I've worked with SuSE several years ago and have to say that (at least
back then) their tech support was *exceptional*. In fact, I urged our
company to choose SuSE over RH for that particular reason. Of course,
they choose RH because they had a bigger percentage of the North
American market share.
I can't speak much about RH tech support as I haven't used them often
enough to form a personal opinion, but I hope (keeping my fingers
crossed) that they're responsive when I need them for something
critical. I will say that I've heard numerous horror stories about
their support from several people over the years. If you're going to
pay $10k/year or more for support, they *better* be good.
Regarding software quality (or even support quality)...
Personally, I understand that nothing is perfect; and just because an
app works flawlessly on one system, that doesn't mean it's good for all
environments. HOWEVER, customers should have some options. As it
stands, we spend sometimes hundreds of thousands for software, and if it
doesn't work in our environment or if it doesn't do what the sales rep
and "demo" claims, we're left with a plastic disk and an unused license.
Businesses seem to have no course of action for bad service, bad
software, or snake oil.
I suppose I have a real problem paying out cash to be someone's bug
catcher - and then more for the patches - and then more to resolve
problems that the patches create. It's not just RH either; I've had
LOTS of issues with MS too (big surprise). I will say, though, that
I've paid for support calls to MS and have been reimbursed if the
problem turns out to be a bug in their stuff.
Regards,
Julie A. Felton
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create
the universe. "
--Carl Sagan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Steven.Jones@xxxxxxxxx 3/30/2005 3:56 PM >>>
Personally I am very shocked at RH's quality, it is as bad if not
worse
than MS IMHO. And it doesn't end there.... we also get Support from MS
and as we have Sun servers as well, Sun, then add in HP for tru64
boxes
and RH is by far the worst performer of the lot in terms of release
and
patch quality, and their support, well......
Having used Debian for 8 years, Solaris for 5 and having to use RH for
9
months commercially the difference is tremendous.......
I am seriously looking at Suse, at least with Novell down the road I
have someone to kick locally in NZ. Dell NZ/AP suck for RH support and
RH in the USA just do not cut it either.
8><----
>So you didn't properly test a new release that impacted 100 servers?
>Shame on you...
The computer software world has a lot to learn, while I agree with you
up to a point....In a QA engineering environment you trust the item
you
install as being fit for its purpose, you do not need to test it, its
QA'd. In turn when you release something as QA'd in turn the person
downline should be able to trust it is going to work.
8><-----
>It doesn't matter if you buy a car or software - you need to test
drive
>each one and determine how it's going to react to what you're going
to
>do. If it's important to you, test it first and develop a backout
>plan.
See my comments above.....
Regards
Thing
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
