Slashdot Mirror
Dell Calls For Red Hat To Lower Prices
VaultX points to an article on CNET (linked below), writing "According to Dell, Red Hat needs to lower pricing. 'We believe Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, for the small and medium-sized business market, was out of the price range of these customers.' With Dell's strong presence in the Linux server market, Red Hat may want to listen."
here's one of them. It's a personal account of working inside of the "dell beast." Written by the site maintainer of www.amdzone.com it was written only a few days ago. Most of the thoughts reflect my sentiment and experience with dell..
here it is
John Allen Mohammed
They could always add support for something like Debian, which is known for its outstanding stability in spite of its lack of big commercial backing. Dell could then offer graduated support options, including, no support. I'm sure lots of businesses that would jump at the opportunity to get a server with Linux preinstalled (that way they are sure all hardware is working and configured out of the box) even if they have no need of a full support package.
"Oh, you don't carry Red Hat? Well we were kinda looking to get a Linux box. Thanks, we'll be talking to IBM."
Sorry but Red Hat IS Linux to many businesses. Thats why Sun directs its challenges to Red Hat, thats why MS talks about Red Hat when they do the TCO arguments, Red Hat is the most visible company selling a Linux system. If you want to aim big, and Dell does, if your not going to carry Red Hat, there's no point in carrying Linux at all.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
A better comparison would be with something like SUSE Enterprise server - their direct competition.
The price difference, as well as the number of options available is an eye-opener.
RHEL ES has two versions, priced at $350 and $800, depending on the support level. W2K3 SBS (Small Business Server) is available at different prices from different vendors, but is typically around $500. All prices in US dollars. The prices are quite similar. If you need support for more than installation and basic configuration, Windows 2003 is actually cheaper.
If small businesses find Windows easier to setup and maintain, then it could be worthwhile. I'm not able to personally confirm this one way or the other, but various people I know who have configured both Linux and Windows 2003 as servers claim that Windows is easier to configure and tune for performance.
Perhaps Dell simply means that for the market they are selling into and the price they are charging, there is a better product available from Microsoft. It's hard to see how Red Hat could compete on price; they really aren't charging a huge amount. For businesses that can't afford a full time server administrator and don't have any Linux expertise, it is quite possible that Windows just plain is a better choice.
Going off topic, Red Hat's website has the Ghandi quote that Slashdot loves: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." A year ago, Microsoft was fighting Red Hat. Now they are laughing at Red Hat. Linux still has a chance, but this battle definitely isn't going the way that Red Hat planned.
I hate to say it, but with IBM preferring Novell and SLES, I think Red Hat has lost.
Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
--Proverbs 9:7
Thse are all the reasons not to use it for a server.
To my brother poster: Gentoo on the server? If you were my employee I'd have you fired. And no, I don't want to hear about building then distributing binary packages.
The only truly free options for servers is Debian stable. Long release cycle, vast package repostiories, security backports so your servers don't break, seamless upgrades in place. Everything Fedora is not. Use it or at least something actually meant to be stable, be it Whitebox, SuSE, etc.
When are people going to realize the best support you can have is hiring someone actually qualified to do the damn job in the first place. Just for fun I like to apply for jobs and get interviews to see how the market is doing in my area. I always get the "How important is it that you make what you currently do?" line. My favorite part is when other employees interview and are so proud of their projects that are minor at best.
When you hire the best that is what you get. When you hire the cheapest that is what you get. Quality isn't free. I guess when all the software development jobs are in India/China we might start to understand there is more to being an excellent employee/partner than just understanding how to program. Or maybe not! Either way I'm on my way out of programming asap.
I've seen HP fly out a new motherboard from Toronto, then the two they kept in the city were found problematic.
I've seen Microsoft fly up people to help with Exchange servers.
I've been on the phone with top level Sun techs within five minutes of the event.
I do, however, work for a very big customer. I don't even pretend that anyone a tenth the size would get this support.