Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
> > Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of
> > linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is
> > symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of
> > its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use
> > :-))
That is the reason I am here. I have paid that bastard gates every year I
have owned an ibm compatible. Add to that computer crashing on a
regular basis and I should have done it years ago when I had my atari. I
became interested in Linux via a mag over here called
apcmag(Australia) which did a review of all the Linux dists and
summarised that for the home user Redhat was the sys to use Caldera
for business( I think) but it stated that the system which would
eventually be the best and stay free is Debian so here I am. I have been
trying to get this bugger to run for months and I still haven't got it right
but I will hang in there until I do. The whole philosophy of Linux and
Debian sits very well with me, especially taking into account the rich
getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
> I would say you are wrong. I think most people use Debian because of its
> technical superiority, not for political reasons.......................
I got frustrated once trying to get Debian Linux running and loaded
Redhat 5.2 but realised I had to learn another set of rules so reinstalled
Debian. Being a newbie who doesn't particularly want to be a
programmer I will be a happier chappie as installation and updates get
easier to install although they are pretty easy(I must be missing
something). On reflection my reasoning is basically political, I don't
want the poor to be further impoverished. So I desperately want Debian
to remain successful. I look forward to the day when my kids easily
install and use linux from a Debian distribution. They are 9 and 12 I
believe/hope that next year they will be able to do it with just a little
assistance from me.
>
> >
> > OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one
> > hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is
> > going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs
> > programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably
> > although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg
> > rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers
> > strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux
> > for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you?
Yep, sort of, service prices seem too high to have much altruistic
thinking in there.
> I would not be surprised that if Red Hat ever went public, Microsoft would
> buy them the next day. There would be very little that the management of
> Red Hat could do about it. The stock is on the free market ... Microsoft
> just buys it all.
If that happened it would be a disaster. Somehow they would find a
wasy to turn open source into products we would have to buy.
> > On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that
> > the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best
> > distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst.
yep.
> Whatever ... it is about the code, screw the psycho-socio babble.
I can't "screw the psycho-socio babble". I live in an area close to
people too poor to buy win95 let alone 98 who at their best may be able
to afford a 486 with 8 to 32 of ram and probably a 520 meg disk.
> > Yet most linux users opt for redhat.
Yep, but as Debian keeps going it will eat into redhat. At the moment
lots of people bought a pocketbook with redhat5.2 on it for $14.95 from
apcmag. Won't be long before it will be debian as the choice on those
cheap booklets with the disks..
> Because it is the only distribution that many have heard of. If you look
> at the big news stories, they talk about Red Hat, Caldera, and S.u.S.E.
> Why? because there is no money in it for them to talk about Debian. No PR
> person to stroke them, whisper sweet nothings in their ear and maybe buy
> them a round of golf at a fancy club. You have to pay to get press unless
> you really do something that is noteworthy.
Correct, but I am certain Debian will do something noteworthy, good and
useful and thereby get the press.
> > I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing
> > policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have
> > professional
Naah. Word of mouth , word of net will get there in the end. Or do you
want to become a millionaire through Debian?
> I fail to see how having more users will make Debian better. It WOULD make
> it easier to "sell" to IT management if they have heard of it.
AFAIK user in programmer talk = idiot. If that is so having us
users/idiots puttiing in our 2 cents worth with the programmers paying
attention to what we say and need to know then implementing changes
to suit eventuallly Debian will be the system of choice. On reading what
I have written it could look as if I am angry, I am not. Just stating I
guess more a mission statement than an objective assessment. I hope
this is useful for reflection if nothing else. hopefully not flame wars.
cheers,
Mike
PS Written on my win95 sytem as I have buggerred up my linux
permissions, therefore can't connect to the net via Linux.
Reply to: