[lug] RH 7.2 in stores - and bloody EXPENSIVE!

[DeVerter at robinsonmechanical.com]

Nate Duehr wrote:

>> Saw RH 7.2 in CompUSA at Park Meadows this weekend.  Personal version
>> $70, Professional $200 (!!!).
>>
>> SuSE sitting right next to it was Personal $30, Professional $70.
>>
>> RH isn't getting money from me this go-around, it would seem.  Yikes,
>> ugly price jump and for NOT much value compared to SuSE or Mandrake
>> boxed-sets.
>>

>RH 7.1 was available in three versions (I don't remember the exact names):
>Workstation ($40), Deluxe/Professional ($80), and Server ($180). From
>their less than informative web page (which is really lousy compared to
>the information RH gave out on 7.1), it looks like in 7.2 they combined
>Workstation and Deluxe at $60, leaving some features out. Server is still
>about the same, but is now $200.
>
>I reckon most people who bought the $80 7.1 version will be able to get by
>with the $60 7.2 version: it seems to have about the same features but not
>all the extra stuff on CD's that I, at least, never used.
>
>But another change for the worse is that, previously, the complete set of
>softcover manuals was available for purchase. This time, it doesn't look
>like they're being sold.
>
>There is also a big change in their support. Previously, the updating
>system of RH Network allowed a registered user to use the service for one
>machine indefinitely, with additional systems costing $20 per month. If
>I read their advertising correctly, with 7.2, this has been reduced to one
>month, and then it costs $20/month.
>
>Thus it looks Red Hat's gotten really greedy, and are well on they way to
>being as money-grubbing as a certain other software manufacturer on the
>West coast: I suppose that those stock losses have to be made up some way.
>
>And Nate is right: what you get for what you spend is no bargain at all,
>compared to SuSE or Mandrake.  So it looks like it's time to subscribe to
>KRUD (unsolicited endorsement) .....

>BOF

Certainly, I agree that a rise in price for RH products was unexpected but
I don't think it's fair to throw the label 'really greedy...
money-grubbing' on them.  We all enjoy low-cost and free software as
benefit of using this particular operating system yet we also want Linux to
'win' some war against other OS's.  Personally, I don't think there is war
on the desktop, at least not one I am that interested in.  The desktop is a
users place of free choice in appearance, function and applications.  What
I do want is Linux and Linux providers to be successful.  I make it a point
to buy one major release from Redhat and outside of that I download the
point ISO's when I feel I want to upgrade what I have.  And in between I am
familiar enough with my systems to apply patches when and where I need
them.  For some people, paying $20/month for RH Network to do this for them
is not a bad deal for easy updates to their system.  Though they may be
better served by using a KRUD subscription we need to remember that money
will change hands at some point.  Seeking profit is not evil.

Personally, my dilemma is whether to give my money to Redhat to aid them in
creating a stronger business class server or to pay tummy.com to support my
local Linux service provider.

My opinion is not that a local provider can't provide a rock-solid server
but that big business is more likely to trust a name that they see in the
news, on Wall Street.  I state this because the war I would like to see won
is the reduction of MS servers and the proliferation of Linux and other
open OS servers.  This is where we need to put our concentration so as to
rid the Net of .Net, Passport and Code-Red type attacks that take away my
bandwidth; nasty ideas that remove choice and free speech.  Having a choice
is what we all I have, it's what we all want to keep and we want others to
have that choice - when they finally realize they can choose and not take
whatever came pre-installed.

Redhat would like your $60.  tummy.com would like your $60.  Support your
Linux providers - whoever they may be...and download the rest.

Mark d.