[TriLUG] Who runs Red Hat and KDE

[karl thiele]

Jon Carnes wrote:

>On Sun, 2003-05-25 at 17:27, karl thiele wrote:
>
>  
>
>>As you are a long time user, I will repeat my questions, what is your 
>>strategy? Do you run RH and KDE?
>>    
>>
>
>I'm one of the old fart Unix guys on this list, so the GUI (or lack of
>GUI) doesn't much matter to me.
>
We have exchanged postings before, actually a couple of years ago. I 
just do not post often.

>
>For corporate use I love Red Hat and focus more on the applications and
>services than on which GUI is installed - but yes I use KDE.  As long as
>the Desktop doesn't get in the way of the corporate apps that my clients
>run then I'm happy (more important - my clients are happy!).  Red Hat
>does a great job there.
>
>Personally I run Mandrake at home (and KDE).  For legal reasons,
>Mandrake is able to provide more built-in functionality for encryption
>and VPN technology than Red Hat. As much as I like that added
>functionality though I still recommend Red Hat for my clients, and
>OpenBSD when they need encryption or VPN technology.
> 
>In my experience Red Hat puts out the most stable and reliable OS on the
>market.  OpenBSD puts out the most secure (and stable) OS for the
>market.
>  
>

I appreciate the answers.

>  
>
>>>And as to the upgrades, well Linux has been a moving target for a long
>>>time! Upgrades and new functionality come out daily. Red Hat has been a
>>>lot of help in that area.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Not my point, irrelevant to what I was asking.
>>    
>>
>
>Then quit complaining about folks having to upgrade. I interpreted that
>as the main point of your complaint: you didn't like the way Red Hat
>integrated KDE into the OS - and only releasing KDE updates with new
>distributions releases.
>
You see it as complaining, I am not whinning either. What is wrong with 
disagreeing with the way Red Hat did something? I actually have more of 
a problem with KDE.org.  I do not mind upgrading, I do it all the time. 
I was asking how others do it in a specific case. KDE...  

>
>  
>
>>>So I should cry for non-techies who have problems keeping up with the
>>>development pace of Linux?  Please! You have got to be kidding me.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>No I am not kidding. Depends on what you want for linux for yourself and 
>>for it's success. I do not epect newbies to run out of kernel.org, but 
>>if they want a new program they should not be dependent on a supplier of 
>>a distribution. 
>>    
>>
>
>First of all, if they are dependent on Red Hat it is because of the
>dependability of the OS and its integrated services and applications.
>Secondly, how many Newbie users do you know that are stopped from
>running an application on Red Hat due to RH's KDE integration? Thirdly,
>how dependable do you think Red Hat would be if they ran the latest KDE
>from CVS (the one that supports your mythical "new program").
>
I would never expect RH to take something from CVS. That is kind of 
putting words in my mouth. 

>
>The current distribution runs *everything* that I ask of it and
>everything that my clients have asked it to do.  If a new app comes into
>use and folks demand it - you can bet that Red Hat will integrate it
>into the distribution.  And if you want to play with it right away (and
>you insist on using Red Hat) then check out Rawhide.  If you can help
>get your "new program" working on Rawhide, then you might just get it
>included in the next stable Red Hat release.
>
>Again, Red Hat's focus is to deliver a stable OS that has many reliable
>applications and services integrated into it. Providing cutting edge
>access to KDE out of CVS is not one of their priorities. 
>
I have not used rawhide and do not know much about it except back in 
2000 I read about it being pre-release type of system. Not seen much on it.

>
>  
>
>>M$ certainly does not pose any obsticles to purchaning 
>>and installing new software on thier OS, one reason for thier success.
>>Do we want Linux to be useable by everyone? Majority of busness types 
>>who use computers are non-techies.
>>    
>>
>
>Red Hat certainly does not pose any obstacles to purchasing and
>installing new software on their OS, and this is one reason for their
>success. On the other hand, M$ throws up barrier after barrier, after
>license, after EULA, after FUD.  You're not going to win any argument in
>a LUG mailing list by using that kind of mis-information!
>
Guess I did not make my point clear, not worth the time to go further. I 
am not trying to argue anything. Just being polite and responding to 
those who have asked a question.

>
>Linux is usable by everyone. A large part of my consulting business is
>migrating businesses off of "proprietary" OS's and applications and over
>to Open Source OS's and applications. My clients love Red Hat! 
>Especially the look and feel of RHL 9.
>
I have run into many surprized folks seeing linux for the first time. 
Maybe this goes against the purity but I also like it when they ask 
about a M$ app, of course most often it is Office. I like to fire up 
crossover and office or IE, WinMedia.. I also usually show them 
openoffice, pull in the same document...

>
>To the non-techies it is all the same to them: M$ or Linux, KDE or Gnome
>- it makes no difference.  Their concentration is on the ability to do
>the job (and on the cost).  Once I show them that Linux works in their
>environment, and with minimal retraining, they are sold.
>
>The key thing *I* have to overcome is M$'s FUD. 
>
It is becomming easier to do, I agree,  you are correct about the FUD.

Good Day,
-karl

>
>Jon Carnes
>
>_______________________________________________
>TriLUG mailing list
>    http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>TriLUG Organizational FAQ:
>    http://www.trilug.org/faq/TriLUG-faq.html
>
>  
>