difference between suse and red hat

[Court Campbell]

To keep is simple, I would say packaging. IMO use what you are comfortable with. My suggestion is to run both side by side and choose the one that meets your needs. Both are great distros. I mainly used Suse in the past because they had better xen support, but now that line has gotten kind of blurred. RH has come a long way in with vm integration. Anyway, that my 2 cents. I guess you could get crazy and start getting amped up about whether apparmor or selinux is better. :P

[Colin Topliss]

Working with both RedHat and SuSE in a production environment, I always push SuSE over RedHat. Patch management in SuSE is easier that RH (our prod systems can't talk to RHN via the Internet, and it's too costly just to put in an RHN satellite server). I don't have that issue with SuSE. Also SuSE networking is (IMHO) better implemented than under RH (ethernet bonding is a breeze, as well as NIC renaming with udev rules, single routing table, etc etc etc).

But at the end of the day, it's really what you get used to. We made our choice back when RH stopped doing the RH releases (RH9 was the last before Fedora) - the SuSE distribution really seemed the way to go (I used to be an avid RH fan and I was swayed).

Can't really comment on support - never had to use it for anything other than issues with HP hardware/software!

[simplylinuxfaq]

https://www.simplylinuxfaq.com/2019/08/differences-between-rhel-and-sles.html