Re: More Red Hat information

From: Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: webb sprague <wsprague(at)o1(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: More Red Hat information
Date: 2001-06-25 19:13:46
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.30.0106251513050.15265-100000@paprika.michvhf.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, webb sprague wrote:
> >
> > > I guess I prefer my free software free...
> >
> > Agreed, but alot of companies want to be able to point a finger at
> > someone or some company when something goes awry. With RH being
> > the first to put out PostgreSQL with an operating system that I would
> > assume was fine tuned for best performance by those that know the
> > OS very well and possibly even include some tools along with it, I'd
> > think their offering would be well received in the small to medium
> > sized business community.
>
> Heck, I pay ~400/year for BSD/OS support on my home machine because when
> I have a complex problem, I need someone to concentrate on getting it
> solved, so commerical support isn't just for finger-pointing.
>
> The $400/year has been worth it for me so I suspect there are PostgreSQL
> users that need such support too.

I didn't mean someone to blame, I meant someone to call.

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-06-25 19:15:47 Re: More Red Hat information
Previous Message Bryan White 2001-06-25 18:59:30 Re: It's Apache, not PostgreSQL