Red Hat the Next MS

[thaddaeus]

My Dad whom works for a prodminantly MS company shared an article he found this one quote from Mathew Szulik makes me curious as to what Red Hat actually contributes to the opensource comunity



Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Red Hat, says Carey's views do not represent those of most Red Hat customers. But in the same conversation, Szulik says he'd love it if Red Hat could become the next Microsoft. "Who wouldn't want to be Microsoft?" he asks. "I mean, come on. Honestly."


But Carey's other concern has to do with Linux vendors themselves, like Red Hat...recently introduced a new licensing policy that will force customers to pay a per-CPU fee for the commercial version of its product, called Enterprise Linux...Enterprise Linux is still free--because customers are being charged for support, not for the software itself (ahem).


The First Quote Scares me about such a big Linux Distro loosing sight of the open source movement. And the last quote kills me. Come on who are they kidding, "Its Still Free we just charge for support", Ok then charge for support seperatly from the Distro. What if i don't want support anyway, do i get a discount, Most likely NO! Sound familar, hmm.

This same issue use to exist before comp. parts were still a bit expensive ( i was too young then so i may be wrong about pricing) and some crazy ms not likeling people wanted to get a refund for unused windows OS on new PCs. Well to get around this MS now gives discounts to vendors to make the spred of windows more prodominant.

This is the link to the article:

http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/03/31/cz_dl_0331linux.html

it was written at the end of last month so its semi new, but reading this makes me loose respect for redhat, and makes me hope that Mandrake Dosn't follow in the same footsteps, they do have that new club thing you can join to get stuff. We'll just have to wait and see what the Linux world becomes.

[Sepero]

Geez, not another one of these lame threads...:rolleyes:

C'mon people. Anyone that understands the GPL knows that there's very little chance of this ever happening. Besides whats wrong with paying per computer support. Let's say a company pays $50 for one copy of Redhat and installs it on a 1,000 computers and you buy one copy and put it on 1 computer. Should they get more support than you?

[chatins]

Like a 400 watt light bulb turned on, it is now clear that the Internet belongs to Linux.

MS will eventually fail in the Internet marketplace as perfect competition, pricing and security becomes the rule not the exception.

Read, former Red Hat CEO, Young's book "under the radar" to catch up with the 1990's. ($1 at Amazon used books)

[XiaoKJ]

At least RH did produce the world's biggest distro, and contributed to the linux and OSS community... What did M$ and the like do???

BTW, RH should charge for support as RHEL is still free, and they need to make a living... Also, an individual computer user just don't need support, JL.com and google just do the trick for many like me!

Thus, RH is free to go commercial for all I care but I may no longer ever use it again as I have outgrown it in terms of desire, functionality and all

However, I may continue to recommend it for newbies and also for companies to use them as it has support, and has paid support, which only them would companies like Oracle would support, otherwise the poor companies would be on their own! This may be, in all, something good for the linux community, and Mr Mathew may donate to OSS/GNU/....

[do_guh_new]

I'd have to agree with sepero, under the GPL it just isnt possible. If it wasnt for redhat I dont know what my first distro would've been when I started using linux, but if it wasnt for redhat books at my local barnes and noble I might've never got into linux, or at least been a long time before I did. It was my first distro for using linux, knowing about open source, and paved the way for me to fully understand the GPL. It's human nature to try and shoot down the big guy, and in essence that's all this is about. Without redhat this message board would probably have a lot fewer members than it does today, that alone is a huge contribution to the community. I dont recall MS having an open source testing platform for windows (fedora).

[thaddaeus]

I would have to admit that i started off with RH and i'm not trying to ko the big guy, I just don't want such a large company to represent what Linux is, thats all most large business see when they want to try "free" linux

[Dark Ninja]

Originally posted by XiaoKJ
At least RH did produce the world's biggest distro, and contributed to the linux and OSS community... What did M$ and the like do???


First off, don't put the $ sign. Microsoft has a lot of money...yes...we all know that.

Secondly, Microsoft did absolutely nothing for the Linux and OpenSource community -- no kidding. That's not where they put their resources.

Third, if it wasn't for Microsoft, the desktop market would probably not be where it is today. (Remember that IBM thought that desktops were only going to be a "passing fad.")

I'm not a MS advocate, but I don't feel they should be trashed just for the hell of trashing them.

[hard candy]

You know wha really impressed me was reading in MaximumPC magazine that Google has >10,000 servers running on Redhat. Can you imagine 10,000 servers? Of course they are in scattered locations but still, I'd like to see that network diagram:eek:

Reckon they use up2date? :)
And do you think they use blades or racks or both?

[Icarus]

Thanks Dark Ninja,
Those are exactly the points most people like to forget. Microsoft does some terrible things, yes. But if it really wasn't for their hard work and dedication computers would still be mainframes and terminal clients. (Then there would be Apple)

Red Hat is not going to be the next Microsoft, ever. Just because they put out notices that they are not going to support their products after 18 months does not make them evil. After 18 months all that software is so out of date patches won't do much good.

You can claim that Red Hat charges too much of their 'Enterprise Linux', bit then you forget that comes with 24/7 support (which is what the IT Managers look for).

It seems that people like to hate Red Hat for the same reasons they hate Microsoft...they are successful.

[El_Cu_Guy]

Another quote taken out of contet.

What software company wouldn't want to be the next Microsoft and enjoy the success and huge market share?

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Originally posted by El_Cu_Guy
Another quote taken out of contet.

What software company wouldn't want to be the next Microsoft and enjoy the success and huge market share?

Exactly.

...That's why as I type, I'm inventing a version of DOS that runs on the PC-XT, and a PC-XT version of BASIC. I get the feeling I'm going somewhere with this one-- hopefully no one beats me to it!

Whu wha wha? Somebody already did that? Eh? They're worth $30-40 billion now!?!? DARN IT! I always get beaten to the punch! :mad:

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by Dark Ninja
(Remember that IBM thought that desktops were only going to be a "passing fad.")


And didn't Gates once say 640K is all you would ever need in a pc?

[Dark Ninja]

Originally posted by mdwatts
And didn't Gates once say 640K is all you would ever need in a pc?

That's what I've been told. And, I'm not saying that Bill Gates didn't make his own mistakes. You have to in order to learn. All I am saying is he did envision a PC sitting on ever person's desk. Because he had the foresight to do this, and the business expertise (which is actually his strongest aspect), he is now one of the world's richest men.

Again, I repeat -- I am not a Microsoft advocate. But, not everything they have done has been bad. They have contributed a lot as well.

[IsaacKuo]

Originally posted by mahdi
Thanks Dark Ninja,
Those are exactly the points most people like to forget. Microsoft does some terrible things, yes. But if it really wasn't for their hard work and dedication computers would still be mainframes and terminal clients. (Then there would be Apple)

Nonsense. IBM was dragged into the PC business by the success of APPLE, not Microsoft. The explosive growth of the Apple ][ driven by the killer app "Visicalc" is what put the PC permanently on the map.

In fact, if Microsoft and IBM weren't around to make the DOS PC dominant, we'd probably be in a lot more ADVANCED state of computing. The Apple Macintosh was going to get developed either way, being the logical extension of the Apple Lisa project. And then, all the Macintosh inspired alternatives would have still copied/expanded on its ideas--the Atari ST and Amiga.

In fact, the Mac, Atari ST, and Amiga had a very healthy competition of the GUIs going along while PCs were stuck in text based DOS. If PCs weren't around, GUI operating systems would have been dominant a DECADE earlier. One of those would have been a modern pre-emptive multitasking OS (Amiga OS).

Just imagine--a fully graphical pre-emptive multitasking OS (with XTerm-like shells also), with multiple desktops, all running in 256K of RAM back in the mid-80's. Well, some of us don't have to just imagine that--we used it.

The Unix-like shell interface and C-friendly pre-emptive multitasking OS of the Amiga made ports of Unix projects popular and relatively straightforward. REAL TCP/IP could be implemented with a port, not merely kludged as was necessary for DOS.

Thank Microsoft? For what? Delaying the preeminence of GUI and preemptive multitasking computing by a decade? Delaying the ubiquitous adoption of Internet networking (i.e. TCP/IP)? :rolleyes: No thanks!

[Hayl]

Originally posted by IsaacKuo

Finally someone making some sense.

I fully agree with you.

[Dark Ninja]

Originally posted by IsaacKuo
Delaying the ubiquitous adoption of Internet networking (i.e. TCP/IP)? :rolleyes: No thanks!

Hey! That wasn't delayed by Microsoft!

...Al Gore just hadn't come up with the idea yet.
:D


Okay, okay, I see the glares. I'm going.

[proffy]

Originally posted by mdwatts
And didn't Gates once say 640K is all you would ever need in a pc?
No,

http://www.urbanlegends.com/celebrities/bill.gates/gates_memory.html

http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,1484,00.html

http://interactiveu.berkeley.edu:8000/lj/stories/storyReader$31

he never said that.

Even if he did, it should be clear that was simply talking about the 16 bit machines at the time
(early 80s).

I told my mom that 512 megs of RAM is enough RAM for her. 20 years from now, when everyone has 100 gigs of RAM standard, are you going to be throwing the quote all around too?

Give me a break.

Proffy

[Sepero]

Originally posted by IsaacKuo
Thank Microsoft? For what? Delaying the preeminence of GUI and preemptive multitasking computing by a decade? Delaying the ubiquitous adoption of Internet networking (i.e. TCP/IP)? :rolleyes: No thanks!

It's funny that now GNU/Linux is beating MS with the same tactic MS used to beat many of it's early competition. It's the same tactic that many businesses use to beat each other.

-Sell a similar product, but at a lower price.

So, good riddens Microsoft. If you didn't become the monopoly you are, Apple would have taken your place. It was innevitable.

<rant>
To everyone that thinks MS is a "nice guy"... Stop Trolling the forum!

Do I have negative feelings towards Microsoft? Of course I do! Microsoft is like the bully in school. The bully says, "Gimme your lunch money or I'm gonna pound you after school". Microsoft says, "Gimme your upgrade money or risk getting pounded with vendor lock-out".

I don't like it when someone tries to bully my friends or family. Picture it for a second, would you tolerate it if a MS representative said that to your mothers face? Hell no, I wouldn't! But they don't have to, because their actions speak louder than WORDS.
</rant>

[EnigmaOne]

Originally posted by thaddaeus
My Dad whom works for a prodminantly MS company shared an article he found...

Yeah, yeah, yeah...there's no Troll food available at the moment.
Rest assured that your call is very 'important' to us.

Please hold.

>click<