If I remember correctly, last year when I rated the different Linuxes, I based my decision on a combination of (in no particular order): Ease of installation, availability of program and updates, availability of support by the community and availability of support by the vendor. If I remember, Debian came in first for ease of installation and Suse came in second, but Red Hat beat both of them in availability (being able to find the software on the net) and on community and vendor tech support. Suse and Debian lost their votes because it was difficult finding the product or support on the net easily. I think I'll take the time this week to rate them again. Buck -----Original Message----- From: shrike-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:shrike-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Craig White Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:46 PM To: shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Fedora vs. RHL On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 09:49, Buck wrote: > I am too new to know about Yum and the others you mention. > > Don't try to read in or out anything. I talked to Red Hat Sales. The > man told me that RED HAT will not be offering the demo or basic > up2date service any longer. Up2date on Red Hat is only available with > the purchase of one of the three enterprise products. > > To me, it would make sense that Fedora would have an up2date even if > they charged a minimal charge, say $30-60 / year. I am sure that they > are working on updates and debugging products anyway so it would make > sense that it would cost them very little to make them available by > up2date when they will make them available anyway. > > Of course, only time will tell. ----- I may convert to Debian - depends upon how things look when all is said and done. Craig -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
