Supercomputing aside, SUSE seems to always be playing second fiddle to Red Hat. Saying that SUSE is another Red Hat is like saying that AMD is another Intel; it's kinda true, but there's a quantitative difference that's more important than the qualitative similarities.
That's quite interesting. As a nearly pure desktop user Canonical is everywhere, even making painful decisions in the community that others can't fight due to size differences, and only once or twice a year I'm reading Red Hat. Never thought of it as the big guy in the room.
I ask because I know Google uses their own version of Ubuntu and while I was at Amazon we also used Ubuntu. Do these companies not count as enterprise? Most companies I've interviewed at also used Ubuntu. I guess I'm just wondering if this is unique to the software industry and whether or not that's included in "enterprise".
That's the best part about these words, they can mean whatever anyone wants them to mean.
Also, what I said really shouldn't be counted as any interesting data point. I was simply responding to someone who thought, based on what they heard, that Red Hat was not a big player.
Really? Fedora is my first choice for desktop OS, worked for companies that RedHat was their first choice for server OS, hosted some of apps on OpenShift and currently I am setting up my Ghost installation, also on OpenShift.
Last time I used any of SuSE's products was about seven years ago (when I was 14), when I couldn't install Linux on my mother's PC and played around with their LiveCD from a magazine.
You should really try SuSE again. I was a Fedora user too until I recently decided to try OpenSuSE and aside from a few quirks I think it's one of the best out of the box experiences I've had on Linux.
Main issues I had came down to knowledge of the OS. Their default software repos don't seem to have nearly as many programs as Fedora/Ubuntu, but by adding a few external repos you'll get all that back.
Fedora's my first choice as well, but it's clear that Ubuntu and SuSE are more popular with somebody: a lot of binaries are compiled for them instead of Fedora (different glibc's, different package names/dependencies). I don't know if Ubuntu's more popular with those specific developers, or if it's more popular with the customers of those projects, but it's more popular somewhere.
Comments
SuSE seems to me pretty much like another Red Hat
Supercomputing aside, SUSE seems to always be playing second fiddle to Red Hat. Saying that SUSE is another Red Hat is like saying that AMD is another Intel; it's kinda true, but there's a quantitative difference that's more important than the qualitative similarities.
Interesting analogy--one wonders if Red Hat has engaged in anti-competitive measures in order to stifle their competition.
Like, you know, pushing for the adoption of weird and tricky things like systemd before they're ready.
And of course there's Canonical, who is trying really hard to compete in the same market as Red Hat and SuSE.
But neither is even close to matching Red Hat's sheer size, profitability, and reputation.
That's quite interesting. As a nearly pure desktop user Canonical is everywhere, even making painful decisions in the community that others can't fight due to size differences, and only once or twice a year I'm reading Red Hat. Never thought of it as the big guy in the room.
To your anecdote, I hardly see Ubuntu mentioned in the enterprise space. Ubuntu is a little desktop player like Apple.
What does enterprise space mean exactly?
I ask because I know Google uses their own version of Ubuntu and while I was at Amazon we also used Ubuntu. Do these companies not count as enterprise? Most companies I've interviewed at also used Ubuntu. I guess I'm just wondering if this is unique to the software industry and whether or not that's included in "enterprise".
That's the best part about these words, they can mean whatever anyone wants them to mean.
Also, what I said really shouldn't be counted as any interesting data point. I was simply responding to someone who thought, based on what they heard, that Red Hat was not a big player.
Ubuntu's focus isn't really the traditional enterprise space, it's the cloud space, where it is doing very well.
Really? Fedora is my first choice for desktop OS, worked for companies that RedHat was their first choice for server OS, hosted some of apps on OpenShift and currently I am setting up my Ghost installation, also on OpenShift.
Last time I used any of SuSE's products was about seven years ago (when I was 14), when I couldn't install Linux on my mother's PC and played around with their LiveCD from a magazine.
Sample size of 1!
SuSE seem to be much more popular in the parts of the linux community that do not have English as a first language.
Particularly in Germany, where they are (were?) based.
You should really try SuSE again. I was a Fedora user too until I recently decided to try OpenSuSE and aside from a few quirks I think it's one of the best out of the box experiences I've had on Linux.
Main issues I had came down to knowledge of the OS. Their default software repos don't seem to have nearly as many programs as Fedora/Ubuntu, but by adding a few external repos you'll get all that back.
Fedora's my first choice as well, but it's clear that Ubuntu and SuSE are more popular with somebody: a lot of binaries are compiled for them instead of Fedora (different glibc's, different package names/dependencies). I don't know if Ubuntu's more popular with those specific developers, or if it's more popular with the customers of those projects, but it's more popular somewhere.