Peter Farrow wrote: > I used RH9 on all my commercial servers previously to Centos, and I > bought paid copies for each even though I could have just downloaded > it because I wanted to support the cause. However Red Hat then dumped > me high and dry with no further release after RH9 leaving me a huge > bill to upgrade to RHEL for each machine, for support that I had never > used in the past anyway....so Centos was a perfect choice.... > > So I don't see myself as leach moreover I see my self as an astute > business man not paying for something I don't need. I have > contributed to the community and will help with any question posed > that I feel I can answer adequately. This is far more valuable than > paying some commercial organisation driven by share holders selling me > something I don't want or need... > > Aleksandar Milivojevic wrote: > I fall into this category as well. My company purchased RH licenses and support for versions 4.2-9.0 and then I felt we were held hostage to upgrade to RHEL when RH EOL'ed the regular releases. In all that time, I don't think I EVER called RH or used their official support mechanisms since it was just easier/faster to tap the usual community sources. But I felt like we needed the "official support" in case we got bitten in the ass by a problem unsolvable by the community support structure. That never happened. So when the choice of completely switching distros or going to an offshoot like CentOS was before me, I decided that I didn't want to re-learn where everything resides on another distro. Switching over to something in beta like Fedora just wasn't an option. I tried whitebox and then CentOS. Ultimately, I decided that CentOS was a better fit for our organisation. And I haven't looked back. I've been very happy with the CentOS distro and the level of support available. I plan on sending them a fat "thank you" check in the near future. Best regards, C -- Chris Mauritz chrism at imntv.com VP & Chief Technology Officer Independent Music Network http://www.imntv.com