Which distro for the enterprise now?

Am 02. Feb, 2004 schw=E4tzte Derek Neighbors so:

> That is my *point*! With Debian I have freedom. I get the software and =
I
> get to CHOOSE my support vendor. With RHEL I have to pay for the support
> in order to get the software. At which point if I changed support vendor=
s
> I would be DOUBLE paying for support. I hope you can understand the
> difference.

What's to prevent the other support vendor from making the software
unavailable?

> I am not saying paid support is bad. I am saying tying the support fee t=
o
> the license is a limit in choice in a strong way. It is a way that Red
> Hat can lock people into buying their support as it becomes non cost
> prohibitive to do otherwise.

I think it's not a problem with Red Hat, but other vendors might decide to
provide only binary packages for tools like apache and mozilla since the
licenses don't prevent that.

As for licensing, RH is trying to make sure the number of machines supporte=
d
is the same as the number for which support has been paid. RH wants a way t=
o
prevent my purchasing 10 support contracts, then servicing 1000 machines.

Do you have examples from other companies on how to manage that? I think
it's an important part of the discussion.

ciao,

der.hans
--=20
#  https://www.LuftHans.com/    http://www.AZOTO.org/
#  C'est la Net - der.hans