Is Red Hat dead? - Redhat

This is a discussion on Is Red Hat dead? - Redhat ; Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: Is Red Hat dead?

  1. Is Red Hat dead?

    Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?



  2. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Skoda wrote:
    > Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?
    >
    >


    I get approx. 500 Posting in the fedora-list mailinglist per day. That's
    where development and discussions are going on nowadays.

    greets Boris

  3. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:

    > Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?


    Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?

    --
    "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."
    Benjamin Franklin (I didn't know he was a Buddhist)


  4. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Skoda wrote:
    > Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?
    >
    >

    Use fedora core instead

  5. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Here in linux.redhat.misc, Ivan Marsh
    spake unto us, saying:

    >On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >
    >> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?

    >
    >Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?


    OS/2 newsreaders are perfectly capable of reading this newsgroup. :-)

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Smyrna, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  6. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:31:13 -0400, Richard Steiner wrote:

    > Here in linux.redhat.misc, Ivan Marsh spake unto us,
    > saying:
    >
    >>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of
    >>> OS2?

    >>
    >>Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?

    >
    > OS/2 newsreaders are perfectly capable of reading this newsgroup. :-)


    Yea, yea... I know... I was razzing the OP.

    OS/2: still the best performing (widely available) SMP OS that's ever
    existed (outperformed multiple versions of *nix, Netware and every MS
    product).

    Big Blue were a bunch of morons to let it die on the vine.

    --
    "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."
    Benjamin Franklin (I didn't know he was a Buddhist)


  7. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Here in linux.redhat.misc, Ivan Marsh
    spake unto us, saying:

    >On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:31:13 -0400, Richard Steiner wrote:
    >> Ivan Marsh spake unto us, saying:
    >>
    >>>Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?

    >>
    >> OS/2 newsreaders are perfectly capable of reading this newsgroup. :-)

    >
    >Yea, yea... I know... I was razzing the OP.


    The OP doesn't realize that Red Hat still hasn't gotten as far as OS/2
    was in its heyday, at least in terms of marketshare.

    How quickly folks forget.

    >OS/2: still the best performing (widely available) SMP OS that's ever
    >existed (outperformed multiple versions of *nix, Netware and every MS
    >product).


    It isn't all that bad on a single CPU, either. ;-)

    >Big Blue were a bunch of morons to let it die on the vine.


    Agreed, but at least life support is still available:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eComStation/

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Smyrna, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

  8. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Ivan Marsh wrote:

    > On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >
    >> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?

    >
    > Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >


    What is OS/2?

  9. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Ivan Marsh wrote:


    > OS/2: still the best performing (widely available) SMP OS that's ever
    > existed (outperformed multiple versions of *nix, Netware and every MS
    > product).


    What happened to this wonderOS? Someone said that it cannot support hard
    drives bigger than 1 gig and CD-R's faster than 2X. This is a joke. Right?


  10. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Richard Steiner wrote:


    > The OP doesn't realize that Red Hat still hasn't gotten as far as OS/2
    > was in its heyday


    Are you saying that Redhat is crap?

  11. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Boris Glawe wrote:

    > Skoda wrote:
    >> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > I get approx. 500 Posting in the fedora-list mailinglist per day. That's
    > where development and discussions are going on nowadays.
    >
    > greets Boris


    Isn't Fedori Redhat?

  12. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:11:00 +0000, Geno wrote:

    > Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?

    >>
    >> Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >>

    >
    > What is OS/2?


    OS/2 was IBM's attempt to replace Dos/Windows. It was insanely stable
    (By 3.5) It was the first consumer directed OS to come with an internet
    suite. It has great features that still haven't been incorporated into
    other OSes or are not used by app developers that still don't get it (I'm
    thinking about the use of EAs here. The ID3 tag is an ugly kludge to
    store meta data that should be in EAs.). The WPS is the best graphical
    shell I've ever used. Gnome, KDE, whatever Windows calls theirs are just
    **** compared to it (I never tried the Mac or BeOs, so I left them off the
    list.).

    The problems were that IBM couldn't sell whores to prisoners, Microsoft
    had forced many "do not support or do business with our competition" on
    hardware vendors and app developers and IBM charged an arm, a leg and a
    left nut for development tools.

    Unfortunately, for boring historical reasons, IBM can't GPL their goodies.
    I'd love to see EPM (their text editor) and WPS on Linux.

    --
    Mark Healey
    marknews(at)healeyonline(dot)com


  13. Re: Is Red Hat dead?



    Mark Healey wrote:

    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:11:00 +0000, Geno wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?
    >>>
    >>>Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >>>

    >>
    >>What is OS/2?

    >
    >
    > OS/2 was IBM's attempt to replace Dos/Windows. It was insanely stable
    > (By 3.5) It was the first consumer directed OS to come with an internet
    > suite. It has great features that still haven't been incorporated into
    > other OSes or are not used by app developers that still don't get it (I'm
    > thinking about the use of EAs here. The ID3 tag is an ugly kludge to
    > store meta data that should be in EAs.). The WPS is the best graphical
    > shell I've ever used. Gnome, KDE, whatever Windows calls theirs are just
    > **** compared to it (I never tried the Mac or BeOs, so I left them off the
    > list.).
    >
    > The problems were that IBM couldn't sell whores to prisoners, Microsoft
    > had forced many "do not support or do business with our competition" on
    > hardware vendors and app developers and IBM charged an arm, a leg and a
    > left nut for development tools.
    >
    > Unfortunately, for boring historical reasons, IBM can't GPL their goodies.
    > I'd love to see EPM (their text editor) and WPS on Linux.
    >


    Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't OS/2 start out as a joint venture
    between IBM and MickeySoft, then they parted ways, MS hired the guy at
    Digital who wrote VMS, and then NT was developed. Actually, I think
    OS/2 and NT had a common development path up to the point where IBM and
    MS split, then IBM came out with OS/2, while MS came out with the 9x
    versions of Windows (which are actually based on a 32-bit DOS) and the
    NT series, including XP.

    I think IBM did sell a version of their Lotus SmartSuite office software
    in an OS/2 version.

    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Mach kernel, which some
    versions of Debian are based on, actually an open source knock-off of OS/2?


  14. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:21:34 +0000, Geno wrote:

    > Richard Steiner wrote:
    >
    >
    >> The OP doesn't realize that Red Hat still hasn't gotten as far as OS/2
    >> was in its heyday

    >
    > Are you saying that Redhat is crap?


    No... He's saying that OS/2 was one of the best OSs that was ever
    written... and the most underrated.

    --
    "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."
    Benjamin Franklin (I didn't know he was a Buddhist)


  15. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:16:31 +0000, Geno wrote:

    > Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >
    >
    >> OS/2: still the best performing (widely available) SMP OS that's ever
    >> existed (outperformed multiple versions of *nix, Netware and every MS
    >> product).

    >
    > What happened to this wonderOS?


    It was never pushed by IBM, for whatever reason... I guess IBM didn't want
    to be in the OS business.

    > Someone said that it cannot support hard
    > drives bigger than 1 gig and CD-R's faster than 2X. This is a joke. Right?


    It's not much of a joke... it is inaccurate however.

    --
    "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."
    Benjamin Franklin (I didn't know he was a Buddhist)


  16. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:11:00 +0000, Geno wrote:

    > Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of OS2?

    >>
    >> Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >>

    >
    > What is OS/2?


    http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/

    --
    "Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed."
    Benjamin Franklin (I didn't know he was a Buddhist)


  17. Re: Is Red Hat dead?


    "Mark Healey" wrote in message
    newsan.2005.06.25.06.14.46.281052@spammer.die...
    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:11:00 +0000, Geno wrote:
    >
    >> Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of
    >>>> OS2?
    >>>
    >>> Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >>>

    >>
    >> What is OS/2?

    >
    > OS/2 was IBM's attempt to replace Dos/Windows. It was insanely stable
    > (By 3.5) It was the first consumer directed OS to come with an internet
    > suite. It has great features that still haven't been incorporated into
    > other OSes or are not used by app developers that still don't get it (I'm
    > thinking about the use of EAs here. The ID3 tag is an ugly kludge to
    > store meta data that should be in EAs.). The WPS is the best graphical
    > shell I've ever used. Gnome, KDE, whatever Windows calls theirs are just
    > **** compared to it (I never tried the Mac or BeOs, so I left them off the
    > list.).
    >
    > The problems were that IBM couldn't sell whores to prisoners, Microsoft
    > had forced many "do not support or do business with our competition" on
    > hardware vendors and app developers and IBM charged an arm, a leg and a
    > left nut for development tools.


    If indeed, OS/2 was as great as you describe it, I find it hard to believe
    that Microsoft could "force" many to not support that business. The way I
    saw it, while Microsoft kept up with providing support and drivers for the
    technology newcomers, OS/2 was always a few generations behind, sort of like
    Linux, which, in my opinion, is **** when compared to OS/2. I don't know
    what motivated IBM to throw in the towel but whatever the motivation was, it
    must have been the wrong one. I hope IBM reconsiders and brings out a 64 bit
    version of OS/2. I'll buy it. BTW, XP's 64 bit version is excellent but
    unfortunately it reminds me of the old OS/2 which always lagged behind with
    driver support.



  18. Re: Is Red Hat dead?


    "Ivan Marsh" wrote in message
    newsan.2005.06.25.15.47.52.886915@you.now...
    > On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:11:00 +0000, Geno wrote:
    >
    >> Ivan Marsh wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:19:45 +0000, Skoda wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Where are the posts for this news group? Is Red Hat going the way of
    >>>> OS2?
    >>>
    >>> Your newsreader is broken... are you using OS/2?
    >>>

    >>
    >> What is OS/2?

    >
    > http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/



    Been there. Now where can I buy it or, should I ask how much does it cost?
    Does it support multi processors and, support for the latest hardware on the
    market such as DVD writers, scanners, digital cameras etc?



  19. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:12:05 +0000, Tango wrote:
    >
    > If indeed, OS/2 was as great as you describe it, I find it hard to believe
    > that Microsoft could "force" many to not support that business. The way I
    > saw it, while Microsoft kept up with providing support and drivers for the
    > technology newcomers, OS/2 was always a few generations behind, sort of like
    > Linux, which, in my opinion, is **** when compared to OS/2. I don't know
    > what motivated IBM to throw in the towel but whatever the motivation was, it
    > must have been the wrong one. I hope IBM reconsiders and brings out a 64 bit
    > version of OS/2. I'll buy it. BTW, XP's 64 bit version is excellent but
    > unfortunately it reminds me of the old OS/2 which always lagged behind with
    > driver support.


    The issue of having the latest and greatest in drivers is far more a mass
    market consumer issue than it is a business computing issue. Almost two
    completely different animals. It is the home user, teenager or gamer that
    wants the latest and greatest hardware on their system, even if it means
    sacrificing security or stability.

    The office I work in isn't particularly large - only about 200 people, but
    a system crash at our place leaves $36,000 in payroll a day sitting around
    twiddling their thumbs. Stability and security are far more important
    than whether Epson's latest entry level scanner works right out of the
    box. That is one big reason Microsoft has long had multiple OS's available.

    You should also be aware that technical superiority in a product in it's
    field has =never= made it the automatic winner in the marketplace. History
    is replete with examples of where the inferior product won the sales
    battle. VHS versus Betamax is a perfect example. Ford's Edsel model of the
    1950's was another example. A technically good car was a major flop.

    OS2 was a better operating system than anything Microsoft had at the time,
    but IBM lost the battle for a variety of reasons. I'd be surprised if this
    isn't a case study in many management MBA programs at various colleges.



  20. Re: Is Red Hat dead?

    Here in linux.redhat.misc,
    Bruce Coryell spake unto us, saying:

    >Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't OS/2 start out as a joint venture
    >between IBM and MickeySoft, then they parted ways, MS hired the guy at
    >Digital who wrote VMS, and then NT was developed.


    IBM and Microsoft worked together on the 16-bit versions (v1.x), but
    the OS/2 2.0 product IBM released in 1992 was a 32-bit OS that had a
    lot of IBM-only stuff in it (the WPS, the MVDM stuff for running DOS
    programs, and the WinOS2 subsystem (a licensed copy of Windows 3.x that
    was rewritten as a DPMI client and had its video subsystem tweaked to
    live alongside OS/2's Presentation Manager and punch holes in it to
    display Windows programs seamlessly)).

    >I think IBM did sell a version of their Lotus SmartSuite office software
    >in an OS/2 version.


    Yes, and they still do.

    >Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Mach kernel, which some
    >versions of Debian are based on, actually an open source knock-off of
    >OS/2?


    No. OS/2 uses a fairly classic monolithic kernel architecture, while
    Mach uses a microkernel. The PowerPC version of OS/2 may have been a
    little different, but I have no experience with it.

    --
    -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Smyrna, GA USA
    OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
    WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast