Peter Farrow wrote:
> I used RH9 on all my commercial servers previously to Centos, and I
> bought paid copies for each even though I could have just downloaded
> it because I wanted to support the cause. However Red Hat then dumped
> me high and dry with no further release after RH9 leaving me a huge
> bill to upgrade to RHEL for each machine, for support that I had never
> used in the past anyway....so Centos was a perfect choice....
>
> So I don't see myself as leach moreover I see my self as an astute
> business man not paying for something I don't need. I have
> contributed to the community and will help with any question posed
> that I feel I can answer adequately. This is far more valuable than
> paying some commercial organisation driven by share holders selling me
> something I don't want or need...
>
> Aleksandar Milivojevic wrote:
>
I fall into this category as well. My company purchased RH licenses and
support for versions 4.2-9.0 and then I felt we were held hostage to
upgrade to RHEL when RH EOL'ed the regular releases. In all that time,
I don't think I EVER called RH or used their official support mechanisms
since it was just easier/faster to tap the usual community sources. But
I felt like we needed the "official support" in case we got bitten in
the ass by a problem unsolvable by the community support structure.
That never happened. So when the choice of completely switching distros
or going to an offshoot like CentOS was before me, I decided that I
didn't want to re-learn where everything resides on another distro.
Switching over to something in beta like Fedora just wasn't an option.
I tried whitebox and then CentOS. Ultimately, I decided that CentOS was
a better fit for our organisation. And I haven't looked back. I've
been very happy with the CentOS distro and the level of support
available. I plan on sending them a fat "thank you" check in the near
future.
Best regards,
C
--
Chris Mauritz
chrism@xxxxxxxxx
VP & Chief Technology Officer
Independent Music Network
http://www.imntv.com
