[PLUG] dumping unix for linux

[Auke Kok]

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> alan wrote:
>> But there are free versions that give you exactly the same thing as the
>> supported version without the support. (i.e. Centos.)
> 
> CentOS is "binary compatible" with RHEL but it is absolutely, positively
> not "exactly the same thing" as RHEL. I've used CentOS, and I like it
> for what it is ... if you like boring, stable Linux platforms, it's
> fine, but then, so is Debian "Sarge", and if all goes well, "Etch" in
> December. :)
>> It may cost you time and work, but the GPL does keep you from getting
>> locked in to a specific vendor.
>>
>> You did remember to save all those Source RPMS?
> 
> Why bother to save the source RPMs? Red Hat posts them on their FTP
> server, as required by the GPL. :)
> 
> When you come right down to it, a Linux distro is composed of:
> 
> 1. A Linux kernel,
> 2. The GNU utilities and tool chain, compilers, editors, etc.,
> 3. Networking and associated tools,
> 4. An X windows implementation,
> 5. A package management system, and
> 6. Office/desktop, workstation and server applications.
> 
> Layered on top of this will be a community, a corporation, or both.
> 
> Along these lines, one of the things that never ceases to amaze me is
> that businesses run production servers and desktops on Fedora rather
> than CentOS. In other words, they believe a community distro "blessed by
> Red Hat" is better in some sense than something that's binary compatible
> with RHEL.

I'd say that that's the *last* thing that they look at, and most people will choose a 
distro based on things like hearsay and personal experience. I doubt that anyone will 
pick CentOS of Fedora because "it is closer to what RHEL is", because that is a very 
poor argument to make, and doesn't say anything about whether you like it or not, and why.

Cheers,

Auke