Re: (clug-talk)

[S�bastien Taylor]

Like I mentioned before, SuSE will give you everything you need out of the box, no kernel recompile. And it's very management friendly. It was the first on the big IBM mainframes, and IBM supports both redhat and suse completelly, in fact suse was the first to be supported by ibm. If you haven't taken a look at it yet, check it out. It's used by a lot of big companies, and many european governments. Many companies use it in east europe too, where price is not an issue, since pirating is so rampant...it's use is based 100% on merit.

</sales pitch>

At least I like it a lot.

Le Vendredi, 1 nove 2002, � 08:19 Canada/Mountain, Kevin Anderson a �crit :

*I* have no technical problem here.

I have a sales problem.

I need to sell people on the idea of Linux. Simplifying it is the main
issue I have. I have plenty of case studies, and cost/benefits and stuff.

Mostly, my original message was a RANT. I was irritated that the available
software wasn't meeting my need. RH has a point and drool install, and 99%
of what I need. I hate their KDE (almost) install. And my need for ACL
support for Samba leaves me with no choice other than XFS or EXT2's ACL
patch, either of which is a kernel redo.

I just wanted to whine and cry like a little baby. That's all. Now it's
time to set everything up.

My road will lead to success, I just want it to be a smooth, easy road.
Apparently that won't happen.

I'll stop my blubbering, and get back to you this afternoon when it's
built... Alternately, if I hit a snag, I'll come back with that too.

Kev.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Cameron Nikitiuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: (clug-talk) <rant>

If there is any sort of leg work or information gathering we can do as a
group for Kevin I think we should all band together (regardless of
differences) and try to assist him in developing his project. By us

showing

unity and adequate support for our fellow geeks, we develop a more

friendly

environment for L/OSS (Linux/Open Source Software) to flourish in.

Kevin's road to success here makes ALL or our battles in the future easier
to win. I don't know much about Linux or red hat for that matter, but I
WILL PERSONALLY through up the offer for any sort of assistance I can. I
know Kevin and I have had problems in the past, but I am willing to

overlook

those differences for the greater good...the promotion and propagation of
L/OSS.

Kevin...feel free to contact me offline if I can be of any help. I am
awesome at researching and have told I have a great gift for
gab...promotions, selling, marketing, PR wise.

Regards,

Cameron

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Anderson [mailto:list-server@;myrealbox.com]
Sent: October 31, 2002 9:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) <rant>


They need to approve it before it ever begins.

And if I'm going to implement what is an unknown commodity for this new
company (We're being sold, remember, so past success means nothing. They
have zero experience with Linux. I already checked.)

If I make a fly-by-the-seat-of-my-pants proposal, then I'll look like an
idiot, AND I'll get shot down. Realistically, I also won't be very likely
to get a second try with it either. They're a pure NT shop. We've

already

been told 99% that Exchange WILL BE our mail solution.

On the other hand, if my presentation is complete, and addresses all of
their concerns and needs, and then I implement it, and complete everything
on schedule, or ahead, then the solution looks good, and so do I.

I'll win where I can, and grow Linux from there. I can wait for a pure
network. Time has always shown that Linux is better, faster, and less
expensive. In a few years, when Mail needs to be replaced, I'll bring up
Linuxes successes. If there are no successes, then I have nothing to

build

on. Plus, the company will be that much more dependant on legacy MS
products.

I will cave to everything management wants so that Linux gets a foot in

the

door. An arrogant attitude on my part won't get it there. I'm arrogant,
believe me, but telling a manager to "I'll give you what I want to give

you,

and you'll shut up and like it" won't get me anywhere.

Kev.



----- Original Message -----
From: "S�bastien Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) <rant>


Ugh, does management need to read your installation documentation? I
doubt it.

Le Jeudi, 31 octo 2002, � 20:27 Canada/Mountain, Kevin Anderson a �crit
:

Ummm. I missed something somewhere. The distros are all pretty much
equal
if you want them to be. But that's a technical perspective.

My concern is selling this to people who are NOT technical. Debian
doesn't
have the MIND SHARE that Red Hat does. And like it or not, that's a
big
part of my battle. It's hard enough to have people accept Linux.
They've
heard of Red Hat. IBM does Red Hat. Nobody has heard of Gentoo or
Debian,
at least not at the management level. Which is the level that
technical
installs are approved or vetoed at.

I want my documentation to read "Install red Hat from cd. Select All
packages. You're done"

I do not want it to read.

"Install <whatever flavor> download patches for X, Y, and Q. Apply
them
against the kernel. Run menuconfig, and choose this list of 175
options to
compile into the kernel, and this list of 50 others to compile as
modules.
Compile the kernel. Compile the modules. Copy bzImage to /boot.
Update
LILO/GRUB. etc, etc, etc..."

One sounds complete. One shounds like a patchwork of pieces that sort
of
work. *I* know otherwise, but you don't need to climb the food chain
very
far from <hands-on IT Admin title of choice> before this is a hopeless
sale.

Documentation should not exceed 2 pages per application. And if it
strays
more than 2 commands from "click next", the sale is going to fail.

Kev.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Cade Cairns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) <rant>

oops.. didnt mean to put that forth in a belittling way.  sorry.

Regards,
Cade Cairns

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Cade Cairns wrote:

Of course.  It's not like Debian is missing features that RedHat
has..

I'm

quite amused that you think that, though.

Regards,
Cade Cairns

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Kevin Anderson wrote:

If I have a document to management that says something like "Then

rebuild

the kernel, enabling extended attributes, etc"

They'll ask "wouldn't XP be easier and faster?"
or
"Could you explain this to use so that we understand what is

happening, and

why?"
or
"Does this mean that Red Hat 8 is unable to meet our needs?"
etc...


I chose Red Hat because management will have heard of it. It's way

easier

to say "I need $100 to purchase a licensed copy of Red Hat" than to

get

approval to "purchase a dozen pizza vouchers for Canberra's LUG".
And

with

me wanting to avoid the need to recompile the kernel, does Debian

REALLY fit

this scenario well?  If I'm going a non-Red Hat route, it'll be

Gentoo.  And

that seems more likely with every passing minute. The main reason I

skipped

Gentoo before is that 1.2 doesn't seem to work with Compaq's

SmartArray RAID

Controllers.  I'd assume 1.4 does, but I'd also like to see it

released

rather than running an RC version.

Kev.



----- Original Message -----
From: "timmy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) <rant>

And I don't want to rebuild the kernel, cause that sort of

documentation

just blows.

I don't understand this statement. Which documentation are you

referring

to? Do you need help with regards on how to compile a kernel from

scratch?