[plug] Linux Home vs Linux Server.?

[Bernd Felsche]

"James Elliott" <James.Elliott at wn.com.au> writes:

>Another question, although I can premise that your answer might be:
>"It is a matter of personal choice", is this .....

>When I was using Linux, I cut my teeth on Red Hat, only because it
>was easy to set up and I had a friend who uses Red Hat to help me.
>After completing a course on Linux I moved to Debian and was happy
>with it.  Now I am thinking of getting a second machine and setting
>up Linux on it, is Debian still a popular choice among IT
>professionals and developers?  I am rusty, but used to be quite
>proficient at Debian Linux.

Is SuSE a four-letter word now? :-)

Businesses may insist on "traditional support" for the operating
systems they use; especially on what they believe are
"mission-critical" servers, appliances and desktops.

It's hard to go past SuSE because it has good, multi-level support
from both Novell and many of those who sell server hardware such as
IBM. What makes it different is that total support for systems can
be provided by any third party for all but proprietary components.
With Linux that means the core operating system, most utilities and
many practical applications.

Businesses are sometimes astonished that the "traditional" support
for Linux on servers isn't really any cheaper than for entirely
proprietary systems.

But Linux guys have to eat as well!

The big savings in IT costs come when businesses decide to change to
Linux desktops.
-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
 X   against HTML mail     | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \  and postings          | to help me spread!