On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 06:15, et wrote: > I have noticed that Redhat, and M$ has lately published listing reguardiing > expected support cycles, and all of them are shorter than what most people > expect for manufactured products, but this is the way of things, and even > more so with computers, since the hardware is planned to be obsolete in 3 to > 4 years anyway.
This is the sweet spot I'm talking about.... IF support cycles matched hardware life it would be IMHO a better proposition. In other words doing support life by series not by release. The the life cycle of the series would more closely match the life of the hardware. The problem now is to hit the sweet spot in Corporate world in such a way that they want/need MDK's support and are willing to pay for it! Product life cycle is cool. I still feel it's a little short. James > the real problem (from my narrow little pinhole viewpoint) is > the need for applications needing all the computing power available. while > most companies got P3 M$ windows boxes, they still use them to emmulate > access to a termanel off the server, or run word. stuff they could have done > with the wyse monochrom termanal they threw away to have pretty colors. > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com -- James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
