Robert P. J. Day
2009-Jun-23 09:57 UTC
[CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if
i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and,
yes, it does make sense.
the scenario is that there is a very large software company in the
area whose only officially supported linux platform is currently suse.
however, they are getting increasing call to have their product run on
red hat.
for most of their clients (who are fairly sizable) who will want
official support, RHEL will be the obvious choice and the software
company will advertise that RHEL is what they support. the SW company
will be happy, the clients will be happy, and red hat will be happy.
on the other hand, if there is the occasional client who is perhaps
not as large, or doesn't have a budget for RHEL, centos will be the
obvious option if they're prepared to do their own support. that
scenario will, i'm guessing, not be that common so red hat has nothing
to worry about it in terms of cutting into their revenue stream in any
significant way.
and, finally, for any client that chooses centos, that will
represent a possible support contract for independent linux
consultants.
sound about right?
rday
--
=======================================================================Robert P.
J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
Sorin Srbu
2009-Jun-23 10:48 UTC
[CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
>-----Original Message----- >From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] OnBehalf>Of Robert P. J. Day >Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:57 AM >To: CentOS discussion list >Subject: [CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this > > > ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if >i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and, >yes, it does make sense. > > the scenario is that there is a very large software company in the >area whose only officially supported linux platform is currently suse. >however, they are getting increasing call to have their product run on >red hat. > > for most of their clients (who are fairly sizable) who will want >official support, RHEL will be the obvious choice and the software >company will advertise that RHEL is what they support. the SW company >will be happy, the clients will be happy, and red hat will be happy. > > on the other hand, if there is the occasional client who is perhaps >not as large, or doesn't have a budget for RHEL, centos will be the >obvious option if they're prepared to do their own support. that >scenario will, i'm guessing, not be that common so red hat has nothing >to worry about it in terms of cutting into their revenue stream in any >significant way. > > and, finally, for any client that chooses centos, that will >represent a possible support contract for independent linux >consultants. > > sound about right?Yes, to me it does. FWIW, we've gone the same way. Us being a "not as large" client. 8-) We've basically been a RHEL-shop mostly until I took over the linux-adminning and had to ask for money to renew the RHEL entitlements. The support that is included there I've used once, and ever since resorted to general web searches, forums and mailing lists like this one and to finally settled for CentOS, except for a handful of RHEL machines we still keep because of software legacy. We're a university department with two sub-departments that I admin. I'm also the entire IT-department(...)=meaning doing our own support. As support goes, I've yet to call RHEL for support again. I'm happy to say that the help and hints I've gotten from members on this list alone is worth a helluva' lot than a cursory look would tell. Very high signal-to-noise ratio that is. -- /Sorin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5106 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090623/0f0feb17/attachment.bin>
Robert Heller
2009-Jun-23 12:16 UTC
[CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
At Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:57:19 -0400 (EDT) CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> wrote:> > > ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if > i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and, > yes, it does make sense. > > the scenario is that there is a very large software company in the > area whose only officially supported linux platform is currently suse. > however, they are getting increasing call to have their product run on > red hat.Just about any product that will run under RHEL will also run under CentOS.> > for most of their clients (who are fairly sizable) who will want > official support, RHEL will be the obvious choice and the software > company will advertise that RHEL is what they support. the SW company > will be happy, the clients will be happy, and red hat will be happy. > > on the other hand, if there is the occasional client who is perhaps > not as large, or doesn't have a budget for RHEL, centos will be the > obvious option if they're prepared to do their own support. that > scenario will, i'm guessing, not be that common so red hat has nothing > to worry about it in terms of cutting into their revenue stream in any > significant way.Right. It is not a matter on 'commonness' either. The big companies will likely opt for official RHEL and be paying RedHat the premium support contract. The smaller companies will be using CentOS.> > and, finally, for any client that chooses centos, that will > represent a possible support contract for independent linux > consultants.Yep.> > sound about right? > > rday > -- > > =======================================================================> Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA > > Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry. > > Web page: http://crashcourse.ca > Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday > Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday > =======================================================================> _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >-- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows heller at deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
Spiro Harvey
2009-Jun-23 21:09 UTC
[CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at crashcourse.ca> wrote:> ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if > i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and, > yes, it does make sense.This also would have been clear had you done some research in advance of your postings here -- not very thorough for someone who appears to have to support himself (and possibly his family) via consultancy work. Ask yourself: What does paying money to Redhat get me? And then go read up on their website. I can save you some of the trouble; in addition to a shiny box with pressed CDs, and phone number to call, a subscription to Redhat support also gets you the Redhat Network (RHN) which is worth the money in itself. In fact, when I last looked at it a couple of years ago, it was superior to Sun's equivalent. FWIW, you may have received a warmer response initially had you come to us with problems, not solutions to perceived problems. It's not that we don't appreciate your position, it's just that your approach was wrong. A bit of research helps you and it saves us rehashing stuff that has been covered before, or obvious to those in the community. -- Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd 021-295-1923 www.knossos.net.nz -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090624/72909f67/attachment.sig>
Robert P. J. Day
2009-Jun-23 21:38 UTC
[CentOS] RHEL, centos and seeing if i now understand this
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Spiro Harvey wrote:> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at crashcourse.ca> wrote: > > ok, given the flurry of responses to my original post, let me see if > > i have a handle on this as i think i've finally figured it out and, > > yes, it does make sense. > > This also would have been clear had you done some research in > advance of your postings here -- not very thorough for someone who > appears to have to support himself (and possibly his family) via > consultancy work. > > Ask yourself: What does paying money to Redhat get me? And then go > read up on their website.the issue was not what support was available from *redhat*, it was trying to clarify what was available from the *centos* community. but thanks for playing. rday -- =======================================================================Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================