On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:09 -0500, drew Roberts
wrote:
On Thursday 03 December 2009 05:04:26 Ng Oon-Ee
wrote:
>> Oh, I was thinking Golden Arch Linux would be the paid-support version
>> of Arch Linux.
> Quite difficult to have a 'paid-support' version of a distro that's not
> owned/managed by a company =).
Yup, but not too difficult to have paid support for a distro that's not
owned/managed by a company.Right?
all the best,
drew
I guess. Doubt it'd be a good economic prospect in any case, considering
the user base either:-
a) doesn't need your help
b) needs your help but won't pay for it cos "OMGZZ THIS ISN'T WINDOWS
WHY SHOULD I PAY"
Disclaimer: I use Arch myself, and I know very very few users who fall
into b). Few isn't none, however =)
Well, I've bought Linux software in
the past when FOSS software couldn't
do what I needed it to, so there are folk who buy Linux software. I even
bought my first Linux distro (CorelLinux).