stability of fedora for server application?

[WipeOut]

shane c branch wrote:

> I currently have RH9 running on one of my servers at work. Now that 
> the RH project has ended and Fedora has taken its place, I'm 
> considering either upgrading or reinstalling that box with Fedora.
>
> However, I'm concerned if Fedora will be stable enough for the server. 
> I would move to RHEL, but my dept isn't too keen on spending money at 
> this  point, which also has me considering going to Debian, as it has 
> a reputation for stability.
>
> Any opinions appreciated.

I have been using FC1 on a server for a while now and its been rock 
solid.. We can't afford RHEL, the server versions are just out of our 
price range as a small startup company where money is a big issue.. If 
we were an enterprise maybe it would not be such a big deal to pay.. I 
think thats what RH intended was for SME's to use FC and large companies 
to use RHEL..

I do think that the RHEL desktop is way overpriced since I can get 
Windows for far less.. (not that I will ever go back to Windows as long 
as there is an alternative which Fedora is!)

I also looked into Debian, as well as Gentoo and a few others and came 
back to Fedora because it is still very easy to manage and I didn't have 
to go through a learning curve, also since it is based on RH many apps 
are compatible without having to do any hacking to make them work.. Also 
YUM is great, do a minimum install and then install just the apps you 
want using YUM..

Specifically on Debian I found the packages VERY old and many suggested 
to me that I run the development version to get newer packages, this 
kind of defeats the point of having a stable and development version if 
the stable version is so out dated that many would rather run the 
unstable version.. (No flames please this is my opinions and experience)

At then end of the day the choice is your but I would say FC is 
certainly an option for servers..

Later.