Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Reports (tiny) Loss, Revenue Slip
Futurepower(tm) was one of the first to write with the news Red Hat reports loss, revenue slips, via Infoworld. Szulik ? is right in his statement that compared to what's going on in the overall technology segment, RH is doing a good job.
Software giant weathers well, Intel slips 15%.
Guess I know where to invest my money *grins*
Actually, looks more appropriate to upgrade my firewall. One linux product that tends to work well out of the box... tho I wish it was more secure by default. I don't think I've had any trouble installing it and running... unlike BeOS which failed 8 out of 10 times.
I doubt slashdot's censorship supporting authors would ever post it, but VALinux reported HUGE losses this quarter. Their stock is not below the $1.00 mark for the first time. If it stays this way for more than 60 days, they will be delisted from the NASDAQ.
I just don't know why in last quarter's report Red Hat loss $400,000 (as I recalled) and says break even because the loss is less than 1c. Now they say loss $100,000 and then loss 2c per share. How's the math?
Then, FYI, this $100,000 loss doesn't include one-time charges and/or costs which would total the loss to $55.3 million. Is there any "accounting tricks" applied to spiff up the reports or what?
Your answer is appreciated. Thanks.
--
Error 500: Internal sig error
It might take a while to kick in, but Redhat potentially can do well because OSS software is so much cheaper than much of the commercial software. There may be arguments that it takes more manpower to deploy, and it's not turn-key so it takes longer to bring to market -- many of these arguments might be valid (at least some of the time). But the value of cash vs. the value of time might be shifting -- cash has become more valuable. Leaner endevours would be well served to use OSS.
OTOH, if you really want to save money, why pay money for the support and the box? Linux is pretty much free. Still, even if I don't particularly care for Redhat (the distribution), I wish them well and am optimistic about their fate.
I feel really uncomfortable when people wonder whether open source software can have a profitable business model.
My company makes plenty of money by supporting the computer operations of businesses. My company provides the software at cost, without profit. The cost of the software is small compared to the support costs for training, hardware and software glitches, and specialized programs.
Open source software is more reliable, but support is still needed.
Red Hat, and other companies that provide support for open source software, are unbelieveably terrible at marketing. They just have no clue. That's part of the reason they have trouble making money.
If Microsoft were as bad as Red Hat at marketing, Microsoft would still be trying to sell Microsoft Basic. What's worse, Red Hat is better than most of the others at marketing.
When I look at most open source projects, I can't even understand the home page! Even the home pages are written with the idea that you work on the project, so you already know everything.
If you have a project involving GNU/free software, and need help with communicating to your prospective users, I may be able to help, as a volunteer. Send me email. Even when software is free, there is still a need for marketing communication.
Want to understand the situation in the middle east? Read What Should be the Response to Violence? . Most important lesson? Understanding the corruption in the secret agencies of the U.S. government. They have a conflict of interest; they are supposed to help prevent trouble, but they get more money if there is more trouble.
Bush's education improvements were