Posted by
timothy
on from the sighs-of-relief-or-disappointment dept.
Several readers have submitted word (this one comes from n8twj) that "CNet News is reporting that AOL Time Warner apparently is NOT making a bid to buy Linux manufacturer Red Hat, said sources familiar with the matter."
Why would this be a bad thing?
by
kwj8fty1
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
So, I honestly don't care if AOL/Timewarner purchases RH. RH is not a distro I use. Having the backing of a huge media giant may help the linux cause. Sure, it will drive features *IN Redhat LINUX*, but not in the other distros. Long term, yes, it may effect the marketplace. But having Timewarner promoting linux would be a GREAT thing. Talk about adoption in the marketplace. Linux needs more credibility, and this may be a good way to get it.
Don't direct your ire at Slashdot; it was a front page story printed in The Washington Post.
The Post generally has very good credibility because its editors use discretion in deciding which stories are credible enough to run. They went out on a limb with this one and it snapped under them. The price they pay is the next time they cry wolf, you won't believe them. If you blame slashdot, you're giving The Post a license to be sloppy.
AOL subscribers swelled from 9 million in autumn1997 to 33 million at the beginning of this year. In December alone, AOL gained 1.9 million new subscribers, the company said. MSN, by contrast, foundered for years, going from 2.5 million subscribers in 1997 to 7.7 million in December.
Translation: in several years time AOL more than tripled subscribership whereas MSN only got slightly more than three times the number of subscribers in that same time period.
Think before you rant!
by
Shabazz
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Public companies can't lie or make any misrepresentations when dealing with questions from investors (or the press). This makes coverups very difficult because they could result in very expensive lawsuits. If they deny that they are in negotiations, and they are, then they are liable under Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act.
And for the record, IAAL.
Credit For:Top 11 Reasons AOL Wants to buy Red Hat
by
GooRoo
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Dude, at least give credit where credit is due.
Original link is from BBspot and can be viewed here.
Slashdot Mirror
So, I honestly don't care if AOL/Timewarner purchases RH. RH is not a distro I use. Having the backing of a huge media giant may help the linux cause. Sure, it will drive features *IN Redhat LINUX*, but not in the other distros. Long term, yes, it may effect the marketplace. But having Timewarner promoting linux would be a GREAT thing. Talk about adoption in the marketplace. Linux needs more credibility, and this may be a good way to get it.
I get it! This is cheap market research.
...bring several million dollars worth of free research to the next board meeting.
1) "Leak" a story that you are in talks to buy Red Hat.
2) Observe the terabytes of feedback from industry analysts, reporters, and fanatical users.
3) After denying everything as rumor,...
4)
5) Get a raise for your ingenious idea.
Well, what I don't understand is why they would buy RedHat when you can download the ISOs for free. ;)
Remeber, they're connected to the net though AOL.
You ever try downloading something big over AOL?
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
The Post generally has very good credibility because its editors use discretion in deciding which stories are credible enough to run. They went out on a limb with this one and it snapped under them. The price they pay is the next time they cry wolf, you won't believe them. If you blame slashdot, you're giving The Post a license to be sloppy.
Translation: in several years time AOL more than tripled subscribership whereas MSN only got slightly more than three times the number of subscribers in that same time period.
Hey!!! the parentheses are good for something
Public companies can't lie or make any misrepresentations when dealing with questions from investors (or the press). This makes coverups very difficult because they could result in very expensive lawsuits. If they deny that they are in negotiations, and they are, then they are liable under Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act. And for the record, IAAL.
Dude, at least give credit where credit is due.
Original link is from BBspot and can be viewed here.
...or to hear, "You've got root!"(TM)
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.