-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 15 March 2004 09:29 am, John Pettigrew wrote:
In a previous message, "Steven T. Hatton"
wrote: it is also arguable that the proprietary nature of YaST and SaX is the essence to SuSE's business success.
This seems blatantly obvious to me. The single greatest differentiator between the different distros is their different management tools. Thus, YaST is the greatest single thing that characterises SuSE linux. And it is probably that more than anything that keeps most people using SuSE (well, that and laziness!).
What's the difference? :-) You're a Brit from the looks of it, so you may not be familiar with the true guiding principle of the US enunciated in the 18th Century by Benjamin Franklin "Lazyness is the mother of invention". But if you consider Ivan's assertion that support not boxes is where the bucks are, it still make sense to use YaST as a market differentiator. If they have 1000 desktops are they going to go with a harder to manage system just to be different? YaST still makes sense if they are going to need support. Why buy/use a product that is hard to support? And if they do populate their office with chameleons, are they going to call the the guys with the hats to support it? I don't think so. YaST needs a _lot_ of work. Yes you heard me. Sure it is amazing how much it has changed since SuSE 5.1, but they have far too many unfinished good ideas to consider it close to finished. If you dig really deeply, you will realize there are a few 'out the door, ready or nots' in there. But it will always be that way.
John
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAVc1DwX61+IL0QsMRAsXeAJ4oWCQr22c4phe78seuHiqcd6hCDACfUSjq waRQIhxKLQAZFxMUr+8CDC0= =kl83 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----