[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ubuntu and CDDs

On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 03:57:54PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 12:57:23PM +0200, Miguel A. Ar?valo wrote:
> > > El mar, 28-09-2004 a las 11:50 +0200, Sergio Talens-Oliag escribi?:
> > > > El Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:35:40AM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill va escriure:
> > Clearly, not everyone agrees with you. People like regular time-based
> > releases. People (especially companies) like *predictable* release
> > cycles. The fact Debian can't say when the next release will be is
> > worse than the fact that it might be 3+ years away in the eyes of many
> > people.
> Actually, I disagree. Companies like *stable* OS', hardware, and
> support contracts that ensure liability. Most of the ones I've worked
> at didn't care about release schedules for their internal operations
> work.

I'm basing that statement almost entirely off of statesments by Bdale
(CTO of Linux for HP) in describing resistance to his push for Debian
within HP. I've heard him say on a couple of occassions that the
predictability, rather than the frequency, was a killer for Debian in
the circle he runs in. I'm absolutely willing to admit that YMMV --
and probably will.

> Big companies care about stability in their operations, not the latest
> and greatest Gnome, in fact most of them wouldn't even use any
> graphical X installation.

I'm not at all surprised that what people want out of a desktop Linux
distribution is different than what they want out of a server
distributions. I suspect that stuck with 4 year old GUI libraries and
web browsers interferes with being able to get work done more than
being stuck on 3 year old Solaris on which you running a custom built
application -- for example.

But at the end of the day, I'm simply more interested in desktop Linux
for me and the people I know than I am in high performance server
Linux for big companies. The people I know very much appreciate seeing
an improvement in their OS on a regular basis and without sacrificing
stability. :)

The point of course, was that someobody wants these things, not that
Fortune 500 companies do.


Benjamin Mako Hill

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: