|
Home > Archive > SUSE Linux > January 2004 > Does suse distribute official retail versions in dvd boxes?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Does suse distribute official retail versions in dvd boxes?
|
|
|
|
| Bego Mario Garde 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
| noname wrote:quote:
> http://www.cameraexchange.org/images_software/4200.jpg
That looks strrrange ... :-)
The German edition of SuSE 9.0 professional comes with 5 CD-ROM, 1
double-sided DVD and two printed manuals. I wonder, how they would fit
into the dvd-box. :-)
Bego
| |
|
|
|
|
| noname 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
|
Jan Stedehouder wrote:
quote:
> Hi,
>
> I bought the DVD-set from these guys. They sell copies of SuSe Linux, either
> DVD or CD. No support or handbooks however. The DVD's were in perfect
> condition. I have had retail boxes of software with damages.
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...&category=41881
>
>
Jan,
What kind of copies are these? From the ftp distribution, or the
official boxed set?
It looks like they got their hands on the official boxed set, made
illegal copies and now sell these with profit.
S.
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
|
"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
news:400970b5$0$326$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...quote:
>
>
> Jan Stedehouder wrote:
>
>
either[QUOTE][color=darkred]
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...&category=41881[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> Jan,
>
> What kind of copies are these? From the ftp distribution, or the
> official boxed set?
> It looks like they got their hands on the official boxed set, made
> illegal copies and now sell these with profit.
>
> S.
Maybe you can enlighten me then. The programs on any Linux distro are GPL or
some other form of Open Source/ Free Software, right? Under what terms could
SuSe prohibit the making and distributing of copies. Basically, I could not
see any profit: just the costs of duplication. How is that different from
all the other Linux-for-a-few-bucks sellers, who download the ISO's and sell
them? No flame intended, just an honest question.
Jan
quote:
>
| |
| Robert Hull 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
| In message <4009b5a4$0$137$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrotequote:
>
>"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
>news:400970b5$0$326$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>
>Maybe you can enlighten me then. The programs on any Linux distro are GPL or
>some other form of Open Source/ Free Software, right?
Wrong. Yast is not GPL, it is released under a license that prevents any
copies from being charged for. Under that license, you are able to
*give* copies at no cost, but you cannot sell copies without written
permission from SuSE.
quote:
> Under what terms could SuSe prohibit the making and distributing of
>copies.
They do not prevent making copies, neither do they prevent distribution
provided that it is for no charge. However, they *do* have the right to
prevent you from charging to distribute software that they have written.
--
Robert Talking to yourself - first sign of madness
Answering yourself back - first sign of schizophrenia
I go one better: If I don't like the answer ...
I put it to a majority vote
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
|
"Robert Hull" <Robert@please.do-not-spam.me.uk> schreef in bericht
news:noz0Jmns6bCAFwdJ@please.do-not-spam.me.uk...quote:
> In message <4009b5a4$0$137$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
> Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote
or[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> Wrong. Yast is not GPL, it is released under a license that prevents any
> copies from being charged for. Under that license, you are able to
> *give* copies at no cost, but you cannot sell copies without written
> permission from SuSE.
Interesting. I have never looked into this point before, but I will now. If
you are right, SuSe has introduced something that puts a restriction on the
free distribution of software that we are accustomed to in the Linux world.
quote:
>
>
> They do not prevent making copies, neither do they prevent distribution
> provided that it is for no charge. However, they *do* have the right to
> prevent you from charging to distribute software that they have written.
Okay, there is the no-charge clause. However, I think lawyers will have a
field day on discussing this. Does no-charge mean 'no money should be paid
for it' or 'no profit should be made from it'?
Hmm, I'll be back after some research.
Jan
quote:
>
> --
> Robert Talking to yourself - first sign of madness
> Answering yourself back - first sign of schizophrenia
> I go one better: If I don't like the answer ...
> I put it to a majority vote
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-19, 10:10 am |
| On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:12:06 +0100
"Jan Stedehouder" <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote:
quote:
> If you are right, SuSe has introduced something that puts a
> restriction on the free distribution of software that we are
> accustomed to in the Linux world.
>
No, they don't allow the distribution of their YaST software, *for a
charge*, unless you've first received permission from them to do so.
If you give YaST away, no problem. That's "free distribution" in the
purest sense of the term.
Any software on SUSE's distro that is GPL is *still* GPL and may be
given away or charged a fee. There are other software packages in
their distro that have other licenses as well -- each one must be
individually honored.
quote:
> Okay, there is the no-charge clause. However, I think lawyers will
> have a field day on discussing this.
Let the lawyers have their field day -- after all, there's more than
enough of them to go around! :-) Wouldn't it be great if we could
get about 90% of the lawyers to use Linux? That would *have* to make
M$ nervous . . . :-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
1:31am up 22 days 17:40, 6 users, load average: 0.07, 0.17, 0.12
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
|
"Kevin Nathan" <knathan@project54.com> schreef in bericht
news:20040118014135.0adc2af0@allevil.local...quote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:12:06 +0100
> "Jan Stedehouder" <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote:
>
>
> No, they don't allow the distribution of their YaST software, *for a
> charge*, unless you've first received permission from them to do so.
> If you give YaST away, no problem. That's "free distribution" in the
> purest sense of the term.
>
> Any software on SUSE's distro that is GPL is *still* GPL and may be
> given away or charged a fee. There are other software packages in
> their distro that have other licenses as well -- each one must be
> individually honored.
>
Okay, just read the YaST license and I have to agree with you guys. Still,
it doesn't feel right. SuSe builds a distro on the work of thousands of
other projects, big or small, using the GPL. Then it adds a cork, called
YaST, and then limits the distribution of the whole lot. It would be
interesting to see if the YaST code has elements that were released on less
restrictive licences before. If so, the YaST license would not be valid. In
my opinion Red Hat followed a course that was closer to the intent of the
Open Source/ Free Software movement. Anaconda is not under a restrictive
license.
Jan
| |
| Robert Hull 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
| In message <400a92bd$0$137$3a628fcd@reader1.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrotequote:
>Okay, just read the YaST license and I have to agree with you guys. Still,
>it doesn't feel right. SuSe builds a distro on the work of thousands of
>other projects, big or small, using the GPL. Then it adds a cork, called
>YaST, and then limits the distribution of the whole lot.
There is *no* restriction on the distribution of the software that SuSE
wrote.
There *is* a restriction on charging for it.
I am perfectly entitled to distribute copies of the CD's that came with
my boxed set of SuSE - and I have done so to people in more than one
country.
What I am *not* entitled to do without permission is to *charge* for
those copies.
Try to get your head around the fact that distributing something FREE OF
CHARGE is still distributing it. You are arguing from the standpoint
that not charging is not distributing. You are wrong in this.
--
Robert Talking to yourself - first sign of madness
Answering yourself back - first sign of schizophrenia
I go one better: If I don't like the answer ...
I put it to a majority vote
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
| On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 15:06:00 +0100
"Jan Stedehouder" <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote:
quote:
> Okay, just read the YaST license and I have to agree with you guys.
> Still, it doesn't feel right. SuSe builds a distro on the work of
> thousands of other projects, big or small, using the GPL. Then it
> adds a cork, called YaST, and then limits the distribution of the
> whole lot.
And, to add to Robert's excellent reply: you can always enter into an
agreement with SUSE if you want to charge for copies (say, on eBay or
something), because the license *does* say without prior approval
from SUSE (or words to that effect). Who knows, you might be able to
work something out that way. :-)
I've never charged for *any* distro I've given to people. Sometimes
they give me blank CD-Rs to copy it onto and sometimes they don't. At
the low cost of CD-Rs, it's not a big deal, but I wouldn't want to
have to buy 5000 blanks to give away 1000 copies -- and I believe that
*that* is what SUSE is really aiming at. They don't want someone to
make money off of their efforts without some agreement where they get
something back.
It will be interesting to see which direction Novell will take them in
the future, though . . . :-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
10:02am up 23 days 2:11, 6 users, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.04
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
|
"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
news:400957d0$0$326$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...quote:
> Hello,
>
> There are several offers on ebay.com for the 9.0 SuSE professional on
> dvd like this:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...&category=41881quote:
> http://www.cameraexchange.org/images_software/4200.jpg
> Are these official?
> S.
>
Agree with that too. I was just surprised by the route SuSe apparently has
chosen. It would be interesting to see how SuSe would respond when you ask
them if you could duplicate and sell CD's/DVD's at a nominal fee. To be
fair: the set of two DVD's I bought through E-bay were $ 15,99 incl.
international shipping (about 12 euro's), which is somewhat cheaper than I
would pay for buying 1 DVD from any other distro sold by a local
Linux-for-cheap. SuSe is going for 95 euro's where I live and -extremely
oversimplified- this a hefty price for books I won't use and the YaST
installer (considering that YaST is the only 'non-free' part of the distro).
But thanks for enlightening me (and for a normal discussion). I appreciated
it. :-))
Jan
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
| Sorry about the misquote guys. My mail program did not cooperate.
jan
| |
| noname 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
|
Jan Stedehouder wrote:
quote:
> Agree with that too. I was just surprised by the route SuSe apparently has
> chosen. It would be interesting to see how SuSe would respond when you ask
> them if you could duplicate and sell CD's/DVD's at a nominal fee. To be
> fair: the set of two DVD's I bought through E-bay were $ 15,99 incl.
> international shipping (about 12 euro's), which is somewhat cheaper than I
> would pay for buying 1 DVD from any other distro sold by a local
> Linux-for-cheap. SuSe is going for 95 euro's where I live and -extremely
> oversimplified- this a hefty price for books I won't use and the YaST
> installer (considering that YaST is the only 'non-free' part of the distro).
>
No suprise at all I think: distributions like suse and redhat are
created with professional care and full time development and support.
Most free distributions do not even reach that level of a complete Linux
distribution. Complete enought to be used in the mainstream, even
complete enought to be used by large corporations and important public
organisations. This comes with a price: restrictions, limitations, you
have to pay. Thus SuSE protects it work by restricting you some things,
but in return you get high quality opensource and licensed software
(yast is not only the restriction you are not allowed to redistribute
the complete distribution as deliverd with the boxed set), unrestricted
professional support for a certain time and assurance of upgrades and
security notifications.
If you want to use some benefits of this professional distribution
program, you are allowed to download the free, official SuSE version
from the ftp sites.
It is the same version as the professional boxed set that comes for
about 90 - 100 euro, but without the books, support and the other
restricted licensed other software, some gadgets and you buy it from
official distributors with garanties you can return and change it for a
good product when something is wrong.
Compared to this and compared to the price we have to pay for Redhat it
is cheap.
When SuSE answers you may not redistribute it as a complete set
yourselve I can fully understand. Everybody can get it for 'free' from
the ftp sites and it protects the program.
The seller at Ebay is no more fare then SuSE when it comes to
restricting gpl distribution: 15,99 is way to much for copy and material
costs. Besides this SuSE does not even see a penny of it.
S.
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
|
"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
news:400af0b8$0$323$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...quote:
>
>
> Jan Stedehouder wrote:
>
>
> No suprise at all I think: distributions like suse and redhat are
> created with professional care and full time development and support.
> Most free distributions do not even reach that level of a complete Linux
> distribution. Complete enought to be used in the mainstream, even
> complete enought to be used by large corporations and important public
> organisations. This comes with a price: restrictions, limitations, you
> have to pay. Thus SuSE protects it work by restricting you some things,
> but in return you get high quality opensource and licensed software
> (yast is not only the restriction you are not allowed to redistribute
> the complete distribution as deliverd with the boxed set), unrestricted
> professional support for a certain time and assurance of upgrades and
> security notifications.
Fine, agree with that too. Though Red Hat makes it's distro available
as downloadable ISO's, with no restrictions on distribution ánd a basic
service, which can be expanded/extended on per subscription basis.
Therefore, RH has been used as basis for tailor made distro's or
derivatives like ASP or LTSP. The Open Source base is the same as
SuSe's.
quote:
> If you want to use some benefits of this professional distribution
> program, you are allowed to download the free, official SuSE version
> from the ftp sites.
Yep, if you have broadband, which, unfortunately I have not.
quote:
> It is the same version as the professional boxed set that comes for
> about 90 - 100 euro, but without the books, support and the other
> restricted licensed other software, some gadgets and you buy it from
> official distributors with garanties you can return and change it for a
> good product when something is wrong.
> Compared to this and compared to the price we have to pay for Redhat it
> is cheap.
Red Hat is available for free. SuSe only hands out live CD's.
quote:
>
> When SuSE answers you may not redistribute it as a complete set
> yourselve I can fully understand. Everybody can get it for 'free' from
> the ftp sites and it protects the program.
> The seller at Ebay is no more fare then SuSE when it comes to
> restricting gpl distribution: 15,99 is way to much for copy and material
> costs. Besides this SuSE does not even see a penny of it.
The seller at e-bay was completely honest, stating beforehand it was
not a retail box. My point was, that the price is cheaper than DVD's I
can buy from a local disk burner, no matter what distro (RH, Debian).
I consider the price reasonable. 7 dollars for shipping, 8,99 for two
DVD's, in slim cases, well-finished. I can't see much of a profit margin
here.
quote:
>
> S.
>
| |
| noname 2004-01-19, 10:11 am |
|
Jan Stedehouder wrote:
quote:
> Fine, agree with that too. Though Red Hat makes it's distro available
> as downloadable ISO's, with no restrictions on distribution ánd a basic
> service, which can be expanded/extended on per subscription basis.
> Therefore, RH has been used as basis for tailor made distro's or
> derivatives like ASP or LTSP. The Open Source base is the same as
> SuSe's.
>
>
I hate to bring bad news, but Red Hat decided a few months back version
9 is the latest freely available Red Hat version for download.
Redhat changed to Red Hat Enterprise Linux now with almost the same
restrictions SuSE had for years:
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/faq/#six
It wont provide the complete system in iso images free for download
anymore. That is even less then SuSE now does. I'll explain this later.
There is however another project, Fedora, with help from some Red Hat
developers. But Red Hat does not offer any support, nor is fedora
completely the same as Red Hat or Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Although it
is build upon the original Red Hat distro, there is no full-time staff
anymore working on it, it has no further professional support and it
does not come on iso images as a complete out of the box solution.
quote:
>
>
> Red Hat is available for free. SuSe only hands out live CD's.
>
You now already know the Red Hat deal.
Now about SuSE: although SuSE does not provide any iso images besides
the live image for the x86 platform, SuSE however does distribute the
full version of the distro on iso images for free for all
non-Intel/AMD/PPC platforms.
quote:
> The seller at e-bay was completely honest, stating beforehand it was
> not a retail box. My point was, that the price is cheaper than DVD's I
> can buy from a local disk burner, no matter what distro (RH, Debian).
> I consider the price reasonable. 7 dollars for shipping, 8,99 for two
> DVD's, in slim cases, well-finished. I can't see much of a profit margin
> here.
>
It looks honnest, but I am not sure. They make it look like it is a
legal deal because they claim they take the unmidofied Linux source and
produce it under license. For instance they do not state they are
authorisation for payment with prior written consent of SUSE LINUX AG or
SUSE LINUX. Without this the sale is illegal if it contains Yast.
Further it is very hard to create almost the same distribution from the
original sources, and certainly to put it on several cd's and DVD's
keeping flawless installation. Many people have tried this.
I really wonder how they did this.
I also wonder if there are commercial packages like StarOffice and OSS
on the distribution.
Unfortunately SuSE doe not provide a list stating what packages are and
are not under GPL.
I like the initiative to distribute SuSE cheap, but it must be legal.
S.
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:12 am |
|
"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
news:400b4294$0$324$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...quote:
>
>
>
> I hate to bring bad news, but Red Hat decided a few months back version
> 9 is the latest freely available Red Hat version for download.
> Redhat changed to Red Hat Enterprise Linux now with almost the same
> restrictions SuSE had for years:
> http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/faq/#six
> It wont provide the complete system in iso images free for download
> anymore. That is even less then SuSE now does. I'll explain this later.
> There is however another project, Fedora, with help from some Red Hat
> developers. But Red Hat does not offer any support, nor is fedora
> completely the same as Red Hat or Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Although it
> is build upon the original Red Hat distro, there is no full-time staff
> anymore working on it, it has no further professional support and it
> does not come on iso images as a complete out of the box solution.
Yep, know about it and Fedora Core is running quietly on my PC.
quote:
>
>
>
> You now already know the Red Hat deal.
> Now about SuSE: although SuSE does not provide any iso images besides
> the live image for the x86 platform, SuSE however does distribute the
> full version of the distro on iso images for free for all
> non-Intel/AMD/PPC platforms.
>
>
>
>
> It looks honnest, but I am not sure. They make it look like it is a
> legal deal because they claim they take the unmidofied Linux source and
> produce it under license. For instance they do not state they are
> authorisation for payment with prior written consent of SUSE LINUX AG or
> SUSE LINUX. Without this the sale is illegal if it contains Yast.
> Further it is very hard to create almost the same distribution from the
> original sources, and certainly to put it on several cd's and DVD's
> keeping flawless installation. Many people have tried this.
> I really wonder how they did this.
> I also wonder if there are commercial packages like StarOffice and OSS
> on the distribution.
To answer this point: StarOffice is not on the DVD's, but OpenOffice is.
I agree with you that the legality is something that needs further inquiry.
If -
and only if- the seller has permission from SuSE, it can be considered
legal.
quote:
> Unfortunately SuSE doe not provide a list stating what packages are and
> are not under GPL.
> I like the initiative to distribute SuSE cheap, but it must be legal.
I am a bit concerned about the future though. RH already stepped of the
home-market
bandwagon, no matter their support of Fedora. The Novell-SuSe deal might
have
some implications too for the home-market, although SuSe's roadmap promises
support for the next five years.
The key difference between RH and SuSe is exactly on the part of the distro
we'
have been discussing: the installer, Anaconda vs. YaST. Other developers can
take
the RH distribution with Anaconda and take it further. As far as I can see,
this is
restricted by the YaST license. Too bad. I like SuSe and it is worth 95
euro's. Good
things do not have to be for free. Maybe it's an idea for SuSe to sell
cheaper retail
versions with just the DVD's or CD-Roms, without the books (and not just
upgrades).
Jan
quote:
> S.
>
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-19, 10:12 am |
| On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:14:30 +0100
"Jan Stedehouder" <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote:
quote:
> Maybe it's an idea for SuSe to sell
> cheaper retail
> versions with just the DVD's or CD-Roms, without the books (and not
> just upgrades).
Their Upgrade version *is* the full Pro version without some books.
This is *not* Windows where the upgrade requires a previous version!
I've bought full Pro versions and Upgrade versions -- depended more on
how bad I wanted it *now*, since Upgrade version is usually only
available directly from SUSE . . . :-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.22-10mdk
11:34:50 up 5 days, 18:34, 1 user, load average: 0.07, 0.08, 0.02
| |
| noname 2004-01-19, 10:12 am |
|
Kevin Nathan wrote:
quote:
> Their Upgrade version *is* the full Pro version without some books.
> This is *not* Windows where the upgrade requires a previous version!
> I've bought full Pro versions and Upgrade versions -- depended more on
> how bad I wanted it *now*, since Upgrade version is usually only
> available directly from SUSE . . . :-)
>
I think it is stupid of SuSE to call it upgrade versions and the way
they distibute it.
I noticed these upgrade boxes some time ago at the local reseller. Here
it comes shiped in a box as upgrade version and the only notice it might
as good be used as a full version is a small orange label marked 'full
version'.
I visit the reseller about once a month. Everytime I am there I see
people grabbing a upgrade box, they look with confusion at the label and
the text on the box and then they put it back.
A few times I asked those people what they think of it. The answer was
they were not sure if SuSE is labeled full because it is a upgrade for
the full version or it is really a full version, but the last was not
possible since the 'real' full version boxes are more expensive.
I think the way SuSE distributes the upgrade version is not good for
sales and getting SuSE or even Linux in the mainstream. People don't
trust it because of the confusing information on the boxes and they
don't want to buy the 'real' version since there are two prices for the
full version.
S.
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-19, 10:12 am |
|
"noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
news:400c4d43$0$331$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...quote:
>
>
> Kevin Nathan wrote:
>
>
> I think it is stupid of SuSE to call it upgrade versions and the way
> they distibute it.
> I noticed these upgrade boxes some time ago at the local reseller. Here
> it comes shiped in a box as upgrade version and the only notice it might
> as good be used as a full version is a small orange label marked 'full
> version'.
> I visit the reseller about once a month. Everytime I am there I see
> people grabbing a upgrade box, they look with confusion at the label and
> the text on the box and then they put it back.
> A few times I asked those people what they think of it. The answer was
> they were not sure if SuSE is labeled full because it is a upgrade for
> the full version or it is really a full version, but the last was not
> possible since the 'real' full version boxes are more expensive.
I agree. It is too confusing. Maybe I am a stickler, but for me Open Source
stands for clarity, transparency. I heard rumours about the Upgrade Pro
being a regular version. Thanks for confirming.
quote:
> I think the way SuSE distributes the upgrade version is not good for
> sales and getting SuSE or even Linux in the mainstream. People don't
> trust it because of the confusing information on the boxes and they
> don't want to buy the 'real' version since there are two prices for the
> full version.
> S.
I don't mind companies making money out of Linux. SuSe does bring a nice
and polished product. Just be fair about it.
Jan
quote:
>
| |
| Robert Hull 2004-01-19, 1:32 pm |
| In message <400c1e75$0$135$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrotequote:
>Maybe it's an idea for SuSe to sell cheaper retail versions with just
>the DVD's or CD-Roms, without the books (and not just upgrades).
Have you ever checked out what a SuSE Upgrade set actually contains ?
It is the Pro distribution minus the printed manuals and with a short
upgrade guide.
There is no need to have an existing installation to use a SuSE upgrade
package. Just like the Pro boxed set, YAST will check whether you appear
to have an exiting installation or not. If you do, either will offer an
upgrade option. If not, either will offer a fresh install.
Maybe it's an idea for people to check out what SuSE *really* offers
rather than what they *suppose* that SuSE *might* offer were it not so.
--
Robert Talking to yourself - first sign of madness
Answering yourself back - first sign of schizophrenia
I go one better: If I don't like the answer ...
I put it to a majority vote
| |
| Peter =?ISO-8859-15?Q?K=F6hlmann?= 2004-01-19, 1:32 pm |
| Robert Hull wrote:
quote:
> In message <400c1e75$0$135$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
> Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrote
>
> Have you ever checked out what a SuSE Upgrade set actually contains ?
>
> It is the Pro distribution minus the printed manuals and with a short
> upgrade guide.
>
> There is no need to have an existing installation to use a SuSE upgrade
> package. Just like the Pro boxed set, YAST will check whether you appear
> to have an exiting installation or not. If you do, either will offer an
> upgrade option. If not, either will offer a fresh install.
>
> Maybe it's an idea for people to check out what SuSE *really* offers
> rather than what they *suppose* that SuSE *might* offer were it not so.
What did you expect from soneone posting with OE? Coherent thought?
--
Don't abandon hope: your Tom Mix decoder ring arrives tomorrow
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-19, 1:32 pm |
| On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 22:33:54 +0100
noname <noaddress@no.mail> wrote:
quote:
>
> I think it is stupid of SuSE to call it upgrade versions and the way
> they distibute it.
It's called "Upgrade" because it's missing some of the books -- which
is also why it's cheaper. If you are a first time Linux user you
should *not* be buying the Upgrade because you will not have all the
books you might need to get you going in it. "Upgrade" implies that
you have a running Linux system, or at least know Linux. Off the top
of my head, I can't think of a better title for it, maybe you can. :-)
quote:
> I think the way SuSE distributes the upgrade version is
> not good for sales and getting SuSE or even Linux in the mainstream.
> People don't trust it because of the confusing information on the
> boxes and they don't want to buy the 'real' version since there are
> two prices for the full version.
>
As opposed to what? Windows' clarity in packaging? Windows' single
price every where you look? Yeah, right! :-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
5:32pm up 24 days 9:41, 6 users, load average: 0.01, 0.07, 0.03
| |
| Jerry Koniecki 2004-01-20, 12:08 am |
| Jan Stedehouder wrote:
quote:
> "noname" <noaddress@no.mail> schreef in bericht
> news:400b4294$0$324$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
[snip]
quote:
[snip]
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> restricted by the YaST license. Too bad. I like SuSe and it is worth 95
> euro's. Good
> things do not have to be for free. Maybe it's an idea for SuSe to sell
> cheaper retail
> versions with just the DVD's or CD-Roms, without the books (and not just
> upgrades).
I just got SuSE pro version 9.0 for $64.99 US through Amazon. Free
shipping.
Cheap enough for you with the books?
I used Google to find the link to Amazon's $64.99 price.
--
Jerry wa2rkn no email @ present
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-20, 4:23 am |
|
"Peter Köhlmann" <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
news:buhsfg$iq2$06$3@news.t-online.com...quote:
> Robert Hull wrote:
>
Listen Peter,
We are trying to have a normal discussion here on the policy of SuSE
regarding their distribution.
Your contribution "What did you expect from soneone posting with OE?
Coherent thought?" is a waste of our time. Besides, it is "someone"
instead of "soneone".
Personally I am a strong advocate of respectful behavior in newsgroups.
Jan Stedehouder
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> --
> Don't abandon hope: your Tom Mix decoder ring arrives tomorrow
>
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-20, 4:23 am |
|
"Jerry Koniecki" <NOspam@my.mailbox> schreef in bericht
news:400CCC5E.56C1A3B1@my.mailbox...quote:
> Jan Stedehouder wrote:
>
>
> [snip]
>
for a[QUOTE][color=darkred]
it[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> [snip]
>
>
> I just got SuSE pro version 9.0 for $64.99 US through Amazon. Free
> shipping.
> Cheap enough for you with the books?
> I used Google to find the link to Amazon's $64.99 price.
True, I just saw that in a local bookstore you can get a box for 50 euro's,
which would amount to the same price. On the other hand: shops are also
still selling SuSE 8.2 next to SuSE 9.0 for the same price: 95 euro's.
It would be nice thought to have a different set of pricing. 95 euro's for
Pro with books and support is not bad, just as 50 for Personal. However,
just a copy of either the DVD or the CD ROM's (why both?) in a price range
of 20-25 euro's would be nice. I would pay that, if I keeps SuSE alive. It
works for Debian and OpenBSD.
Jan
quote:
>
> --
> Jerry wa2rkn no email @ present
| |
| Peter =?ISO-8859-15?Q?K=F6hlmann?= 2004-01-20, 9:37 am |
| Jan Stedehouder wrote:
quote:
>
> "Peter Köhlmann" <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
> news:buhsfg$iq2$06$3@news.t-online.com...
>
> Listen Peter,
>
> We are trying to have a normal discussion here on the policy of SuSE
> regarding their distribution.
>
Fine. Why do you whine then about a SuSE Pro with manuals (which you say you
don't need) for 95 Euros (it is less than 80 Eur in germany) when you could
get the *exact* same version less the manuals (except the admin-manual, it
is present, as well as a short install guide) for rougly half the prize?
To me it sounds exactly like that version you want and clamour for and yet
have completely failed to notice that it already exists
quote:
> Your contribution "What did you expect from soneone posting with OE?
> Coherent thought?" is a waste of our time.
No. It is a simple stating of the facts
quote:
> Besides, it is "someone" instead of "soneone".
>
So you have never heard of those infamous "typos". When you ever get around
to have a look on those things people call "keyboard", try to make out
where the "n" and the "m" are located
And no, I have absolutely no respect for people posting with OE. Especially
not in a linux group. No respect at all. Nada, zilch
If you where posting in alt.os.windows-xp, I could somewhat understand the
usage of OE, since the majority of posters there have a combined IQ of less
than 43.
[QUOTE][color=darkred]
> Personally I am a strong advocate of respectful behavior in newsgroups.
>
> Jan Stedehouder
>
>
See? Your abomination of a "newsreader" does not even handle sigs.
It handles about nothing correctly. And makes for a really bad reading
experience for everyone else as soon as people start to use it in
newsgroups.
I would have expected somewhat more respect for other people from someone
who feels so easily offended
--
Windows was created to keep stupid people away from UNIX."
__--_Tom_Christiansen
| |
| noname 2004-01-21, 12:39 am |
|
Kevin Nathan wrote:quote:
>
> It's called "Upgrade" because it's missing some of the books -- which
> is also why it's cheaper. If you are a first time Linux user you
> should *not* be buying the Upgrade because you will not have all the
> books you might need to get you going in it. "Upgrade" implies that
> you have a running Linux system, or at least know Linux. Off the top
> of my head, I can't think of a better title for it, maybe you can. :-)
The way the SuSE upgrade version is distributed (missing some of the
books), does not make it the best type of SuSE for Linux starters. I
agree, although other operating systems like MS also are not distributed
with books and the installation on a fresh system is not as complicated
as a few years back. Beside this: why should starters start with the
professional edition? It could be good to have this type distributed
without tempting information for the new users to buy it rather then the
professional boxed edition with the books.
But I don't think it is a good thing this is accomplished by the
confusing information. The word 'Upgrade' makes it clear this type can
be used to upgrade from the previous versions, but it does not make it
clear at all it can also to be used as full version for professional
Linux users who don't need those books.
I agree the name upgrade should be the main name on this type, but SuSE
should also make it clear on the outside of the box (not with labels) it
can also be used by advanced users to as a full version.
And the upgrade box should have a different colour/layout.
quote:
>
>
> As opposed to what? Windows' clarity in packaging? Windows' single
> price every where you look? Yeah, right! :-)
>
>
Opposed to clear information on the SuSE boxes. They dont want to buy
because they want the cheapest box, but do not dare to buy the cheap box
because they are not sure what to get and why there is a different
price. Because af the confusing message the label and boxes send out
they often do not buy the personal version eighter.
There is no need for single price and Windows clarity. But the recent
professional upgrade box and the professional box with books already are
like the windows clarity packaging unfortunately.
But I have hope for SuSE 10.
S.
| |
| xhzat@detyec.com 2004-01-21, 12:39 am |
| |>>I think it is stupid of SuSE to call it upgrade versions and the way
|>>they distibute it.
|
|The way the SuSE upgrade version is distributed (missing some of the
|books), does not make it the best type of SuSE for Linux starters. I
|
|But I don't think it is a good thing this is accomplished by the
|confusing information. The word 'Upgrade' makes it clear this type can
|be used to upgrade from the previous versions, but it does not make it
But you can also upgrade with the full Pro version.
I think the name Upgrade is confusing. It may have started life this
way, but it should be called something else now, like maybe
-Update, -Lite or -Expert, who knows. SUSE marketing, if you are
listening, please put on your thinking caps.
Otherwise we will keep having this FAQ: "Yes the Upgrade box contains
everything the Pro box has, except the full set of manuals. So if you
are newbie..."
The other FAQ we will keep having is: "What's missing from the Personal
box".
--
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-21, 12:39 am |
| On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:41:23 +0100
noname <noaddress@no.mail> wrote:
quote:
>
> agree, although other operating systems like MS also are not
> distributed with books and the installation on a fresh system is not
> as complicated as a few years back.
I will submit to you that Windows itself is not as complicated (or
powerful) as Linux. And practically no programs included, except
things like Notepad, Wordpad, Paint and some games. All the really
complicated stuff (digicams, printers, etc.) are handled by the third
party vendors and *their* software drivers written exclusively for
Windows. In SUSE, practically everything you'd ever need is included
and they've done a damn good job of making sure it works together.
When you hear of a few problems with it, consider that there are over
2000 programs included -- so a few problems are virtually guaranteed
to happen . . .
And if something goes wrong in Windows, what do you do if a reinstall
doesn't fix it? :-)
quote:
> Beside this: why should starters
> start with the professional edition?
Why not? If that scares them away, they can buy the Personal version.
If they research it first -- like visiting SUSE's website, they'd
learn the differences and could better decide what they wanted.
Making a decision based on a box in the store is not the wisest course
of action; research a little, first.
quote:
> But I don't think it is a good thing this is accomplished by the
> confusing information. The word 'Upgrade' makes it clear this type
> can be used to upgrade from the previous versions, but it does not
> make it clear at all it can also to be used as full version for
> professional Linux users who don't need those books.
Actually, the title is "Update" not "Upgrade", but not much difference
there, I'd say. How about this for a marketing plan:
$50: SUSE Linux 9.0 "New Users" -- was Personal
$90: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Intermediate Users" -- was Pro
$60: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Advanced Users" -- was Pro Update
$25: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Guru " -- new category, disks only.
:-)
quote:
> And the upgrade box should have a different colour/layout.
>
I don't think so. Keeping the color/layout/logos the same is a good
idea, just label them more prominently, as you said.
quote:
> Opposed to clear information on the SuSE boxes. They dont want to
> buy because they want the cheapest box, but do not dare to buy the
> cheap box because they are not sure what to get and why there is a
> different price. Because af the confusing message the label and
> boxes send out they often do not buy the personal version eighter.
Personal and Professional are good, clear labels. If I'm a beginner,
I'd look to buy Personal first; if I've been using Linux a while, I'd
be tempted to buy Professional. The confusion is only with the Update
version, and you don't see that one here in the states very much. The
only way I've been able to get it is direct from SUSE, never in any
store. Of course, that's probably different in a large metropolitan
area . . . :-)
Maybe they should label the Update as "Pro w/o the books". That'd be
much clearer.
quote:
> But the
> recent professional upgrade box and the professional box with books
They aren't recent -- SUSE's been doing that as long as I've been
buying it (granted, only since 7.1, but I'd bet they were doing it
before that, too!).
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
5:37pm up 25 days 9:46, 6 users, load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-21, 12:39 am |
| On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:53:16 GMT
xhzat@detyec.com wrote:
quote:
> I think the name Upgrade is confusing. It may have started life this
> way, but it should be called something else now, like maybe
> -Update, -Lite or -Expert, who knows. SUSE marketing, if you are
> listening, please put on your thinking caps.
Actually, it *is* labelled "Update", not "Upgrade". (Check their
site.) But I agree with you that they probably need to find a better
naming scheme to indicate more accurately what the box contains . . .
:-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
6:04pm up 25 days 10:13, 6 users, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-21, 12:40 am |
| Peter Köhlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote in message news:<buk88q$46s$02$3@news.t-online.com>...quote:
>
> No. It is a simple stating of the facts
>
>
> So you have never heard of those infamous "typos". When you ever get around
> to have a look on those things people call "keyboard", try to make out
> where the "n" and the "m" are located
>
> And no, I have absolutely no respect for people posting with OE. Especially
> not in a linux group. No respect at all. Nada, zilch
I am sorry, but you have just proven my point. Really, your are making
quite an "effort" to promote Linux.
quote:
>
> If you where posting in alt.os.windows-xp, I could somewhat understand the
> usage of OE, since the majority of posters there have a combined IQ of less
> than 43.
>
See earlier remark.
quote:
> See? Your abomination of a "newsreader" does not even handle sigs.
> It handles about nothing correctly. And makes for a really bad reading
> experience for everyone else as soon as people start to use it in
> newsgroups.
> I would have expected somewhat more respect for other people from someone
> who feels so easily offended
For the sake of clarity: you started abusing others, whereas
-fortunately- the other participants were having a civilized
discussion.
| |
| Jan Stedehouder 2004-01-21, 6:29 am |
|
"Kevin Nathan" <knathan@project54.com> schreef in bericht
news:20040119173749.69de6ee7@allevil.local...quote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 22:33:54 +0100
> noname <noaddress@no.mail> wrote:
>
>
> It's called "Upgrade" because it's missing some of the books -- which
> is also why it's cheaper. If you are a first time Linux user you
> should *not* be buying the Upgrade because you will not have all the
> books you might need to get you going in it. "Upgrade" implies that
> you have a running Linux system, or at least know Linux. Off the top
> of my head, I can't think of a better title for it, maybe you can. :-)
>
>
I have been checking the SuSe site for the description of Pro 9 and Pro 9
Update.
The descriptions are nearly identical, with no clarity on who would benefit
from
which box. The Pro 9 Update page makes no reference to prior Linux knowledge
or the necessity to have Linux installed.
Still, a less confusing name would have been nice.
Jan
| |
| noname 2004-01-21, 8:33 am |
|
Kevin Nathan wrote:
quote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:41:23 +0100
> noname <noaddress@no.mail> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I will submit to you that Windows itself is not as complicated (or
> powerful) as Linux. And practically no programs included, except
> things like Notepad, Wordpad, Paint and some games. All the really
> complicated stuff (digicams, printers, etc.) are handled by the third
> party vendors and *their* software drivers written exclusively for
> Windows. In SUSE, practically everything you'd ever need is included
> and they've done a damn good job of making sure it works together.
> When you hear of a few problems with it, consider that there are over
> 2000 programs included -- so a few problems are virtually guaranteed
> to happen . . .
>
> And if something goes wrong in Windows, what do you do if a reinstall
> doesn't fix it? :-)
I agree, SuSE is still more complicated because it has far more
software. The installation of SuSE is since a few distribution versions
almost as easy as MS Win, but I forgot beginners need the book also for
the software after the installation.
But the books are also on the disk, if I am not mistaken.
quote:
> Making a decision based on a box in the store is not the wisest course
> of action; research a little, first.
Yes, but we can not force the buyers to be wise. This is also why I
think there should be enough information on the box to make it at least
clear what buyers exactly get, with advice what kind of users should buy
that distribution type.
quote:
> Actually, the title is "Update" not "Upgrade", but not much difference
> there, I'd say. How about this for a marketing plan:
>
> $50: SUSE Linux 9.0 "New Users" -- was Personal
> $90: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Intermediate Users" -- was Pro
> $60: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Advanced Users" -- was Pro Update
> $25: SUSE Linux 9.0 "Guru " -- new category, disks only.
>
> :-)
Isn´t it better to start renaming from a new version? :-)
I was more thinking like:
SuSE Linux 9.1 Personal, Starters
SuSE Linux 9.1 Personal, Update & Advanced Users
SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Starters
SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Update & Advanced Users
SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Starters for Students
quote:
>
>
> They aren't recent -- SUSE's been doing that as long as I've been
> buying it (granted, only since 7.1, but I'd bet they were doing it
> before that, too!).
>
My mistake. I mean since a few distribution versions it is far more easy
to install SuSE.
S.
| |
| Robert Hull 2004-01-21, 11:34 am |
| In message <400ec24e$0$135$3a628fcd@reader1.nntp.hccnet.nl>, Jan
Stedehouder <j.stedehouder@nowhere.nl> wrotequote:
>The Pro 9 Update page makes no reference to prior Linux knowledge
>or the necessity to have Linux installed.
That could be because neither of those is a pre-requisite, although if
you decide to go without printed manuals it makes more sense to
understand how to access them in electronic form.
YMMV
--
Robert Talking to yourself - first sign of madness
Answering yourself back - first sign of schizophrenia
I go one better: If I don't like the answer ...
I put it to a majority vote
| |
| Kevin Nathan 2004-01-21, 11:34 am |
| On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 22:21:12 +0100
noname <noaddress@no.mail> wrote:
quote:
> The installation of SuSE is since a few distribution
> versions almost as easy as MS Win
>
There are cases where it's even *easier*. For instance, when I get
done on the ng, I have two laptops that I have to resurrect. Of
course, they didn't keep the original books or driver disks so I get
to try to figure out what's in them after installing a vanilla Win9x
CD -- sure wish I could put SUSE on them! But then, I'd not be able
to charge them as much because I'd get done too soon . . . :-)
quote:
> Yes, but we can not force the buyers to be wise.
>
Very true! And I've been guilty of that myself. But, to be fair, I
can't remember seeing *any* boxed software, whereever it came from,
labelled much better . . .
quote:
> I was more thinking like:
>
> SuSE Linux 9.1 Personal, Starters
> SuSE Linux 9.1 Personal, Update & Advanced Users
> SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Starters
> SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Update & Advanced Users
> SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional, Starters for Students
>
I think I'd leave out the second one. IMO, Personal should be suitable
for home users that just surf the web, email, write letters, do simple
home finance and play games; and the books included should reflect
that. Other than that, a good division I think. :-)
quote:
> I mean since a few distribution versions it is far more
> easy to install SuSE.
>
Yes, *all* distros are getting easier. Well, except for Linux From
Scratch and a few others . . . ;-)
--
Kevin Nathan (Montana, USA)
Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
5:38pm up 26 days 9:48, 6 users, load average: 0.30, 0.25, 0.22
| |
| Michel Catudal 2004-01-24, 1:33 pm |
| noname wrote:
quote:
>
>
> Kevin Nathan wrote:
>
>
> The way the SuSE upgrade version is distributed (missing some of the
> books), does not make it the best type of SuSE for Linux starters. I
> agree, although other operating systems like MS also are not distributed
> with books and the installation on a fresh system is not as complicated
> as a few years back.
I installed Win XP around christmas time. I would have a "-" on the left
corner shortly after I started the installation. The solution to the
problem was to remove the PCI NVidia card and put something else until
the install was completed. Not complicated install you say ...
quote:
>Beside this: why should starters start with the
> professional edition? It could be good to have this type distributed
> without tempting information for the new users to buy it rather then the
> professional boxed edition with the books.
>
If you don't know shit about Linux it is illogical to get the OS without
books. If the person is too cheap to buy books with Linux he should stick
to Windows.
--
Howard Dean for America
http://www.deanforamerica.com
http://www.netonecom.net/~bbcat
|
|
|
|
|