[lug] New here, Favorite Distros?

[bgiles at coyotesong.com]

>> (... There are good reasons to deploy stable lifecycle systems, but
>> they're often applied over-broadly.)
>
> My gut tells me the "good reasons" are willingness to rely on low
> quality software.  Or maybe lack of imagination.

What's with the 'tude?

The organizations that need years-long stable lifecycles are making
informed business decisions.  They have their own contractual obligations,
it may literally cost millions of dollars to upgrade training materials
and retrain employees, the hardware may be deployed, etc.  (for
"deployed", think of things like ATM machines or DVD kiosks.)

Mid-range managers have more flexibility, but it's still a business
decision and most companies will legitimately choose to be more
conservative than us techies would prefer.