Re: debian vs redhat -fair
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
However, Woody (which was released analogous to RH9) was just as rock
solid stable as Sarge. I agree completely that we must compare
relatively equal systems, but doing so does not change the outcome:
Debian Stable lives up to its name.
I was using RH in 2000-2001, and couldn't figure out why the company
stayed with it. I put Debian on my own system, and wow-ed them with
dselect and apt. Oh well, Management was inflexible. And, that
company is long gone. Maybe there's a connection there....
Curt-
On Thursday 06 April 2006 05:10, Alvin Oga wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > To be fair, RH9 was released 03/31/2003, while Sarge was released
> > 06/06/2005. I would say that a difference of 2+ years would be
> > quite significant in terms of hardware support and general
> > application stability.
>
> bingo ...
>
> some folks like to compare oranges to dogs ... vs a fair comparison
> of like systems from the same era ..
>
> 2 yrs is way way too long ... it'd be like comparing p4-1G vs p4-3G
> w/ hyperthread or something similar and yet vastly different
>
> c ya
> alvin
- --
September 11th, 2001
The proudest day for gun control and central
planning advocates in American history
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBRDUayC9Y35yItIgBAQJgkQf+JqBNIzwKEmpVm8iZCPLzd08zAVMOMMgt
FMgiqYut1SAVIJLuek0tx6XYL2q1k1mpmk7kn8WjEhprYrH2IBRP9p/MhyYoaId1
I/a5im+4coBcVj0GKlNokbeWT7XnWm23HfGYi32F7ONcdrQ3B5pzXaXtjxEC2bsz
xi2BbgXHCe301tCV/1mYgc6v6iaCp3MVH2pEHZyGw5Kr2NLxk2o+EngCRfNHxy/c
MDKGHfW+6ysQ6NlEur9UmlQOimyLas2RFmwMwSPAnZTBsqyQGs9kzX43WrLDmO4Q
b50evbj+FIIu0yBYl9xUISZBFKXcoqC/lvpxxKYA57FSkBfpne2mXg==
=lCrh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: