Conversion to Linux

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Ty Unes <riverty at kc.rr.com> wrote:
> I may be incorrect on this but, I have always thought that RedHat started
> their business to sell support for Linux, not necessarily their version of
> Linux. RedHat started with only one distribution, freely downloadable, and
> built their business on selling "official support" for that distribution.
>
> At the time, I was running Slackware servers and will admit that I didn't
> really follow the reasoning behind Redhat's split into Fedora and RHEL. My
> guess was, without really following along, that RedHat decided to garner the
> cool system administration tools that made their distribution "enterprise
> ready" for themselves, and release and support Fedora freely onward.
>
> If this is true, then I don't see why CentOS is in the wrong and/or hurting
> RHEL. Cent is not selling support for their distribution. Although, I've
> been to their website and read a bit. It IS kinda quirky how they refer to
> RedHat as "a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor." Almost like
> they feel like they are stealing.


I think they do that purely out of trademark issues -- specifically
not wanting their brand associated with the unsupported CentOS


-- 
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )