever you run on your desktops. The number of CALs is the number of devices (printers, other servers, workstations/desktops) that are allowed to concurrently connect to W2K3 Server.
Single-vendor support is another way of saying “vendor lock-in.” Sun, IBM, Novell, RH, any service company should be able to provide update and support services for your software. At least, in a perfect world…
-Jem
Holy Jebus! How many times does this have to be explained. Single-vendor support is not another way of saying “vendor lock-in” If you don’t agree with the licensing terms set forth by the company use something else. An application you or your company uses determines what platform you run your application on. Wanna use Exchange? Well be prepared to run Microsoft Windows. Microsoft will support you on it. Wanna run Exchange on Red Hat inside of Wine, well Microsoft isn’t going to support you, however, neither is Red Hat or the Wine project, so you’re on your own.
Single vendor support ensures that you will get a set level of support for a set price for the product or service you are purchasing. It states that the company is willing to be the last stop to solve any problem pertaining to your support contract on the product they sold you in a supported system configuration. That’s what you’re paying for after all. Piece of mind that when something goes wrong with Red Hat, Suse, Oracle, SAP or any other OS or application that Red Hat, Suse, Oracle or SAP will be there to solve your problem according to your said service contract.
Who cares what the client license is called – you’re still paying for it. Windows XP Pro is *far* from cheap at full price; certainly miles from some desktop flavour of SuSE.
The author of the review implies that the server purchase requires seperate CALS it is my understanding this is not the case. Like i stated most CALS would most likely pre-exist becasue of past purchases of XP/2000 Professional by a given organazation. The exception being perhaps terminal server connections which i believe are handle by a different licensing scheme.
If you had really worked on any big clients you would have known that the cost of operating system and other licenses would work out to be larger than suse linux in case of windows. this is a well known fact.
You really are clueless, aren’t you? Even after having it explained to you not once but twice.
Your windows OS license has nothing to do with client access licenses. CLAs are the number of concurrent connections that a windows server will accept. And you have to pay for each one of them individually.
For someone who always advocates Windows and talks of his “professional” experience at Fortune x00 companies, you really are clueless, which just shows that you lack any such experience.
Additionally, besides paying for outlook and exchange, you will also pay on a per-client basis for the number of people accessing the exchange box.
I have always been told that Windows 2000 pro on up comes with a CAL. Have I been told wrong by everyone for the last four years?
Here you will find when you need to buy CAL’s.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensing/calov…
By the way, XP do not includes CAL’s for Windows Server.
Why do people keep nagging about M$? This is an article about SLES9.
If you think Microsoft can beat SLES9 in any area then buy it.
“Slackware or BSD servers are unlikely to be replaced by SUSE and its fancy interface, but Windows Server 2003 has no prayer against this production-quality server OS.”
“SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 is easily the most powerful, comprehensive server OS on the market.”
Jem:
When I saw you getting bashed over and over and over because of that poorly written DragonFly BSD review, I thought that you might would take a little more time and choose your words a little more careful next time you attempt to write a review.
I was wrong.
– Erik
I have always been told that Windows 2000 pro on up comes with a CAL. Have I been told wrong by everyone for the last four years?
ISTR That is right, Windows 2000 Professional comes with a license which allows one remote machine (at a time) to access services on it. If you want the service to be accessed by more than one machine at a time, you need Windows * Server edition with the correct number of CALs.
BTW the price quoted for SLES 9 is per year, also it is possible to a media kit separately USD35 (fairly cheap as media kits go, e.g. compared to say Solaris). What I wonder, is it possible to buy just a media kit with no support (or updates), also if you buy a years subscription, do you then need to buy a media kit too?
You have to buy upgrade cals, you just can’t reuse your old ones, at least this is how it was before