Hi! Am Mittwoch, 8. März 2006 15:49 schrieb Osho GG:
For a serious business user, it is not possible to upgrade the entire distro every year or so. I like to keep my distro and keep it for at least 2-3 years.
You can keep it, just not use supplementary, because supp is not part of the distro but an extra. On the other hand, via YOU you only get security fixes, so even, if one just wants the bugfixes for the KDE version supplied with the distro one is forced to use supp, which IMO should not be the case. Yet I think it is very reasonable for a user to want a bugfix-version, which is what Windows supplies too with its Service-Packs. Although I might get some angry replies, I would like to know why SuSE offers shorter support compared to Windows. At the moment a SuSE user has to buy a new version every two years, if one wants to get security patches. Since SuSE Linux only costs about half of Windows XP, it would be cheaper, if MS's supplied security fixes for four years only, which it does not. The argument that e.g. one does not get an office-suite with it does not change anything, since OpenOffice and alike are also available for Windows, for free. So why is SuSE more expensive for the desktop user than XP? Sven