Paul Tansom wrote:
> I personally don't see Fedora as anything that should be used
> commercially as it is the proving ground for Red Hat, and therefore more
> bleeding edge. I wouldn't stand a chance selling Red Hat to my customer
> base since it would price out higher than Windows given the need to pay
> a subscription to keep it updated. If your subscription ends then you
> scrap your machine since although you can use it as is, you can't get
> security updates (supplied free by MS) and even if you want to add
> something at a level from when your subscription was still valid, you
> can't.
If an organisation needs more than one server then use RHEL for the
critical services like email, file storage and authentication. Beyond this
for lesser servers, depending on the organisation, Fedora 5 or 6 will last
2 or three years and you can fairly easily build your own rpm's (and
rebuild when necessary) for WAN facing services. This compromise is more
marketable.
White Box is RHEL built from Red Hat GPL code and is updated nearly as
soon as when Red Hat release security patches. CentOS is very similar.
You then have the advantage of a consistent user and administrator
interface across your install base with costing flexibility.
Damian
--
Damian Brasher
www.interlinux.co.uk
All mail scanned by clam-av
http://www.clamav.net/
