“With the imminent demise of the product known as Red Hat Linux, many people are asking, “Where do I go next?” For IT decision-makers, the question couldn’t come at a worse time. Just as Microsoft is dropping support for their most popular version of Windows, prodding budget-conscious managers to consider Linux on the organization desktop, the best-known Linux distribution is suddenly no longer a part of the solution set at the retail level.” Read the article at NewsForge.
Fedora Core 1 versus the free version of SuSE 9.0
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I guess that Linux is the only viable OS in this particular article eh?
Fedora Core 1 is the worst distro I have ever seen. On my 2 different PCs, it was even more unstable than Windows 98 running only with BETA software. Fedora has darkened my view of Linux, it’s totally horrible. The installation went with fatal error after fatal error and I constantly get fatal errors with Gnome software. Do your self a favor and don’t even bother with this distro. Still it does not make me cast judgement on other Linux distros but If I would have been running a company switching to Fedora or something as horrible as that I would cancel it and stay with Windows, in this case it would have been very expensive to install Fedora, so mutch time got wasted it would easily pay for new WindowsXP licence. Free is not always free unless your are unemployed.
I mean no offence Linux users in many cases Linux is better but that does not apply all the time.
If you’d read the article instead of just the headline blurb, you would have discovered that it’s a comparison between Fedora Core 1 and the free version of Suse 9, for those already committed to or considering migration to Linux. Refs to MSWindows (version not specified) are for comparison only.
If you’re interested in other OS’s, you’ll have to read another article. MacNews has quite a few re migrating from MS to Apple products. Of course, over at Sun you can read all about migrating to JDS on Suse 9 or Solaris. Cray has some pretty cool stuff, too.
I only read the comparisions beetween fedora and Windows as I have yet to try suse, witch I will skip as I am going to try another better rated distro. It’s not fair comparision because Windows is much easier to set up, even through the eyes of a newbie it is ( only Lindows and likes are easier for the newbie), although Windows may take little longer time to install, still almost automatically, nVIDIA drivers can be automatically installed with windows update although not always the newest version they are enough for “office” people and non-gamers. Creative now also has automatic driver delivery system although it does not install all the software and most network cards work out of the box or need no configuration. Yes you get basic install of drivers for hardware in linux but usually it’s just basic drivers so you have to get another drivers again have to remember few console commands and read the manual of them also as it does not install a nice easy GUI that’s easy to use from the beginning. My SB Audigy sounded horrible with Fedora sound drivers, and the graphics and sound is horrible in 3D games compared to their WinXP version. It’s ofcourse mostly fault of the developers of the hardware/drivers but untill it changes I will use Windows primarily and Linux secondary unless I would be going to run a server.
Getting to the console to do easiest things is not for everyone and some people don’t want to read installation manuals for many individual programs that have not been compiled.
Apple’s OS10+ is nice system but it does not serve me good enough, nor does any Linux, then I’m not talking of because of the OS out of the box, rather because of what’s awaylable for it.
I only “spoke” because of how low he rated windows, it appears that the one who wrote this article still thinks Windows is a layer on top of 16bit layer on top of layer as it was in the old days…
It is very funny that I actually have 3 completelly different systems here, one of them a laptop, 2 are running Fedora Core 1 ( no issues whatsoever) and 1 Red Hat Linux 9 with Ximian Desktop 2. The Anaconda installer is one of the best, not to mention that Debian is adopting it too. Since 96 I’ve never seen a “Fatal error” in the anaconda installer and you know what, “Fatal error”s occur in windows, the name “Fatal error” is Windows characteristic, it doesn’t exist in Linux. And I’ve been using Win98 with beta software, even Windows Memphis if by any chance you might know what the heck it is, and it was not stable at all. But that is a different story, I’m not here to bash Windows. I bet you’re amusing yourself trowing flame bate here and trolling.
PLEASE MODE THIS TROLL DOWN -> Microsoft fan. (IP: —.du.vortex.is)
You’re comment is inconsistent and full of lies, and you only try to start a flame war.
One thing that I dislike about Fedora and it’s parent Red Hat (I’ve no idea about Suse as I dislike their proprietary stuff so haven’t tried it) is the fact that it is so huge. Multiple CD installs irk me, especially when I get get all the basic stuff on one CD from FreeBSD.
I think that it would be very nice if the Fedora people could slim down Fedora Core so that a basic install (the personal desktop one perhaps) would be entirely on the first CD. Their preference has always been GNOME, so I’d recomend that they leave the KDE stuff off of this first CD to reduce the duplication of functionality, or release two “CD #1s” one with GNOME and the other with KDE.
It’s not going to happen, but I can dream.
No marc, they are not full of lies, it was my experience of Fedora Core, it appears as if you are a Fedora developer or else your would not get so tense. Apperantly there is some hardware conflict (or I hope so or else I would be mad about those bugs) with Linux and the Hardware on my Machines, as Redhat8, Mandrake9 and Fedora( Fedora was the most unstable of them all) have all been unstable as hell. Now WindowsXP runs perfectly on the same machine so no there is nothing wrong with the hardware there, now if someone would get the same kind of hardware conflict with Windows and his home made machine, many of them would then start judging Windows over all and tell it’s a piece of crap. Now tell me how comes I have only seen windows XP problems on PCs run by either idiots or people with incompatible hardware, Beta drivers and software running and some badly written shell extensions.
You see I don’t judge linux because of it apperantly has some conflicts with my hardware, but most people who get conflict with their home brew machines running windows start judging Windows and thinking it’s unstable just because it’s happening to them. I am going to try Linux again, more than once but no it’s not going to be Fedora. But again I am very tired now so I’m most likely writing something out of context so I will stop for now.
“Fedora Core 1 is the worst distro I have ever seen. On my 2 different PCs, it was even more unstable than Windows 98 running only with BETA software.”
Key phrase there. Worst you have ever seen. But for others like me and many others, it’s the best we’ve ever seen. Your experience does not necessarily mirror that of others.
Erm… I think FC1 is one of the nicest and most polished distros i’ve ever seen. Installation was a breeze and this bluecurve gui is hella nice. my only gripe w/ it is lack of wireless support, but that’s not FC’s fault really… it’s those bastard hardware vendors that don’t support linux just yet. Anyone know how i can get my wireless pci adapter to work under FC1?
> The Anaconda installer is one of the best, not to mention
> that Debian is adopting it too.
Debian is not adopting Anaconda. Progeny has made Anaconda
work with Debian, but Debian will be using their own new
installer for a while. Debian’s goal is not to package the
best software, but package the software that runs on all of
their architectures. Or perhaps Debian does not consider it to
be the best if it does not run on all supported architectures.
Fedora Core 1 is the worst distro I have ever seen. On my 2 different PCs, it was even more unstable than Windows 98 running only with BETA software. Fedora has darkened my view of Linux, it’s totally horrible. The installation went with fatal error after fatal error and I constantly get fatal errors with Gnome software.
Fatal error? Care to elaborate on that a little?
Did you burn the ISO’s on your 52x CDRW at full speed with media that is only 16x grade?
I’ve been running Fedora Core 1 on my main computer for the last 6 or 8 weeks and haven’t had any problems with it. If the distro were as broken as you say it is, then I think I would be experiencing at least one or two of those problems?
That was a pretty pathetic article. Something written under an obvious deadline, to fill space, without much thought or effort really put into it. Honestly, most of the generic user reviews on here are better than that.
I’ve personally had terrible luck installing Fedora Core, especially the latest “stable” release. It wouldn’t even install without some major screwing around, once I get it there Gnome proceeded to die…everytime. SuSE FTP install is a nightmare too, there’s a reason I like Mandrake and heck…Gentoo is easier to install and setup than those two.
Anyways, I think my biggest problem with the article was just that there was no balance, no realistic attempt to LIMIT the bias. It was like an eight year old writing about the various flavor of lima beans. They all suck. Especially the green ones, Windows. Has the guy ever even used a Windows install? He just went off, with nothing to even back himself up. Im sorry, you can put down windows, you can talk shit about it, hell you can hack it for all I care but atLEAST give a valid reason why it sucks and be honestly valid why the other guys suck too.
@Shawn – Linux users with as horrible experience of Windows as I have of Linux do exactly the same thing as I am doing now, but in much larger numbers. They go around with crap like telling WinXP is unstable and uncontrolled, I have not experienced Unstable WinXP that was not caused by the unvise user’s actions or hardware conflict. Even the Gnome terminal has crashed on me, top that.
Gentoo users keep also telling Fedora is crap and should be used by no-one.
Anyone know how i can get my wireless pci adapter to work under FC1?
What card is it? More importantly, what chipset? I have a Netgear MA311 PCI wireless adapater (Prism 2.5 chipset) that I’m using under FC1 and it “just works”. FC1 auto detects and brings up the orinoco_pci module for it.
Ok, I know I’m simply feeding the trolls here, but *someone* has to say something.
The only proprietary stuff in SuSE are their Yast2 & SaX2 utilities. These are not *derived* from any GPLed software, and are essentially front-ends to system configuration files & such, so there’s no reason why they should be GPLed (as is often the expectation of all those who complain about their proprietary nature).
There are of course third party things like the Acrobat reader, but providing you with the source code for those isnt really SuSE’s concern.
And its not like they charge you for it either. The FTP version of SuSE *includes* these two tools. So in a sense you’re actually getting their proprietary stuff for free!
So what reason if any could one possibly give to make claims like: <<<I’ve no idea about Suse as I dislike their proprietary stuff so haven’t tried it>>> … havent even tried it, but that doesnt stop you from are complaining about the proprietary stuff in it?
No that’s not the problem, I even did a media check before install. The installation program also froze few times when trying to re-partition the disc. both automatically and manually.
it’s a linksys model no. WMP54G , that’s all i know
“Ok, I know I’m simply feeding the trolls here”
I’m not trolling. I know that it’s only a few utilities, but they are ones needed for getting the thing installed etc. If I wanted to use proprietary software, I’d use Solaris or Windows. One of the reasons I use the BSDs and to a lesser extent Linux and GNU, is because they are not proprietary.
“havent even tried it, but that doesnt stop you from are complaining about the proprietary stuff in it?”
Nope. As I said, it’s the main reason I haven’t tried it, and an entirely reasonable one. I’m not saying DON’T USE IT CAUSE THEY’RE EVIL!, but simply stating one reason why I personally do not. Cool your jets child. Proprietary things are not my cup of tea, and I’ll not praise a product that is, even in part.
As for the GPL, I don’t like it, but it’s better than nothing.
You have to begin with the supposition that anyone who identifies him/herself as a “Microsoft fan” is a troll. My original comment was directed at Kingston, anyway, because his first comment seemed to indicate he hadn’t read the article yet.
Since RH7.2 redhat has been easier to install than MSWindows. When I upgraded to RH7.3 there was an issue with the AMD Athlon chip in the box, which was easily fixed by adding “noathlon” to Lilo config. Sure I needed help to do this. But when I installed Win2000 on another box it needed a bios flash update before it would install and work. This required a trip to the local shop. Also, RH7.3 has been running without problems ever since, about 3+ years. After 3+ months of non stop problems with Win2000 I finally reformatted and reinstalled Win98SE. Too bad, I did like the pinball game. Not to mention it cost me CN$300+ for the OS and CN$50+ for the bios upgrade!
This article is relevant to me because my two Win98 boxes are starting to show serious symptoms of terminal registry constipation: failure to load SymTray and Explorer on first boot attempts, sometimes requiring 2,3 or more boot attempts to load succesfully; and inability to shutdown cleanly. They are both to the point where clean shutdowns occur about once every 3-4 attempts. The only cure, of course, is reinstalling (I’ve already done as much “registry cleanup” as I can) and I don’t want to bother with reinstalling this crappy MS junk any more. So I am contemplating moving on to Suse.
One thing I noticed in the article was the guy points out that MP3 support, Flash, and “the real” Acrobat are included with SuSE but not Fedora. But doesn’t he realize that those are proprietary pieces of software and the legal issues surrounding their inclusion is in question? Don’t be surprised if all the free download versions of the various distros stop including MP3 support. I’m not sure if Mandrake is paying their royalties to the right people or not but on the 9.2 DVD power pack edition I just bought you get Flash, Acro Reader, Java, and so on.
I downloaded the SuSE 9 FTP ISO installer about a week ago so I could try out SuSE (for the first time ever I believe.) I was so NOT impressed with it. Sorry SuSE fans… just remember, to each his own – so don’t flame me. I couldn’t install it from the boot CD via FTP because I have a router/firewall. (And like the reviewer pointed out, you have to load the NIC module yourself. Not a major hassle but it seems kind of strange and out of place when every other distro auto loads the right module for you.) So I had to plug my computer directly into the cable modem to get the FTP installer to work. (There may be another way? But the advice I got said SuSE’s FTP installer didn’t allow passive FTP installations.) The mirror I went to was increadibly slow so I decided to just download the entire FTP site over night onto my Desktop machine using a passive enabled FTP program and then I would install it from the hard-drive the next day. That worked. (Though it came with it’s own huge set of difficulties but the problem was specific to my setup so I won’t bother to talk about it.)
That initial menu driven part of the install seems out of place. Is that only in the free version? Does the retail version have a complete GUI setup like RedHat, Fedora, Mandrake, etc…? (Please – no disparaging comments about my being too “stupid” to handle SuSE. It has nothing to do with that. I’m just making comparisons and am curious.)
Once YaST starts up, the installer looks about as good as the rest. But I still don’t think it’s as good as RedHat/Fedora or even Mandrake. I didn’t see anything about the SuSE installer that made it seem more “powerful” than the Fedora or Mandrake installs. (Which might justify it being less friendly.)
Once the install was complete and I was able to login, a lot of the things I didn’t like were purely aesthetics. Some people like stripes, some don’t. Some like vanilla, some like chocolate. And so on… saying that Mandrake looks better is totally objective. But I personally prefer the default look of Mandrake to the default look of SuSE (or Fedora). But that’s nothing a theme change won’t fix right?
So what about the tools? Well like the reviewer pointed out, Fedora has GUI tools, but they are kind of sporadic. I agree with him on that point. SuSE has YaST (which I personally don’t like at all) but the idea behind it is good. A cohesive, unified configuration system. RedHat/Fedora should bundle all their config tools together into one location like Mandrake’s Control Center or SuSE’s YaST.
Between SuSE and Fedora, my vote definitely goes to Fedora. But I’ll take Mandrake over either of those. (I’ve yet to check out Libranet which I hear is good.)
it’s a linksys model no. WMP54G , that’s all i know
802.11g support in Linux is almost non existant from what I understand. I have an 802.11g PCMCIA Netgear card that has driver emulation support available (http://www.linuxant.com) but I haven’t been able to make it work. It looks like that same project has support for your card. Give it a shot, maybe it will work for you.
“With the imminent demise of the product known as Red Hat Linux, many people are asking, “Where do I go next?”
Uh, Suse, Debian, Mandrake, JDS. Not enough choices? Is it really that hard for IT professionals?
>Now tell me how comes I have only seen windows XP problems on
>PCs run by either idiots or people with incompatible
>hardware, Beta drivers and software running and some badly
>written shell extensions.
So i guess you are a number 1. Right?
If you take a nick like – Microsoft fan – your lost..
Stay with your Windows OS and do not bother to try another Linux for about 3 years. You might succeed with installing then..
No that’s not the problem, I even did a media check before install. The installation program also froze few times when trying to re-partition the disc. both automatically and manually.
Well I guess we can assume you know your hardware is good. That you have installed Windows on it and it works perfectly. That being the case, you might want to try doing a text mode (menu driven) install just to see if your video card is causing the system to hang up. Is your video card relatively new? Or is it old and obscure?
as long as some one claims “it was my personal experience” then we cannot assume they are lying even if they make outrageous claims.
“Linux killed my Wife!!!!, this is just my personal experience though”
I mean really. there can only be so much variance in experience. windows user is so far out of the norm, he can not be considered credible.
The retail versions do have complete GUI setup. I have to agree with you on the whole menu-driven thing in the free version though … its just poor design.
Depending on the FTP server you choose, it can be painfully slow, so if your local mirror supports it, go with the HTTP install. In addition to the listed mirrors on SuSE’s website, some universities also main linux mirrors (typically with more than one distro), so needless to say, it works a lot faster if from one of these.
negative, when i get driverloader started in FC1 it asks me to insert FC1 CD 3, but once i do, it just gives me an error. it’s a common problem, everybody else i know with my card has the same issue. oh well, i guess wait for Fedora Core 2?
not really an issue just a little annoyance, when booting up FC1 it shows about 8 lines of text then it switches to the graphical set up hiding the details… then it just spontaneously shows the details w/o me clicking ‘show details’, does this happen to anyone else?
negative, when i get driverloader started in FC1 it asks me to insert FC1 CD 3, but once i do, it just gives me an error. it’s a common problem, everybody else i know with my card has the same issue. oh well, i guess wait for Fedora Core 2?
The Add/Remove Programs (redhat-config-packages) utility that comes with FC1 is broken. Sounds like you haven’t downloaded the fixed RPM yet? If not you can get it here (scroll down ot the bottom of the page) – http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/1/i…
not really an issue just a little annoyance, when booting up FC1 it shows about 8 lines of text then it switches to the graphical set up hiding the details… then it just spontaneously shows the details w/o me clicking ‘show details’, does this happen to anyone else?
In order to completely hide the text you have to configure lilo/grub to do a frame buffer boot up. Probably more trouble than it’s worth but if you’re interested you can look here for more info – http://www.ibiblio.org/mdw/HOWTO/BootPrompt-HOWTO-5.html
As far as it switching to details with you asking, that happens on mine as well. I think it’s due to the fact that the boot process is reporting “abnormal” information that it thinks you should know about. On mine it warns me that the floppy.o module can’t be loaded … (because I don’t have a floppy drive in this machine) … and so far I haven’t figured out how to tell Fedora not to probe for my non existent floppy drive. Anyone know?
The retail versions do have complete GUI setup. I have to agree with you on the whole menu-driven thing in the free version though … its just poor design.
Well that’s good to know. I suspected that might be the case. Do you know if the retail version looks the same as the download version? I personally thought it was kind of ugly looking. Just wondering if they use a nicer looking default theme in the retail version? And YaST just didn’t appeal to me really. I personally think Mandrake’s Control Center is nicer. And I’m not some narrow minded, long time Mandrake fanboy set in my ways. I’ve only recently started messing with Mandrake.
Depending on the FTP server you choose, it can be painfully slow, so if your local mirror supports it, go with the HTTP install. In addition to the listed mirrors on SuSE’s website, some universities also main linux mirrors (typically with more than one distro), so needless to say, it works a lot faster if from one of these.
What I ended up doing was just downloading the entire FTP site over night. (Didn’t realize how big it was!
But the next day I had it all on my hard-drive. All 5GB+ of it. So now the install is quite fast. Unfortunately I’m just not impressed with what I’ve seen.
With the imminent demise of the product known as Red Hat Linux, many people are asking, “Where do I go next?”
I agree. RedHat Server isn’t going anywhere and I hope you don’t use RedHat desktop on your servers. If you do you shouldn’t be too worried about using Fedora, its not like you take much care in planning out your network.
Besides, its not like there’s much difference between RedHat server, desktop, or any of the other Linux distros.
Re: Graphical Boot
I prefer what I’ve seen with Gentoo, but anyway Redhat will drop back to the text messages if anything fails. So where you see all those green “OK”s on the right side of the screen there should also be a red “FAILED” message infoming you that there have been problems.
But for RedHat it doesn’t necessarily mean those are real problems, just annoying boot messages possibly requiring minor configuration tweaks to make them go away.
eventually linux will blow up at grab a 20% market share in the years to come…, but when this happens, won’t these companies just become greedy and turn into a MSFT? it’s in the nature of man to lust for power and money and being corrupt. let’s hope not, but i was just wondering, someone will always carry the torch, why does it matter who it is. i dunno, just some thoughts.
No.
The whole point is that that can’t happen. If one company tries to take control, any user can fork the GPL code and distribute and modify it for free.
Linux, or any other GPL’d software, will never be under a corporation’s control. As much as IBM, Novell, Sun, and SCO would each love to, they just can’t.
Neither one is good for the Enterprise for desktop use. If I was to use a Linux distro in the workplace, I would choose either Sun’s or Novell’s desktop solution. These are the only solutions that provide built in integration to a directory service for enterprise security management.
i really don’t understand why people like bluecurve, it looks really horrible. they changed every fucking gnome and kde icon and the round windows decorations are really ugly.
but this is IMHO
This can and will always happen with proprietary software vendors. The worst that can happen with Open Source vendors is, that the company starts acting greedy or unfriendly, but they’ll never be able to make you dependant on their software.
And that’s why I will never support a company like SuSE, which are making their money mainly by adding proprietary (and central!) software to their distribution. For me personally, it would be no win if Microsoft would be replaced by SuSE today, so why should I help them?
I’m still hoping that Novell will see the light.
The only thing that will make those companies not circumvent the rules of Free Software by replacing important parts of a Linux OS with proprietary software, is if we, the community, users and developers make absolutely clear, that we are not motivated to play along nicely with this. And that’s why silly OSS hippies like me will never stop advocating.
Red Hat is one of the few remaining “good ones” and luckily, they kick ass.
Actually, it can happen, and it will. Maybe not Novell, but somebody.
The whole point is that that can’t happen. If one company tries to take control, any user can fork the GPL code and distribute and modify it for free.
So how do you, for example, fork the Xandros File Manager and modify the code?
Sure, Linux the kernel will always be free, but who’s to stop anyone from taking Linux, building their own proprietary crap on top of it, and then selling it? “But”, you say, “that will never happen .. the community won’t stand for it!” But you have to realize that most people who are currently on ‘the dark side’ don’t care about open source, or any of that mess. So, if whatever works the best happens to be proprietary and owned by a corporation, that’s what they will use.
“So, if whatever works the best happens to be proprietary and owned by a corporation, that’s what they will use.”
We can see this beginning now with drivers, XFree drivers specifically. It’s not just installers, package manager front-ends and filemanagers but really basic stuff. In time will there be anything left that is free but the basic kernel (for example) itself?
Sure, it sounds like madness now, but people will try it, and if you’re not careful, it might become the norm.
I’ve installed Fedora Core 1 and SuSE 9 on a variety of harware ranging from a P166 to a laptop, a Athelon XP, and a Compaq Xeon server. They both installed without a hitch and did everything they were supposed to do. I think the main difference is that Fedora Core is targeted as a leading edge distribution which may at times contain untested or unstable components, where as SuSE releases are targeted at production environments where stability is a must.
Paul
Fedora is for me the best distro ever!.
I use Redhat from 5.0 versions, slackware and mandrake too, but Fedora is really good. No problem at all with Fedora, all works OK for me.
I received the LIVE ISO of SuSE 9.0 last week….and it is…at lack of a better description…a nice user experience. However…the raw HORSEPOWER needed to run it is outrageous. (Maybe it’s due to the LIVE ISO…maybe not). My 1000 MHz Athlon w/ 128 MB RAM wasn’t even close to being stout enough. It runs flawlessly on my wife’s 2.5 GHz (Gateway with XP) P4….but she had a fit when she saw Suse rather than her “beloved” XP.
This is a double post of a comment (I also put it up on NewsForge) but I thought I’d share this with all of you since it comes from the source, and I do think this would very much affect someone deciding to do a rollout of SuSE say in a public school as the article mentions. I’d been thinking of it myself for my wife’s work (that or Fedora) but didn’t want to charge them licensing fees to keep costs down (apart from me buying an initial retail box for myself). Because the Yast License is a bit murky, I thought I’d ask their sales to clarify the legalities of this for me. You might find their answer interesting, particularly their claim about the GPL:
Dear (my name),
many thanks for your request.
You wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I imagine you’ve fielded this question before, but I’d really like to
know the answer from the source itself. I’m seriously considering
purchasing a copy of SuSE Linux Pro 9.0 soon. I’ve been using the FTP
version of late and have been very impressed with what I’ve seen. My
question though is regarding redistribution. Once I have purchased it,
I would like to be able to make copies for two situations. One, to give
to friends and coworkers so they can also use and evaluate SuSE’s
distro for themselves (I’m sorry but the ftp install is something only
the most eager can handle).
This is perfectly fine as long as no money changes hands.
And the second situation is that I am occasionally asked to help
somebody on their system for which I charge a fee. It is not my main
source of income by any means (I actually provide Linux-based tech
support for Sun), but is something I do now and then on my own. Soon, I
will likely be installing a Linux distro at my wife’s workplace (ABCD
Child Development Center, which is related to the head start program)
and I will be charging for the service. The question is though is what
distro to install. Fedora may be an option, though I would really like
to be able to install SuSE for them as I feel it would best meet their
needs, with a more intuitive and user friendly interface, as well as
much better multi-lingual support (most of the center’s children and
many of the staff are hispanic). At this point they do really have any
server type needs, mainly client (particularly office type) applications.
I need to know clearly if this is allowed though. I do not want to
charg
e them, or anyone I do these things for, an exhorbirant amount, so I if
it necessary to purchase additional licenses I would likely have to use
a different distro.
>
This is completely & totally illegal. We do offer a reduced price
version of SUSE 9.0 Professional for schools & NPO’s.
Your wife’s school could buy it from our educational reseller:
CCV Software
http://www.ccvsoftware.com
800-541-6078
Anytime you charge someone an installation fee for helping them with
installing SUSE Linux, you must purchase the SUSE OS from our
distributors at the reseller price, and pass that cost on to the client.
Otherwise you’re breaking the GPL, the Yast license, and most state &
local laws for reselling or re-distributing products.
> I have read the Yast license, and I do understand the question of
modifications (something I’m not planning on doing), but please clarify
SuSE’s position on this. As to third party components of the distro,
such as Java, Adobe, RealPlayer, etc., will any of this affect the above?
Thanks for the help you can give.
>
> Regards,
(my signature)
Yours sincerely,
Marissa Krupa (Business-Support )
—
SuSE Inc., Tel (US): 888-8754689 extension 5088
318 Harrison st suite 301 Fax: +1-510-628-3381
Oakland CA 94607 Email: Business-Support
USA WWW: http://www.suse.com
Two points:
1. Complaining about being forced to install software or about the number CD’s in a distribution is a sign of inexperience and unwillingness to read. If you don’t want to install all that software, don’t. Fedora, RedHat, SUSE, etc., all give you the option to install a variety of canned selections, to pick and choose individual selections, or to install everything.
2. You can’t fit a contemporary Linux distribution, XFree86, and Gnome or KDE on one CD. Even Slackware has added a CD, precisely for that reason.
someone who rates patch management, and ease of configuration better in any linux distro than windows, doesn’t deserve to to be taken seriously. It doesn’t do the open source community any good to print such obiously biased reviews.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,NS