My big push has always been to encourage my employers to buy support. There is the technical reasons, and then my underlying reason.
Technical: 1: Red Hat is your advocate to upstream open source projects. Have a problem with kickstart, yum, etc? You can try going through upstream (which has varying levels of success depending on the project), or push it as an RFE through support. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but if you aren't as comfortable with the process its a nice option. 2: Quicker turn around on security patches through the official channels. There is a great blog does an analysis on this, but I'd have to dig for the link if anyone wants to see it. 3: Liability. When the fit hits the shan, CxOs want someone to yell at. If I told them to buy support and the didn't, and they try yelling at me, I'd kindly remind them that I had suggested we get support, and regardless of their response I'd look for another job (I realize an irrational/irrate boss might force that path on you, but ya... its not worth the hassle.) My underlying reason: Most companies want to leach off Linux. Its free, awesome. But like Matt said, if we all stop paying, it goes away. Plus by paying for Red Hat (or Canonical or Novel) support they are actually contributing back to the F/OSS community, all be it indirectly. I thought about responding on slashdot to that article too. The reality behind it is that if his CIO doesn't want it, you give him a reasonable statement via e-mail explaining why its not a recommended practice, and when you have a major issue that support could have helped facilitate a resolution to, you add that in the post-mortem of that incident. nice try though Bryan. -greg On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 13:49, solarflow99 <solarflo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've noticed most businesses will try to get out of paying if they don't > have to. They'll spend more on windows server just because they have no > choice and its expensive, but if they have to they just pay it. As an > experienced administrator I don't want to say I don't need support, I try > to get them on a support plan for their own good. > > > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Matt Brown (Sky Road LLC) < > mbr...@skyroadasp.com> wrote: > >> We have actually wrestled with this one the past two years. >> I don't understand what they are calling Non-paid Linux? (What are people >> running Slackware or Debian or something?) >> We don't call Redhat to fix kernel bugs or to provide better IO >> performance, we basically are happy with the vanilla RHEL and 80% of our >> support calls over the past 4 years have been on Satellite server. >> I would think we are the poster child for who leaves RH, we chose RH to >> avoid the finger pointing of "that app is not supported on the hardware >> with that OS" (or we have not certified that on the OS) that vendors do. >> RHEL nice a very good stable OS, but for what you pay unless you are one >> of those people who drinks coffee with their TAM, it is hard to justify to >> the CFO. >> >> Just my 2 cents >> >> Matt >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rhelv5-list-boun...@redhat.com [mailto: >> rhelv5-list-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Bryan J Smith >> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 11:15 AM >> To: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 (Tikanga) discussion mailing-list >> Subject: [rhelv5-list] [Slashdot] "How Can I Justify Using Red Hat When >> CentOS Exists?" (IDC 2011 April TCO Study) >> >> Hate to do this, and I really hate Slashdot, but my client just pointed >> out this thread this morning. I decided to take the time to post >> (anonymously, so this isn't about anything for myself) the IDC 2011 April >> TCO study of non-paid Linux v. Red Hat. It's not getting modded up, hence >> the "bump" here (I know this is likely an abuse of hte list). >> >> >> So if you believe the study should be marked insightful, please +1 it up: >> >> - http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2500906&cid=37895636 >> >> -- Bryan >> >> >> P.S. I also want to make developers aware of this additional comment on >> the RHN Developer Subscriptions, which all professionals should consider in >> my opinion. If you have a TechNet (let alone MSDN) subscription, and you >> are subscribed to this list, you should probably consider a $99 RHN >> Developer subscription too. >> >> - http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2500906&cid=37895880 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rhelv5-list mailing list >> rhelv5-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list >> >> Sky Road LLC Message Disclaimer >> >> This message and any attachment transmitted with it (collectively, this >> "Message") may contain confidential or privileged information. It is >> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, >> use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, >> please advise the sender by reply message (e.g., email, fax or >> telephone) and destroy all copies of this Message. The information in >> this Message is not intended to replace a recipient's own internal >> processes for evaluating a transaction. This Message should not be >> regarded as (i) a recommendation to buy or refrain from buying any >> security; (ii) an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy any >> security; or (iii) an official confirmation of any transaction. Sky >> Road cannot guarantee that the transmission and content of this Message >> is secure or error-free. Sky Road does not represent that this Message >> is accurate, uncorrupted, or free of viruses or other harmful code. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rhelv5-list mailing list >> rhelv5-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list >> > > > _______________________________________________ > rhelv5-list mailing list > rhelv5-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list > >
_______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list rhelv5-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
