5 ms·
I cannot think of many reasons to run RHEL and pay Redhat, but if I was building a warship for 3.5 billion, I'd install RHEL on it and pay to have my version of
by timthelion 9y ago
I cannot think of many reasons to run RHEL and pay Redhat, but if I was building a warship for 3.5 billion, I'd install RHEL on it and pay to have my version of the OS maintained indefinitly.
- TallGuyShort 9y agoMy understanding from an engineer who worked on UK military projects and UK satellites (not sure if there was overlap there) was that RHEL was far less willing to enter extremely long-term support contrtacts than Microsoft, and THAT was the one requirement that allowed even Vista to trump RHEL for some mission-critical systems.
- digi_owl 9y agoWonder if that has changed recently as i swear i read about a new destroyer or something that would get a RHEL based "datacenter" installed.
- TallGuyShort 9y agoCould be the different use cases, too. Also been a few years since I was up to date, but Windows certainly used to dominate the control systems market a bit more than the server market.
- digi_owl 9y agoAnd i have long wondered if the real push behind Wayland is not that X is "broken" but that X is a bad fit on IVI and similar uses, because of various overheads.