RedHat vs. the rest of Linux

Robert Sweet rsweet at garagenetworks.net
Fri Jun 14 14:21:00 CDT 2002


On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 09:08:40AM -0400, Collins, Kevin beat on the keyboard:
> Hi All,
> 
> Some time back I read a reply to someone in this group from (I think) Matt
> Domsch (excuse me if I have that wrong) stating that Dell supports Linux on
> all of their servers.
> 
> The first thing that I want to do is remind everyone here that I am a newbie
> to Linux.  The distribution that I have used the most is RedHat (both 7.2
> and 7.3) - primarily because Dell sells it on their servers and on some
> workstations.  I figured, I'll need to know RedHat if I'm going to buy Dells
> with Linux, so I started down that path first.
> 
> The reason I bring that up is because I laid my hands on SuSE Linux 8.0
> Professional at Best Buy earlier in the week and have been trying it out as
> a Desktop replacement for Windows at home.  I must say in the week that I
> have used SuSE that I am impressed by it.  Probably 10 times more than I am
> with RedHat - especially with YaST2 and the ability to add software in the
> form of RPMs to a base install.  All of this may be a "newbie" mistake, but
> I feel that I can gain better results from using SuSE than I can from
> RedHat.
> 
> So the big question here is:  Why does Dell bundle RedHat?  I can understand
> the economics behind the scenes (if that's what it is) and am OK with that.
> But if Dell supports "Linux" and not "just RedHat Linux", then why is RedHat
> the only option for bundling with their hardware?  Is there some fundamental
> reason that the Dell Engineers decided to use RedHat above any other
> distribution?
> 
> The other (probably more important) question is: Is there anything that
> anyone in this group whose experience tells them that SuSE is a bad way to
> go compared to RedHat?  Should I use RedHat because it is fundamentally
> better than SuSE?  Should I go down the RedHat path and be done with it?  If
> so, WHY?
> 
> I don't want to start a flame war, I'm just curious about why RedHat is so
> dominant and whether SuSE would be a bad choice for me from a corporate
> server standpoint.  I have so little experience, that I feel I need guidance
> from those who have traveled the road several miles more than I have.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Kevin L. Collins, MCSE
> Systems Manager
> Nesbitt Engineering, Inc.
> 
> (859) 233-3111 ext 24
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
> Linux-PowerEdge at dell.com
> http://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
> Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq or search the list archives at http://lists.us.dell.com/htdig/
I have run Slackware, Redhat, Caldera, and SuSE. I started
with Slackware, then ran Redhat and Caldera, I then dropped
Caldera since at the time it was based on Redhat. Ran Redhat
till they increased the pricing. So I decided to give SuSE a
try (5.x series). I have never regretted it. SuSE to me is a
much better product. Unfortunately Redhat is slowly becoming
the "Microsoft" of Linux. I don't see any problems running
SuSE vs. Redhat in a business environment. You need to
evaluate what exactly you will be running on this box. I
guess Oracle has chosed Redhat as their Linux of choice for
support, so things like that need to be considered. It will
be interesting to see how United Linux will fair in the
future. I will continue to use SuSE.
-- 
                              _   
 _ __   _____      _____  ___| |_ 
| '__| / __\ \ /\ / / _ \/ _ \ __| -o)
| | _  \__ \\ V  V /  __/  __/ |_  /\\ 
|_|(_) |___/ \_/\_/ \___|\___|\__|_\_v
rsweet at garagenetworks.net
"unix soit qui mal y pense."




More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list