Where UnitedLinux Got It Wrong

An Anonymous Coward writes "A story on NewsForge [ed. note: part of the keiretsu] suggests that the lack of binaries for UnitedLinux shows disrespect to the community which created most of the software. The author suggests a better way for handling the business problems that a lack of binaries is supposed to solve. Some particularly clueless reader comments say that UnitedLinux has no responsibility to cooperate with the community. The thought that UnitedLinux won't even offer a development distribution to the community does not sit well with me."

Comments

This is kind of naive

[RTFA Man]

Corporations want to feel secure. They want a brand name. They want support. What happens if the boss hears the name "Hacker's Linux?" You can expect to hear an immediate dissertation on the order of "We don't want software for hackers -- we want software that gives us support and quality! Get that UnitedLinux product in here!"

The name "Hacker's Linux" will make the downloadable software totally unpalatable to the corporate world. And, because the corporate world is the only targeted customer base for UnitedLinux, this will virtually eliminate any loss of revenue otherwise expected from providing ISO images.

moderators?!?!?

[BoneFlower]

This is not off topic. Redundant perhaps, but definitely not off topic. Moderation is steadily getting worse here... perhaps the karma level needed to be a moderator should be increased a bit... You can't moderate effectively if you don't know what a good post is, and until you've built up positive karma, how have you shown that you know good posts from bad and thus deserve moderator access?