>Tom Berger wrote: >> >> People don't buy M because it is based on Redhat like ten or >> twenty other distros (else they would buy Redhat, right?) but # >> because it's Mandrake. If we've got a new version ready, we >> release it. I don't see why we should wait for RedHat to catch >> up... > >Um... actually, isn't that the reason *most* people buy it? One of its >key selling points has been that it's "RedHat with Pentium >optimizations". Another is that it's "RedHat with newer packages, >because we're not afraid of using the latest stuff" (ref: Mandrake > 6.0 had KDE 1.1.1 while RedHat had KDE 1.1-something). Those > have been the key selling points regardless of their accuracy or > unofficial status. > >Now, I don't want to knock the distribution in general. I think it's >great. The (significant) changes from the actual RedHat distro > seem very worthwhile. > > >~Mike > Well, if you want updates you can dl them from one of the dozens of RedHat mirrors. I don't deny that M's compability with RedHat is an important factor, but there are dozens of other distributions who also derived from it. If you've just started you have to cling to standards to survive as long as you're not big enough to set them yourself. So if you want to make a successfull new Linux distro today (and you aren't happen to be Corel Inc.), you have to adopt RedHats Packaging Manager. But this itself is of no use if your new users can't use RedHat binaries. So you have to adopt their file hierarchy and rc settings. However, you won't be successful for long if you just copy them or put newer packages in your distro. In fact the *difference* to RedHat will make you famous and build up the all-important consumer community which will buy your next distribution. Mandrake has modified rc-scripts, an open developement platform, optimizations, own preconfigured apps, a thoughtout desktop. In fact you can't possibly differ *more* from RedHat without giving up compability, IMO. And compability is a Good Thing (tm). Just my 2 cents Regards tom
