Red Hat 9 is Great!!! - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Red Hat 9 is Great!!!

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3
    Here's RedHat 8.0 and 9.0 ISOs on a decent server.

    http://linux.cem.itesm.mx/isos/

  2. #12
    Senior Member cheesegoduk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    224
    The offical release for non redhat network paying users is this coming Monday(April7th) Although it has been lecked to a number of sites.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    634
    I'm still under RedHat 7.3, it works fine. I think I will try RedHat 9 soon, but I don't understand why they have released a major new version only some few months after the 8 version. Did they got too many problems with it (I didn't heard of such a thing), or did they want to make their marketing strategy more agressive?

    KC
    Life is boring. Play NetHack... --more--

  4. #14
    I don't understand why they have released a major new version only some few months after the 8 version.
    I dunno. However, it seems Linux distros tend to get new versions a lot quicker than it's propritary conterparts, which is a good thing I suppose. However, I have never tried RedHat9, but Slackware 9 is sweet

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    30
    eWeek has an article explaining RH's new distribution release strategy. Read it at eWeek (link is to the article).

    Basically it sounds like they are splitting distribution releases between "Enterprise" (Less frequent releases, more stable) and "General Purpose" (more traditional frequent releases, more new features, less stable).

    Sounds good to me. I'm looking forward to taking a peek at 9.0.

  6. #16
    Just a Virtualized Geek MrLinus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    7,324
    Originally posted here by amazingzarkon
    eWeek has an article explaining RH's new distribution release strategy. Read it at eWeek (link is to the article).

    Basically it sounds like they are splitting distribution releases between "Enterprise" (Less frequent releases, more stable) and "General Purpose" (more traditional frequent releases, more new features, less stable).

    Sounds good to me. I'm looking forward to taking a peek at 9.0.
    I don't know if that's a good strategy. When you think about it what do we remember the most about OSes? All their good features or the bad? Microsoft still has a reputation of "plug'n'pray" even though they've improved it vastly. The reputation of not being able to have an OS last longer than 24 hours is one that carries from Win95.

    Releasing more often with less stability won't help the market, especially if the people that end up with the Linux are new users. They're going to think that Linux sucks and go back to MS. I dunno. IMHO, I don't think it's a good strategy.
    Goodbye, Mittens (1992-2008). My pillow will be cold without your purring beside my head
    Extra! Extra! Get your FREE copy of Insight Newsletter||MsMittens' HomePage

  7. #17
    AO Security for Non-Geeks tonybradley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    830
    Releasing more often with less stability won't help the market, especially if the people that end up with the Linux are new users. They're going to think that Linux sucks and go back to MS. I dunno. IMHO, I don't think it's a good strategy.
    It seems their decisions are profit and marketing driven more than practical or logical.

    I have heard a couple different rumors regarding the quick release of RH9. One was that they wanted the version number to match or exceed the competition. If SuSE has a a 10.0 or Mandrake has an 11.0 then Redhat would be perceived as being behind by having 8.0 even if 8.0 was released after the other two.

    I also think that Microsoft does a lot of the same. Do they make upgrades to the kernel itself and fundamentally alter the operating system with each release? Sometimes. But it seems that they could just release updates, patches, hotfixes and service packs to keep the operating system current, stable and secure without renaming and repackaging it and displacing many of their customers.

    But, when the gas runs out of the marketing campaign for the previous version, what else is left to do but rename and repackage it so you have something new to blow your horn about?

    I have to agree that its not a good strategy and seems counter to the goal of marketing. Many companies are still using Windows NT because they were waiting for Windows 2000 to be proven and stable before investing in it. Before they could get there, they came out with XP and now .NET / 2003. Most companies don't like to bet the farm on new, unproven technology and Microsoft shoots themselves in the foot by coming out with new versions faster than the old one can establish itself.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    452
    You've got a great point there tonybradley, microsoft does release their operating systems too quickly. By the time they got a good or half way decent thing going, it's no longer supported, or out of date. Seems to me their just renaming and dressing up the same old crap. Microsoft makes releases of new software, just to sell and make bling bling ($$$$), where and this is my own opinion, in the *nix community, I don't believe that their releases have anything to do much in the way of marketing and version number garbage, I feel that when a new release is out, it's to satisfy the needs/wants of the community of users. The *nix community I feel, is a group that is highly technical and prefers to be on the cutting edge of technology, we demand more stability, more reliablity, more flexablility and security from our operating systems. I guess the reason alot of that is, is because we have to depend on these operating systems, our jobs depend on them and many people lives are affected by them without their even knowing. Wow, ok, this thread has drifted a little. Let's please get back to the topic of how cool Red Hat 9 is, : ) I'm still working on getting those ISO's for those interested.
    Like this post? Visit PuRe\'s Information Technology Community. We\'ve also got some kick ass Technology Forums. Shop for books and dvds on LiveWebShop.com

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    452
    As promised, here is a link to the Red Hat 9 ISO's:

    ftp://65.41.9.136/pub/Mp3s/RedHat9/

    I'll keep these ISO's on the server for two days exactly, after that, you should be able to get your free downloads from Red Hat or a mirror with big bandwidth. My bandwidth is pretty decent, just hope it doesn't get bogged down with this post. Oh well. : )

    PuRe
    Like this post? Visit PuRe\'s Information Technology Community. We\'ve also got some kick ass Technology Forums. Shop for books and dvds on LiveWebShop.com

  10. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    64
    I agree with tony, they should stop the version number thing and start assigning codenames instead

    I don't think they care much about the needs/wants of the community of *nix users these days as PuReExcTacy says, now is about marketing and going mainstream

    New versions are less stable than the ones released when linux was not so popular

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •