The problem isn't the ridiculously short lifetimes of Red Hat's releases, it's that there is currently now NO upgrade path for Red Hat 7.3, 8, and 9 users still out there.
Yeah, it's too bad Red Hat isn't GPL so that thirdparty can support it. Oh, that's right, you don't want Open Source, you want a free ride.
As for Fedora, I won't hit anything even remotely related to Red Hat with YOUR girlfriend's dick anytime soon.
It's too bad you don't have a dick of your own to try Fedora with. It's shaping up to be a good distro, and probably will be the first one to ship a 2.6 kernel.
This is a major difference. Red Hat did not announce EOL for their 7.x and 8 versions until well after they were released. In other words, those installing 7.x when new really did not know when support would end. Many of us ASSuMEd that they would follow historical patterns and continue to receive updates for at least 2 years.
So.... Lindows doesn't put it's name behind Debian so Debian IS nothing.
If you want the Red Hat name, buy RHEL. Even though you are trolling, you should read the reason it doesn't have a Red Hat name. I personally like the fact they changed the name in order for it to be more open.
To shut the people up that would complain if they didn't have a distro to download.
Red Hat believes in Open Source, so they are willing to provide some resources to a project focusing on an Open Source distro. There is a big difference between providing some resources and supporting a bunch of freeloaders that want free beer with updates for life.
Spoken as someone who hasn't even looked at Fedora.
As part of the Fedora beta process, I would say that the Rawhide snapshot that became Fedora Core 1 probably went through more testing than any other. This was helped by creating a yum repository out of Rawhide so testers could easily see when things were updated.
Now, if you actually bothered to install Fedora, you will find that it is just as good as the "Red Hat 10" everyone was expecting it to be.
1. Read some mailing list archives. A lot of companies still only support RH 7.x. Software companies will LIKE having less releases to support. Hell, that is part of RH's reason for RHEL.
2. People that buy RHEL aren't going to be running out and installing random things from the Internet. With that said, if it is open-source, rebuilding isn't that hard.
3. Red Hat has always been the primary (ONLY!) fixer of bugs for their release.
How is supporting it for 13 months "cutting 9 off early" when they stated before it was released it would get a minimum of 12 months of support?
If your RHN subscription runs beyond April 30th, you get a copy of RHEL WS w/RHN until the end of your subscription. But since you have a paid RHN account you've already read the FAQ that tells you that, right?
Even if you are truly silly enough for Slashdot to be your only news source, you still missed it. Red Hat Announces Product EOL Calendar Posted Jan. 27, 2003
Redhat 9 was released March 31 (to RHN subscribers anyway, everyone else April 7).
Yep, they have stepped up to the plate and decided to sell support after RH's EOL. Oh, btw, they also understand how much work it is (prices for support until July 2004):
I'm a perfect example. I have 10+ servers, I don't need hand holding, I have never called Redhat support, but I certainly do appreciate security updates. Am I going to pay $1000 per machine for that? No way!! What's my option, Redhat?
First off, what are you talking about? The only two options close to $1000 are the $799 ES Standard edition (I thought you didn't need support) and the $1499 AS Standard (what does your SOHO do that requires the AS edition?).
If you bother to look, you will find that most of your servers can probably use the $179 basic edition of WS. It includes Apache httpd, Samba, and NFS servers. ES would only be needed for servers that require more (bind, dhcp, vsftpd, etc.) and has a $349 basic edition.
Well, I still see plenty of action on the Fedora lists, so it doesn't look like that's going away. Someone using Fedora at home will probably still recommend RHEL. Fedora is to RHEL as RHL was to RHEL. Either way they aren't going to be 100% the same.
Good word of mouth doesn't pay the bills. 90% of their current Enterprise customers think Red Hat is doing a good job... Don't you think that might contribute some good word of mouth?
This is the same flawed logic that gets posted here in stories about RIAA. "I tell everyone about it and show them how to get it for free, so it should be free to me because I'm doing advertising for them".
Slashdot Mirror
OMFG, where is the "Troll of the year" mod?
It's Red Hat's fault that their Open Source kernel doesn't work with nVidia's close sourced drivers...
Have you actually looked at the EOL policies of Mandrake, SuSE, Debian, Etc.?
So it is Red Hat's fault you didn't read the Errata policy?
Oh, and WTF does this have to do with Windows 98?
This issue is a little more:
4. Re-protect document using the same password as original.
Damn, people will believe everything they read in the comments on Slashdot.
Yeah, it's too bad Red Hat isn't GPL so that third party can support it. Oh, that's right, you don't want Open Source, you want a free ride.
It's too bad you don't have a dick of your own to try Fedora with. It's shaping up to be a good distro, and probably will be the first one to ship a 2.6 kernel.
I don't believe Red Hat has ever developed a software product that isn't GPL, Anaconda included.
Errata policy updates and product end of life Dec. 19, 2002, two months after the release of Red Hat 8 (well after? I think not).
And, Red Hat 7.3 is being supported for 19 months. Not quite your 2 years, but close.
And that product is?
That's what I thought. When RH announced the EOL all products were set to be supported for at least a year.
Even better: The scrollbar issue isn't not a bug, it's a feature.
If you are running Rawhide, you are doing it by choice. Fedora updates are not Rawhide.
Rawhide is the same as it always was, in development. Fedora is the distro, just like Red Hat Linux was. Nothing to see here, move along.
So.... Lindows doesn't put it's name behind Debian so Debian IS nothing.
If you want the Red Hat name, buy RHEL. Even though you are trolling, you should read the reason it doesn't have a Red Hat name. I personally like the fact they changed the name in order for it to be more open.
To shut the people up that would complain if they didn't have a distro to download.
Red Hat believes in Open Source, so they are willing to provide some resources to a project focusing on an Open Source distro. There is a big difference between providing some resources and supporting a bunch of freeloaders that want free beer with updates for life.
Then come and bitch on Slashdot because you can't figure it out...
My God man, did you even bother to look at the Fedora mailing list archives?
The Nvidia questions get asked and answered there at least twice a week.
Spoken as someone who hasn't even looked at Fedora.
As part of the Fedora beta process, I would say that the Rawhide snapshot that became Fedora Core 1 probably went through more testing than any other. This was helped by creating a yum repository out of Rawhide so testers could easily see when things were updated.
Now, if you actually bothered to install Fedora, you will find that it is just as good as the "Red Hat 10" everyone was expecting it to be.
1. Read some mailing list archives. A lot of companies still only support RH 7.x. Software companies will LIKE having less releases to support. Hell, that is part of RH's reason for RHEL.
2. People that buy RHEL aren't going to be running out and installing random things from the Internet. With that said, if it is open-source, rebuilding isn't that hard.
3. Red Hat has always been the primary (ONLY!) fixer of bugs for their release.
OK, since you seem to be having trouble with math, I'll make it simple:
RHL 9: Released March 31, 2003
RHL 9: EOL April 30, 2004
How is supporting it for 13 months "cutting 9 off early" when they stated before it was released it would get a minimum of 12 months of support?
If your RHN subscription runs beyond April 30th, you get a copy of RHEL WS w/RHN until the end of your subscription. But since you have a paid RHN account you've already read the FAQ that tells you that, right?
Even if you are truly silly enough for Slashdot to be your only news source, you still missed it.
Red Hat Announces Product EOL Calendar
Posted Jan. 27, 2003
Redhat 9 was released March 31 (to RHN subscribers anyway, everyone else April 7).
Looks like it is time for your eye exam.
KRUD 8.0 Updates $500.00
KRUD 7.3 Updates $500.00
WTF are you talking about? RHL9's EOL date was announced the day it was released and hasn't changed.
It was all about trademarks. It is also the same reason we have 'Fedora' instead of 'Red Hat Free Beer'.
First off, what are you talking about? The only two options close to $1000 are the $799 ES Standard edition (I thought you didn't need support) and the $1499 AS Standard (what does your SOHO do that requires the AS edition?).
If you bother to look, you will find that most of your servers can probably use the $179 basic edition of WS. It includes Apache httpd, Samba, and NFS servers. ES would only be needed for servers that require more (bind, dhcp, vsftpd, etc.) and has a $349 basic edition.
Well, I still see plenty of action on the Fedora lists, so it doesn't look like that's going away. Someone using Fedora at home will probably still recommend RHEL. Fedora is to RHEL as RHL was to RHEL. Either way they aren't going to be 100% the same.
Good word of mouth doesn't pay the bills. 90% of their current Enterprise customers think Red Hat is doing a good job... Don't you think that might contribute some good word of mouth?
This is the same flawed logic that gets posted here in stories about RIAA. "I tell everyone about it and show them how to get it for free, so it should be free to me because I'm doing advertising for them".
You forgot you were on Slashdot. Red Hat's EOL policy is evil. Mandrake's similar EOL policy isn't discussed.