RHEL vs SUSE

[mark]

Mike Cronenworth wrote:
> -------- Original Message  -------- Subject: Re: RHEL vs SUSE From: Aaron
> Bliss <abliss at brockport.edu> To: 'General Red Hat Linux discussion list'
> <redhat-list at redhat.com> Date: 09/30/2008 04:27 PM
> 
>> You may want to look at centos instead of fedora.  Binary equivalent of 
>> RedHat ES.  We use RedHat for our most critical boxes, just to be able to 
<snip>
> Unfortunately what I'm working with are people that do not believe in "free"
> versions. Even if I explained that it was a copy of RHEL it is still free
> and therefore inferior in their eyes. Spare me any antidote. :)
> 
> RHEL or SUSE are the only options on the table.
> 
> I would be using Fedora, but everyone knew I was using that and said "No."
> quite readily. Ugh.
> 
Um, I wouldn't use Fedora in production. I'd use centos. When I was looking to
upgrade from RH9 a couple of years ago, at home, on my SOHO, I didn't want to
pay for RHEL, and my impression, along with everyone I spoke to, including my
old acquaintance ESR, felt that it was bleeding edge, not leading edge.

So it was kubunto or SUSE. I wound up with SUSE. If I'd known about CentOS, I'd
have gone that way.

	mark