[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <200311041622.hA4GMugv014025@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu)
Subject: Fw: Red Hat Linux end-of-life update and transition planning
On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 10:25:55 EST, Eric Bowser said:
> Fedora seems like it will be unstable/difficult to patch/*insert
> whatever here* in an intentional effort to extract money from users for
> the enterprise version. I don't debate the business sense behind their
> decisions, but they have made a viable OS available for years, gotten
> everybody addicted, and then replaced it with your choice of headaches,
> or a pay-to-play product. Don't drug dealers do that?
On the other hand, commercial OS's tend to be *really* static, without
much innovation - look at IBM's z/OS, there's still remnants in there
from OS/360 in 1964. People complain that Solaris hasn't picked up
<whatever> that other vendors have been doing for years.
That's the price of stability.
You should be glad that RedHat is willing to finance a distro where
the Next Big Thing can develop, even if it isn't their official product.
It's quite possibly the best thing that could have happened to
*both* RedHat and Fedora lines - now there's no longer the big
stability/innovation conflict that having one product line trying
to do both had.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20031104/50c9a076/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists