[Novalug] RedHat Desktop Subscription Model

[David A. Cafaro]

Nope, if you want to study it or test it out you use their trial  
program:

http://www.redhat.com/solutions/industries/developer/products/basic.html

And yes, you have to pay for paid support, pretty much universal in  
most industries :-).  Their model happens to be a yearly support  
contract, while others do per instance charge, or some do multi-year  
contracts.

You can also give CentOS a try and have the same feel and software as  
RHEL for the most part, but not the guarantees or corporate support.

Cheers,
David



On Mar 14, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Ken Kauffman wrote:

> So -- if an individual wants to study a new technology and certify  
> on it for career advancement, as well as take advantage of paid  
> support and updates, you have no choice but to pay every year?
>
> Ken
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:11 AM, David A. Cafaro <dac at cafaro.net>  
> wrote:
>
> On Mar 14, 2008, at 10:47 AM, ethan at 757.org wrote:
> >
> > Solaris would be another fine choice as well.
>
> Well, it would, if we didn't need/prefer to use Linux in our
> particular case.
>
> >
> > I don't hate Redhat, and I've come to start using CentOS 5 *a lot*
> > as well as RHEL ... but it's always been kid of odd to me that the
> > company itself made so much money, and these non-tech people got so
> > filthy rich on the backs of the open source community. It's always
> > been this delimma in my mind with regards to Redhat. I know they
> > employ tech people and this and that.
>
> I would have a problem with Red Hat if it wasn't for the fact that
> they release all their OS code back to the community to use (That's
> why CentOS exists).  Shoot, they even make it easy and release src
> rpms.  Though they are required to release source code, they aren't
> required to package it up nice a pretty.  They also provide a lot of
> support in bug fixes for Linux in general and hire a lot of the
> people who make that code we all love an use.  They also support
> programs like legal defense for opensource developers, opensource
> users, and other things that help the broader community.  Overall,
> though not perfect, they've been good community members in my view.
> Oh and many of the first employees for Red Hat were very much tech
> people, and did pretty well money wise.
>
> >
> > I also know that when I worked for a research lab, when it was time
> > to renew the Redhat desktop liceses (I'd say we had 800+), the
> > inital quote from Redhat was higher than our Microsoft desktop
> > licenses. And one of my coworkers said, "That's kind of ironic,
> > because Microsoft actually wrote the software they sell."
>
> Doesn't really surprise me about the cost thing.  Again, it's usually
> not an apples to apples comparison.  Did the MS desktop license
> include free upgrades to later software?  Did it include support and
> licenses for MS Office?  It's hard to just take things kinds of thing
> and say they do or don't equal.  With out details, it's hard to say.
> Maybe the MS deal was better?  But then did you need linux desktops?
> And are they happy enough with Windows stability for their work?
> Shoot was Linux stable for their work?  One size doesn't fit all etc..
>
> As for the MS code writing stuff, well, there are many things that
> could be said about that ;-)...
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
> David A. Cafaro <dac at cafaro.net>
> Cafaro's Ramblings:  www.cafaro.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Novalug mailing list
> Novalug at calypso.tux.org
> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/novalug
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Novalug mailing list
> Novalug at calypso.tux.org
> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/novalug

David A. Cafaro <dac at cafaro.net>
Cafaro's Ramblings:  www.cafaro.net