Can we stop this dumb thread. It's sooooo boring and unhelpful.
Or at least take it private.

Cheers
Bill
 
-----Original message-----
> From:ToddAndMargo <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday 9th November 2017 12:07
> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Rage against the EL Machine
> 
> On 11/08/2017 03:52 PM, O'Neal, Miles wrote:
> > I'm not real sure what this discussion has to do with Scientific Linux, 
> > but I'll give this a shot.
> > 
> > On 11/08/2017 05:25 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> >>
> >> I can't afford to have my Contacts and Tasks wiped out
> >> by the OS being too out of date to accept fixes and
> >> an OS vendor that won't fix it.  So it works both ways.
> > RedHat is quite up front about the point of RHEL, which is long term 
> > stability and support. EL is NOT about being anywhere even close to 
> > leading edge, much less bleeding edge. If you buy a heavy duty pickup 
> > truck, you do not get (and should not expect) sports car performance.
> > 
> > We use EL for both servers and workstations in hardware design[1] (and 
> > we are not alone in this). That's because that's what the third party 
> > tools support. There is no way those vendors can validate complex tool 
> > chains against a new build every six months. Yes, we are frustrated that 
> > we can't use the latest email client, web browser, or aardvarkial 
> > sanitization discomboobulator, but it comes with the turf. Conversely, 
> > many software groups prefer something that is very up to date, such as 
> > Fedora, Ubuntu, etc. They need a sports car, and recognize they can't 
> > haul a half ton microscope in it.
> > 
> > And you know what? For the job they really need to do (all sorts of 
> > things around hardware design and basic business and communication 
> > functions), the EL-based workstations work great.
> >>
> >>>> And you know the Cxxx series of chipsets have been around
> >>>> for a while now.  Just not long enough to be out of
> >>>> production at which point it will appear on Red Hat
> >>>> compatibility list.
> >>>
> >>> Nonsense. Our friends over at Red Hat are continuously supporting
> >>> leading edge *server* hardware. 
> >>
> >> Niko!  The C236 chipset *IS* a server grade chipset!
> >> And it has been around for a long time.  No doubt Red Hat
> >> will eventually support it in about five years, which is
> >> typical of them and useless to me.
> >>
> > Actually, it was meant to be a consumer and workstation chipset. While 
> > it is based on a server chipset, it's been somewhat gutted. But either 
> > way, unless the hardware vendor partners with RedHat, the latter is 
> > unlikely to support it. Should vendor be yelling at you if your employer 
> > got caught in a Congressional budget crunch and couldn't pay for massive 
> > magnets? No, because that's not how it works.
> 
> Intel does classify it as a "server grade" chipset.  It is
> meant low end model meant for small business servers and
> top reliability workstations.
> 
> > ...
> >>
> >> My problem is that I have been trying to pound a square peg
> >> into a round hole.  RHEL is a really poor choice for a system
> >> that has a lot of innovation going on on it.
> > 
> > It does sound like you're trying to pound a square peg into a round 
> > hole, but it's not the peg's fault. One must pick the right peg for the 
> > hole that needs to be filled.
> > 
> > -Miles
> 
> RHEL and Clones is best not used as a workstation, unless the
> software yo are going to run on it expressly support out-of-date
> operating system or software that currently work and your intention
> is to freeze it.  And can do such with any OS by turning of
> the updates.
> 
> In my case, the software I run requires the OS to keep on top
> of things.  Having my business' Tasks and Contacts deleted
> and the OS not supporting the patch is a *total annoyance*.
> 
> And it is my fault for choosing an OS that is out-of-date
> by design.  Square peg, round hole.
> 
>