From djb@redhat.com Thu Mar 26 20:35:04 1998 From: djb@redhat.com To: users@lists.opensuse.org Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] Re: No Linux on Merced Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 21:35:04 +0100 Message-ID: <6fee5o$6jp$1@Galois.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <[S.u.S.E. Linux] Re: No Linux on Merced> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2922513953642272515==" --===============2922513953642272515== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [ I was forwarded the message below with most of the attributions gone. =20 Sorry if this is a day late. ] > > The Red Hat folks came out to Internet World in Los Angeles and visited a= ssorted > > Linux Users Groups. They said support for non-Intel platforms is as much= as > > dead. Not enough of a market to make it worth the development expense= . I I was the one who spoke at that users group. I did *not* say that. I did say that there weren't any really interesting things left to port *to* (basically that right now we had no plans to do official PPC or m68k ports). I never sa= id we'd be dropping Alpha or SPARC support. We have no plans to do that. If we did I'd be feeling really bad about that $1500 I just spent so that one of the glibc developers could have his own SPARC to play with. > Well I dont use redhat anyway, and my need for a Alpha version makes my > opinion more strong due to their latest statements. I was going to use > redhat linux on a alpha based system, however they are starting to tread > very thin ice with me...their commercial interests outweigh their > versatility, its time to can redhat and find a more flexible distributor. Please don't go making decisions like that based on third hand information, at least. Contact us directly if you have questions of this nature. =20 > > also found it odd that in discussing the upcoming versions and install/co= nfig > > features they kept saying "Windows 98 is going to...." Appears the comme= rcial > > world blues are hitting Linux well at least Red Hat. >=20 > With the sucky operational ability of redhat, suse and slackware tend to > get my vote depending on the task at hand...I know they dont do alpha > either but at least they have not taken a stand against the possibility of > it How can you make a claim like this? We currently have the *only* Alpha distribution. We had the first Alpha distribution. We have the only official SPARC distribution. We had the *first* SPARC distribution. How in the world could you possibly brand us like that based on third hand information? Some folks like to brand us as "too commercial" or what have you. The simple fact is that our products are driven by the developers. We don't have folks in marketing telling us what we can and can't do. They have input, but it's the *hackers* in this company that build things like the SPARC distribution. We never decided to do it because we thought it would make us tons of money. Boy would *that* have been stupid. Same goes for the Alpha... --Donnie -- Donnie Barnes http://www.redhat.com/~djb> djb(a)redhat.com = "Bah." Challenge Diversity. Ignore People. Live Life. Use Linux. 879. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _Things You'd NEVER Expect A Southerner To Say_ by Vic Henley: =20 ** I'm using new tin on the roof. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e --===============2922513953642272515==--