Slashdot Mirror

A recent post on the fedora-legacy mailing list makes the following points (emphasis added):

[Michael Johnson] talked with the legal counsel at red hat and got the following info.

- the fedora.info people haven't tried to take a number of steps to work it out - they've taken none
- fedora.info was only using f.e.d.o.r.a as an acronym -not as a trademark
- only after the rh trademark filing did fedora.info assert a trademark
- rh had previously informed uva and cornell that rh would not interfere with their continued use of the fedora trademark.
- the fedora has been associated with red hat ever since the shadowman logo was adopted.

My original comment from the Q&A article.

Why isn't Red Hat actively marketing their Professional Workstation Product? Apparently, this is a newly-released offering that hasn't been receiving much attention. It's odd, because it's not even displayed prominently on their site.

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. It's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. I purchased it from my local Microcenter for $99. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

Even more interesting is the fact that Red Hat didn't put much effort into product differentiation with this Professional Workstation product. I opened the box and the CDs were labeled "Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS". Well, only the first CD was labeled as such. The other CDs are identical to the Red Hat Enterprise AS/ES offering and include the same RPMS/SRPMS. SRPMS build cleanly in every test case I tried. So, buying this and using Enterprise 3.0 SRPMS for future updates is entirely possible. The same RHEL patched 2.4.21 kernel is there, too. Nifty.

Another issues that bugged me about the Red Hat Enterprise Linux move was the poor upgrade path. Reinstalling the OS on production servers that are running Red Hat 7.x or 8 ain't pretty. So, my final test with the Professional Workstation was prompted by a half-page paragraph in the manual that came with the box set.... It stated that in-place OS upgrades were only available for Red Hat Enterprise 2.1 -> Red Hat Enterprise 3.0 systems (via "linux update" at boot)...... however, you have the option of booting the install CD with "linux updateany" to relax the restriction "in case your /etc/issue file is damaged". Hmm.... No version-checking, eh? So I performed a test in-place upgrade on an existing Red Hat 8.0-equipped Proliant server...... It totally worked without a hitch!

This, along with the education and bulk-pricing deals leads me to believe that the Red Hat marketing department is working hard to appeal to the people it alienated with its announcements over the past few weeks. But it may not be enough. How can enyone plan for the future when Red Hat seems to be a moving target? We'll see what happens come December 31.

My original comment from the Q&A article.

Why isn't Red Hat actively marketing their Professional Workstation Product? Apparently, this is a newly-released offering that hasn't been receiving much attention. It's odd, because it's not even displayed prominently on their site.

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. It's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. I purchased it from my local Microcenter for $99. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

Even more interesting is the fact that Red Hat didn't put much effort into product differentiation with this Professional Workstation product. I opened the box and the CDs were labeled "Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS". Well, only the first CD was labeled as such. The other CDs are identical to the Red Hat Enterprise AS/ES offering and include the same RPMS/SRPMS. SRPMS build cleanly in every test case I tried. So, buying this and using Enterprise 3.0 SRPMS for future updates is entirely possible. The same RHEL patched 2.4.21 kernel is there, too. Nifty.

Another issues that bugged me about the Red Hat Enterprise Linux move was the poor upgrade path. Reinstalling the OS on production servers that are running Red Hat 7.x or 8 ain't pretty. So, my final test with the Professional Workstation was prompted by a half-page paragraph in the manual that came with the box set.... It stated that in-place OS upgrades were only available for Red Hat Enterprise 2.1 -> Red Hat Enterprise 3.0 systems (via "linux update" at boot)...... however, you have the option of booting the install CD with "linux updateany" to relax the restriction "in case your /etc/issue file is damaged". Hmm.... No version-checking, eh? So I performed a test in-place upgrade on an existing Red Hat 8.0-equipped Proliant server...... It totally worked without a hitch!

This, along with the education and bulk-pricing deals leads me to believe that the Red Hat marketing department is working hard to appeal to the people it alienated with its announcements over the past few weeks. But it may not be enough. How can enyone plan for the future when Red Hat seems to be a moving target? We'll see what happens come December 31.

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here.

About Lunix
Lunix is an operating system. An operating system is the basic set of programs and utilities that make your computer run. Some other common operating systems are Unix (and its variants BSD, AIX, Solaris, HPUX, and o

Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project.

Red Hat's assertion of trademark includes restrictive guidelines on the use of the Fedora name.

Except as provided herein, you may not use "Fedora" or any confusingly similar mark as a trademark for your product, or use "Fedora" in any other manner that might cause confusion in the marketplace, including in advertising, on auction sites, or on software or hardware. Any party wishing to use the Fedora(TM) mark may do so as long as they meet two conditions:

(1) They must only use the Fedora(TM) mark in association with the original Fedora(TM) code found on the Fedora Project website (see http://fedora.redhat.com/) without modification;

(2) If they charge a fee for the CD-ROM or other media on which they deliver the Fedora(TM) code, they warranty the media on which the Fedora(TM) code is delivered, thus ensuring that the recipient receives a usable copy.

I can't believe what some of you are writing...

Does no one notice the "red hat" is a red fedora? HELLO? The choice of name was not arbitrary. No, they could not have just called themselves "pink sunglasses."

I dislike Fedora as much as the next guy (meaning the distro) but geeze...

Take a look here. Scroll down, and there you'll see...wait, what is that...its a Fedora! Its red! Its the same damn hat that's been in the RH logo for years (not the original, mind you, but for a lot longer than 1998 anyway).

Regardless, if the fedora.info project has it trademarked, then they do. But it was NOT an arbitrary choice, people. yeesh.

The last entry on the way back machine doesn't show that TM on the FEDORA Project site.

However, it does appear that they have been using the Fedora name longer than the original Fedora Linux Project, but not longer than Red Hat has been associated with the Fedora.

How can people say BSD is dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. Would you buy software from them? I don't think so! You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her ! I mean just look at this girl ! Doesn't she excite you? I know this little hottie puts me in need of a cold shower! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox . As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little minx . I mean are you telling me you wouldn't like to get your hands on this ass ?!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you could have people queuing up to buy open source products. Could you really refuse to buy a copy of BSD if she told you to? Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin or a gay looking goat ! Don't you wish you could get one of these ? Personally I know I would give my right arm to get this close to such a divine
Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can people say BSD is dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. Would you buy software from them? I don't think so! You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she excite you? I know this little hottie puts me in need of a cold shower! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little minx. I mean are you telling me you wouldn't like to get your hands on this ass?!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you could have people queuing up to buy open source products. Could you really refuse to buy a copy of BSD if she told you to? Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin or a gay looking goat! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Personally I know I would give my right arm to get this close to such a divine beauty!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can people say BSD is dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. Would you buy software from them? I don't think so! You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she excite you? I know this little hottie puts me in need of a cold shower! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little minx. I mean are you telling me you wouldn't like to get your hands on this ass?!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you could have people queuing up to buy open source products. Could you really refuse to buy a copy of BSD if she told you to? Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin or a gay looking goat! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Personally I know I would give my right arm to get this close to such a divine beauty!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can people say BSD is dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. Would you buy software from them? I don't think so! You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her ! I mean just look at this girl ! Doesn't she excite you? I know this little hottie puts me in need of a cold shower! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox . As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little minx . I mean are you telling me you wouldn't like to get your hands on this ass ?!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you could have people queuing up to buy open source products. Could you really refuse to buy a copy of BSD if she told you to? Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin or a gay looking goat ! Don't you wish you could get one of these ? Personally I know I would give my right arm to get this close to such a divine
Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

One word: RHN.

By using RHEL or RHAS we can continue to use Red Hat Network, while the same option won't be available for Fedora. And RHN is much more than just the mere theoretical availability of updates; it's guaranteed access to updates when they're available and allows for automatic or scheduled installs, system grouping and grouped update policies, and so on.

One thing that annoyed the hell out of me in the past was that when I needed updates to patch servers as soon as possible, the ftp servers were all full and the mirrors didn't have the fixes yet etc, which was more than just a little frustrating. With RHN I suddenly had priority access to updates and could get them in no time at all times, and also schedule their install or even install them automatically upon availability. That made a major difference. I need no telephone support, but I cannot live without RHN anymore, so a RHEL or RHAS without support fits this use perfectly.

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. It's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. I purchased it from my local Microcenter for $99. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

Even more interesting is the fact that Red Hat didn't put much effort into product differentiation with this Professional Workstation product. I opened the box and the CDs were labeled "Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS". Well, only the first CD was labeled as such. The other CDs are identical to the Red Hat Enterprise AS/ES offering and include the same RPMS/SRPMS. SRPMS build cleanly in every test case I tried. So, buying this and using Enterprise 3.0 SRPMS for future updates is entirely possible. The same RHEL patched 2.4.21 kernel is there, too. Nifty.

Another issues that bugged me about the Red Hat Enterprise Linux move was the poor upgrade path. Reinstalling the OS on production servers that are running Red Hat 7.x or 8 ain't pretty. So, my final test with the Professional Workstation was prompted by a half-page paragraph in the manual that came with the box set.... It stated that in-place OS upgrades were only available for Red Hat Enterprise 2.1 -> Red Hat Enterprise 3.0 systems (via "linux update" at boot)...... however, you have the option of booting the install CD with "linux updateany" to relax the restriction "in case your /etc/issue file is damaged". Hmm.... No version-checking, eh? So I performed a test in-place upgrade on an existing Red Hat 8.0-equipped Proliant server...... It totally worked without a hitch!

This, along with the education and bulk-pricing deals leads me to believe that the Red Hat marketing department is working hard to appeal to the people it alienated with its announcements over the past few weeks. We'll see what happens come December 31.

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. It's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. I purchased it from my local Microcenter for $99. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

Even more interesting is the fact that Red Hat didn't put much effort into product differentiation with this Professional Workstation product. I opened the box and the CDs were labeled "Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS". Well, only the first CD was labeled as such. The other CDs are identical to the Red Hat Enterprise AS/ES offering and include the same RPMS/SRPMS. SRPMS build cleanly in every test case I tried. So, buying this and using Enterprise 3.0 SRPMS for future updates is entirely possible. The same RHEL patched 2.4.21 kernel is there, too. Nifty.

Another issues that bugged me about the Red Hat Enterprise Linux move was the poor upgrade path. Reinstalling the OS on production servers that are running Red Hat 7.x or 8 ain't pretty. So, my final test with the Professional Workstation was prompted by a half-page paragraph in the manual that came with the box set.... It stated that in-place OS upgrades were only available for Red Hat Enterprise 2.1 -> Red Hat Enterprise 3.0 systems (via "linux update" at boot)...... however, you have the option of booting the install CD with "linux updateany" to relax the restriction "in case your /etc/issue file is damaged". Hmm.... No version-checking, eh? So I performed a test in-place upgrade on an existing Red Hat 8.0-equipped Proliant server...... It totally worked without a hitch!

This, along with the education and bulk-pricing deals leads me to believe that the Red Hat marketing department is working hard to appeal to the people it alienated with its announcements over the past few weeks. We'll see what happens come December 31.

I keep seeing people say that 'Redhat Linux' is not free. That is not entirely true.

Basically, what Redhat has done is forked their distribution, providing what they call 'Redhat Enterprise' as a 'stable' fully supported (and thus with a dollar cost associated with it) distribution targeted at businesses, and 'Fedora', a 'development' platform for use by open source contributors and linux enthusiasts (a free downloadable distribution). Items that Redhat sees as valuable for the 'Enterprise' will be rolled from Fedora into the Redhat Enterprise product.

Redhat is pushing their 'Enterprise' product as being gold-plated and stable for businesses, and by definition, conversely that 'Fedora' is a toy. That is probably not very accurate an assumption - and serves to put more money in Red Hat's bank account more than anything else. Of course, the money will be coming from businesses - so who cares?

Currently I am running Redhat 8.1 and Slackware on my machines. I am seriously considering going 100% Slackware if Fedora turns into a seriously uncompatable fork - compared to other stable distributions. On the other hand, Fedora might free developers to build some really neat things into the distribution for desktop home users - such as industrial strength WineX out of the box for Gamers etc... It might just be the shot in the arm that linux on the desktop needs to gain momentum. I guess what I am saying is 'we shall see'.

According to here Fedora will neither be tested, maintained, nor distributed from Redhat.

I don't suppose you read the Fedora Objectives page. I quote:


1. Create a complete general-purpose operating system with capabilities equivalent to competing operating systems, built for and by a community...


I think the people involved with Fedora would include Windows XP & Apple Mac OS X in their list of competing OSes although that's not explicit.


6. Emphasize usability and a "just works" philosophy in selecting default configuration and designing features.


Again, the Fedora project actually does appear to be putting an emphasis on usability and the concept of working out of the box.

I believe my comment makes sense as it stands.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux is sold through a one-year subscription and it does have a licensing agreement. But before you mention the "p"-word ("proprietary"), understand that the code is open and protected by the GPL license. It's not proprietary. We're licensing the services, not the software. The source code files can be downloaded by anyone, and you still have the right to use the software after the license and services expire.

• your licensing policy, as summarized in the RHEL FAQ:

  Except for a few components provided by third parties (for example, Java) all the code in Red Hat products is open source and licensed under the GPL (or a similar license, such as the LGPL). So you always have free access to the source code. In fact you can download it from our FTP servers at any time. However, Red Hat does not provide free access to the binaries of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and these, combined with an annual subscription to Red Hat Network, access to upgrades, and a selected support services, are the components that Red Hat bundles into each Red Hat Enterprise Linux solution. Since every Red Hat Enterprise Linux product includes support for the system on which it is installed, Red Hat supplies the products with a per-system usage/support subscription. This simple model ensures that systems which useRed Hat Enterprise Linux are able to access the maintenance, services and product upgrades to which they are entitled. Of course, as mentioned before, this has no impact on your access to the Red Hat Enterprise Linux source code.

• appears to violate the GNU General Public License:

  2. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

I find this completely unacceptable and can assure everybody that I consider none of the code I contributed to glibc (which is quite a lot) to be as part of the GNU project and so a major part of what Stallman claims credit for is simply going away.

3) What happens to my paid RHN subscription if it expires after April 30, 2004, (the end-of-life date for Red Hat Linux 9)?
Customers whose paid RHN subscription expires after April 30 will receive a complimentary evaluation ISO and channel access for Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS for the remainder of their subscription. These customers also have the opportunity to take advantage of the 50% discount currently available on migrations to Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES or WS.

4) When will the complimentary evaluation copy of Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS be available?
The channel will be opened March 1, 2004. Users whose account expires after April 30, 2004 will be able to access the complimentary evaluation of Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS from March 1, 2004 until the end of their subscription.

I guess you could download the source code and see

In those Bugzilla discussions I mentioned, I've seen a lot of highly-informed, to-the-point correspondence from people just like me -- we have no problems patching driver code, recompiling kernels, parsing debugger output &etc., and I'd hazard a guess that the issues we raise and the bugs we help troubleshoot in the field (the ones that make it past your inhouse QA folks) are part of the reason that RedHat has been so rock-solid. This translates directly to the stability of the server-class packages you sell to our cousins in the corporate trenches. The targetting of Fedora at bleeding-edge enthusiasts and hobbyist installations means that these bugs (remember, these are the ones that made it past the in-house RH team -- have a look at the tg3 driver issues in bug 69920 for one example) likely won't be caught before they bite your paying server customers. Do you foresee a decrease in stability for RHEL as a result? If not, where do you envision getting your field/beta testing done for the server components of your OS? Isn't it possible that, while taken by itself the "free" version of RH was an operating loss, when viewed in context of overall product line it was actually part of the reason you started operating "in the black"?

Why is the AMD64 version of RHEL WS 3.0 so expensive? With a disproportionate number of x86-64 owners likely to be Linux users, the rapid growth of x86-64 sales, and given that the engineering effort to port to x86-64 had to have been a helluva lot less than what it took to port to the niche-market Intel Itanium, I don't understand Red Hat's pricing decision, especially given the much more modest 64-bit premiums charged by other Linux vendors. Since Microsoft has dropped the ball on x86-64 support in Windows (release version at some ambiguous date well into 2004), why isn't Red Hat using this as an opportunity to rack up sales?

For personal use, I'm anxiously awaiting the first beta .iso set of Fedora for x86-64. Obviously I want to recommend RHEL to business users though.

Why is the AMD64 version of RHEL WS 3.0 so expensive? With a disproportionate number of x86-64 owners likely to be Linux users, the rapid growth of x86-64 sales, and given that the engineering effort to port to x86-64 had to have been a helluva lot less than what it took to port to the niche-market Intel Itanium, I don't understand Red Hat's pricing decision, especially given the much more modest 64-bit premiums charged by other Linux vendors. Since Microsoft has dropped the ball on x86-64 support in Windows (release version at some ambiguous date well into 2004), why isn't Red Hat using this as an opportunity to rack up sales?

For personal use, I'm anxiously awaiting the first beta .iso set of Fedora for x86-64. Obviously I want to recommend RHEL to business users though.

Does Redhat or the Fedora project plan on setting up guidelines for minimizing the chaos involved with using multiple 3rd-party repositories...

That's called Fedora Extras. It's just getting started.

The problem is, a supported product which was once there now is not.

Capt. Buzzcut, I can see the veins bulging on your forehead because someone has had the audacity to discontinue the free version of their product. RedHat is still there, it's just not free anymore. See?

Why isn't Red Hat actively marketing their Professional Workstation Product?

I wish I could mod this up. I 100% agree. My only wish would be that it was Red Hat Professional without the Workstation part and included all RPMS. Additionally, it appears the key difference from RHEW other than price is that updates are only available for a year through RHN. If this is RHEW why can't they just put the RPMS they've already built into the RHN network channel as well? Oh well.

The 'Other Products' link at the bottom of their software page will lead to the Professional Workstation page.

Additionally, RHPW fills the obvious gaping hole in this matrix between free and ouch. The biggest problem being the difference in 'Update lifetime'. 5 years or 2-3 months. Doesn't really seem reasonable.

I guess my question would be: This whole thing seems like a PR screw up. Is any one in the Red Hat marketing department going to get the axe?

Why has your company misled customers for so long?
Read on...

We were all sold here on the praises of how great your Redhat Linux product was going to be. How it was going to revolutionize the way we did business and bought our software. How it was the ultimate alterative to very expensive, proprietary solutions. And how it was so much more secure and carefully tested and patched and on how top-notch the support we would receive would be.

Then gradually...hmm...the prices started to rise. Version upgrades came more quickly. Quality support responses were becoming fewer and took days or even weeks longer than before.

Suddenly, we were told that certain (relatively new) versions of our Redhat Linux were no longer going to be supported at all! We must upgrade or die from lack of security patches.

Then finally, *no* version of this product that we had faith in would be supported. In fact, it would no longer be a product at all! Suddenly, its no good any more. Nobody wants to know from it. Your company's public website now begins to describe it as a " general purpose environment with no specific focus" and that it possesed " limited maturity/quality controls ."

Huh?!? Can you imagine trying to pitch a product to your customers that its own manufacturer describes as having "limited maturity/quality controls"?? I don't remember it being described this way to me way when Redhat was urging me to buy more subscriptions!

Ok, what can I do? You now seem to be giving me two alternatives. One is a "community" initaitive that you say " is for developers and early high-tech enthusiasts using Linux in non-critical computing environments". Hmm...non-critical, no keeping things running and keeping my job is pretty critical, so that ones out.

The other one seems to be a list of several variations of all the same stuff I used to have in Redhat Linux, only some of them are missing some parts. And these options seem to cost even more money. There doesn't seem to a long-term option to just download bugfixes/patches without paying you some kind of addtional fee. All of your overall changes seem to have a single goal: to make the same product more expensive, thereby generating more revenue.

As I said, why have you misled customers for so long?

Why has your company misled customers for so long?
Read on...

We were all sold here on the praises of how great your Redhat Linux product was going to be. How it was going to revolutionize the way we did business and bought our software. How it was the ultimate alterative to very expensive, proprietary solutions. And how it was so much more secure and carefully tested and patched and on how top-notch the support we would receive would be.

Then gradually...hmm...the prices started to rise. Version upgrades came more quickly. Quality support responses were becoming fewer and took days or even weeks longer than before.

Suddenly, we were told that certain (relatively new) versions of our Redhat Linux were no longer going to be supported at all! We must upgrade or die from lack of security patches.

Then finally, *no* version of this product that we had faith in would be supported. In fact, it would no longer be a product at all! Suddenly, its no good any more. Nobody wants to know from it. Your company's public website now begins to describe it as a " general purpose environment with no specific focus" and that it possesed " limited maturity/quality controls ."

Huh?!? Can you imagine trying to pitch a product to your customers that its own manufacturer describes as having "limited maturity/quality controls"?? I don't remember it being described this way to me way when Redhat was urging me to buy more subscriptions!

Ok, what can I do? You now seem to be giving me two alternatives. One is a "community" initaitive that you say " is for developers and early high-tech enthusiasts using Linux in non-critical computing environments". Hmm...non-critical, no keeping things running and keeping my job is pretty critical, so that ones out.

The other one seems to be a list of several variations of all the same stuff I used to have in Redhat Linux, only some of them are missing some parts. And these options seem to cost even more money. There doesn't seem to a long-term option to just download bugfixes/patches without paying you some kind of addtional fee. All of your overall changes seem to have a single goal: to make the same product more expensive, thereby generating more revenue.

As I said, why have you misled customers for so long?

Why has your company misled customers for so long?
Read on...

We were all sold here on the praises of how great your Redhat Linux product was going to be. How it was going to revolutionize the way we did business and bought our software. How it was the ultimate alterative to very expensive, proprietary solutions. And how it was so much more secure and carefully tested and patched and on how top-notch the support we would receive would be.

Then gradually...hmm...the prices started to rise. Version upgrades came more quickly. Quality support responses were becoming fewer and took days or even weeks longer than before.

Suddenly, we were told that certain (relatively new) versions of our Redhat Linux were no longer going to be supported at all! We must upgrade or die from lack of security patches.

Then finally, *no* version of this product that we had faith in would be supported. In fact, it would no longer be a product at all! Suddenly, its no good any more. Nobody wants to know from it. Your company's public website now begins to describe it as a " general purpose environment with no specific focus" and that it possesed " limited maturity/quality controls ."

Huh?!? Can you imagine trying to pitch a product to your customers that its own manufacturer describes as having "limited maturity/quality controls"?? I don't remember it being described this way to me way when Redhat was urging me to buy more subscriptions!

Ok, what can I do? You now seem to be giving me two alternatives. One is a "community" initaitive that you say " is for developers and early high-tech enthusiasts using Linux in non-critical computing environments". Hmm...non-critical, no keeping things running and keeping my job is pretty critical, so that ones out.

The other one seems to be a list of several variations of all the same stuff I used to have in Redhat Linux, only some of them are missing some parts. And these options seem to cost even more money. There doesn't seem to a long-term option to just download bugfixes/patches without paying you some kind of addtional fee. All of your overall changes seem to have a single goal: to make the same product more expensive, thereby generating more revenue.

As I said, why have you misled customers for so long?

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. According to the various Red Hat lists, it's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... I recall someone on the Red Hat list mentioning that he received RH WS CDs when he bought the product. Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

However, a Google cache of the page shows the relationship of Professional Workstation to the rest of the RHEL line.

The Red Hat Professional Workstation isn't available online, or through Red Hat, but through a few selected retail channels. Buy.com has it for $82.57, which includes one year of up2date service. According to the various Red Hat lists, it's the same product as Red Hat Enterprise Workstation. Here's the RPM list.

It looks like this product was a last-minute addition.... I recall someone on the Red Hat list mentioning that he received RH WS CDs when he bought the product. Apparently, it's not crippled or relabeled.

Given my previous rants on Slashdot about the Red Hat shadiness, this looks like a good option.

Here's an even better question:

Considering the following:
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES Basic edition
1.) Is comprised of well over 95% GPL/Free software that redhat did not write
2.) Comes with no tech support other than the user's forums
3.) Can only be installed on ONE computer, and has a non-transferable licence
4.) Comes with no warranty
5.) Costs $349 per year, per computer

What am I paying for?

What is laughable is that Eugenia still had those old RPM dependency hell issues. You would have thought they would have been solved by now, or that somebody would have created a decent desktop based on a base distribution with decent package management tools.

She was trying to install third party Shrike RPM (Shrike == RH9). Packages built for different distributions should not be expected to work, and generally will not work, no matter whether you're running Debian, Gentoo or FC.

Fedora with some very nice package management (this is old page, Fedora up2date doesn't use RHN, but instead supports both apt and yum repositories) tools.

I make a living by saving these people from hours and hours of servicing Microsoft patches, updates and malware.

If you didn't make money doing this, would you still do it? RedHat didn't make enough money providing updates for their desktop distribution, so they stopped doing it. Seems rational to me.

There's no sign up process for Fedora because it's no longer required, not because it's going away. What has changed is who's responsible for providing updates. It's now not RedHat's sole responsiblity, it's a community process just like Debian.

You need to take a deep breath, relax, and read the information at http://fedora.redhat.com

Mr Szulik,

Is nalin@redhat.com a real person or just a clever mail alias pointing to /dev/null? I ask because Nalin owns many bugs in Bugzilla, but few (if any) appear to ever get fixed.

Dear Mr. Szulik,

I believe that the popularity of Red Hat with business users early on was the promise of a workstation/server that was much cheaper than Windows, combined with decent support not available for the other Linuxes and BSDs. Now, I see that the 'basic edition' of Enterprise Linux Workstation is $179 and for Enterprise Server is $349. All that for a distro without even web-based support, or a printed manual? While I still believe that RH is a superior OS distro to Windows, I think the price increases and limited support are hampering adoption by businesses, and some that embraced RH earlier might be feeling a bit betrayed. Do you care to comment on this?

A lot of people here don't seem to have noticed that Red Hat still have a desktop product (RHEL WS 3) and if they did would find the pricing intimidating. Sure $179 of x86 isn't much, but it's a lot more than $0! Moreover $792 for AMD64 is out of the reach of non-corporate purchasers. (If my next home box in a year or so is an AMD64 will I be forced to use a different distro for the first time ever?)

So onto the question:

Could there be room for a level between Fedora (free, good, etc.) and the RHEL WS 3 pricing: ie. the RHEL WS 3 product, but with updates only via 3rd-party yum mirrors or some such?

They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.

This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.

I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.

Which one is right for you ?

They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.

This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.

I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.

Which one is right for you ?

They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.

This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.

I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.

Which one is right for you ?

They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.

This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.

I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.

Which one is right for you ?

They have made up their minds. They are offering an Enterprise Solution with their Enterprise Linux line of products.

This line of products contains Operating Systems that are well suited for high end server use, small and mid-range server use OR, lo' and behold, Desktop use.

I guess too many people are reading too much in their annoncement to drop the RedHat Linux product line for their RedHat Enterprise Linux Line. Also, notice that nice graphic on their front page.

Which one is right for you ?

Fedora is called Fedora so that Red Hat can keep iron-fisted control over its trademarks.

I saw a copy of Red Hat Professional Workstation at CompUSA this weekend. It's not listed in bugzilla, and the web page all but says, "Don't buy this." What is RHPW, and who should buy it?

I've noticed quite a few questions that have been answered and re-answered again and again on the Fedora mailing lists and the Fedora Project website. Please read the Fedora FAQ before asking Szulik a question thats been answered a thousand times already by people who actually know what the hell is going on with Fedora.

Red Hat still sells desktop-oriented Linux, in the form of Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS [Workstation].

Jay (=

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here.

About Lunix
Lunix is an operating system. An operating system is the basic set of programs and utilities that make your computer run. Some other common operating systems are Unix (and its variants BSD, AIX, Solaris, HPUX, and o

One without sufficient programming skills is still in a position to help by filing a bug report.

I certainly have.