Interview With Gaël Duval of Mandrake Linux

jukal writes "Open for Business's Timothy R. Butler talked with Mandrake co-founder Gaël Duval about the company's past, present, and future. Worth a read, clip: "GD: For one year, we had a so-called "World Class Management" team that left us in a very bad financial situation, and engaged the company in ventures (such as e-learning) that we should never have been involved with. But that's all part of our history now, so I'd prefer to not dwell too much on that. ""

Comments

how funny

[geekoid]

is it that the saying at the bottom of the /. page was:
"All problems are the fault of the last person who quit, until some else quits"?

"problems? why, there the fault of world class managment, hrumph. hurumph. eveythings fine now though."

I don't know there situation, and this isn't a comment about Mandrake per se, but I founf the coincidence very funny.

Re:how funny

[Mudhiker]

And if it's been ages since someone quit and that excuse don't work anymore, blame it on the NEW GUY!

Re:how funny

[mandolin]

Around here it's "whoever did the last commit, even though it's been busted for months".

Re:how funny

[G-funk]

Just blame Tibor!

I'd like to give props to mandrake

[Raul654]

They do deserve credit as they best distro linux can muster for the desktop.

Mandrake Business Plan revealed!

[KNicolson]

Plan v1.0

1. Employ "World-class Management"
2. ???
3. Profit!

Oops, that didn't work, let's try v2.0

1. ???
2. ???
3. Profit!

Re:Mandrake Business Plan revealed!

[Libor Vanek]

v3.0

1. Create free Linux distro
2. Ask community for dotations
3. Profit!

OK, a bit sarcastic ;)

Re:My prejudice

[leviramsey]

Or as I like to call it "unethical RedHat".

Considering that Mandrake has a much stronger policy regarding Free Software than Red Hat, I find that interesting.

Either that, or IHBT.

Re:My prejudice

[HaggiZ]

Yep

Why is it unethical? I remember as a newbie I had lots of problems getting X up and running in slackware, and just generally having how I want. So I tried RedHat, that was a lot easier. Then I gave KDE a shot, and woah!! Wasn't that a breeze!!

I fail to see why just because it was easier, it was "unethical". Things shouldn't have to be difficult just because they can be.

I think many other newbies are the same as me, and maybe it's a sad reflection of my generation, but slackware (and at times redhat) took too long to do what I wanted when I was learning. I want to make some changes, compile, see the difference. I dont want hours upon hours of trawling config files when I'm learning, I want immediate reflection of my actions so I can learn it quicker.

Once I'm learning it, and starting to actually understand what I'm doing... then I'm willing to spend hours understanding it in more depth.

More power to KDE, if it wasn't for them I probably would have walked away altogether, and I'm sure many others are the same.

Re:My prejudice

[TheTomcat]

to me Mandrake is still RedHat+KDE ... Am I the only one?

I used to think the same thing.

I'm a pretty die-hard Debian fan (100% of my server installations have been Debian for the last year). However, when Woody came out, officially, I tore my desktop apart (time for a backup of critical and wipe of the garbage I'd been collecting). I tried Woody.. liked it just as much as any debian I'd tried (started with slink)... I I also decided to try Mandrake9.0beta (since my machine was in a "confused" state, anyway).

I've used Mandrake before (7.1+). It was always "decent", but had its problems.. I must say I'm impressed with 9.0, and I'm running GNOME on top of it right now, as my primary (home) desktop, as I type.

It's no longer just Redhat + KDE. RedHat can do that on its own.

With 9.0, my opinion is that Mandrake is finally holding its own. It's actually decent to work with, and while I miss apt-get (and can't find a decent MDK-9 apt-rpm repository) greatly, I honestly can't be bothered trying to get all my stuff working on Debian, where with Mandrake, it all works nearly out of the box. And it's no longer impossible to find config files (they're starting to be, for the most part, where you'd expect them).

I'm not bashing Debian, by any means.. just praising Mandrake (9).

S

AMD, Mandrake, MS and DRM,

[ronaldcromwell]

In the interview, Duval says:

Nowadays, Mandrake Linux is in the "top 5" of Linux distributions with partners such as HP, IBM, AMD, and other big players.

With AMD supposedly supporting paradigm, how does "free software" fit into the equation? Will MS try to make AMD cut it's ties with Mandrake? Will they try to get some sort of DRM put into Mandrake? Any ideas?

Re:My prejudice

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that Mandrake has a much stronger policy regarding Free Software than Red Hat, I find that interesting

OK, exactly what is that policy?

I have a box edition of Mandrake, which includes a bunch of closed-source software, including IBM's viavoice.

Mandrake Foundation

[InodoroPereyra]

I read this article earlier and submitted the story myself. What really caught my attention was this paragraph:

For the future, we are thinking about a "Mandrake Foundation" which would be a non-profit organization that focuses on developing the Mandrake Linux distribution exclusively. It would be financed partly by Club memberships and/or donations and/or by a "Street performer"-like system, and partly by companies that make money with Mandrake products, including MandrakeSoft. We think this approach would be much clearer for everyone to understand, and would also provide a more secure future for the Mandrake Linux distribution. It would also help MandrakeSoft become a more successful and profitable company by cutting most of its development costs.

Uou. That is to me some pretty cool idea. I am not sure this is the way to go, but it sounds promising. The other viable model for Mandrake would be to sell solutions (customized desktop environments plus support) to big companies, which is what redhat seems to be trying to do with their upcoming "corporate desktop" thing. Mandrake should go ahead in the same direction. They have a much more polished desktop product.

Re:Mandrake Foundation

[Sam Lowry]

Actually, this is what Debian community has done for years.

Re:My prejudice

[leviramsey]

while I miss apt- get (and can't find a decent MDK-9 apt-rpm repository) greatly

Have you tried urpmi?

What a bunch of crap

[Screaming Lunatic]

GD: For one year, we had a so-called "World Class Management" team that left us in a very bad financial situation, and engaged the company in ventures (such as e-learning) that we should never have been involved with. But that's all part of our history now, so I'd prefer to not dwell too much on that.

The above quote is the answer to one question out of about a dozen. 3 lines out of a 150 line article. And is misrepresenative of the article. Duval answers the question and moves on. He tries not to bitch, he tries not to complain. What's this "I love X distro, Mandrake sucks!" crap?

I mod this Slashdot story -1 Troll. Despite the fact it was a decent interview.

If you don't use Mandrake that's fine. Is it kind of a Newbie-Linux distro? You could argue that. It was the first distro I used.

There is place in the Linux-world for as many distros as anyone wants to put out. Deal with it.

Re:What a bunch of crap

[eggsovereasy]

I don't think there is a need to argue whether it is a 'newbie-distro' or not as that is what Mandrake is marketed as...

Re:My prejudice

[Afrosheen]

"Am I the only one?"

In a word, yes. You may have been around for awhile but you obviously haven't tried Mandrake for years. They ceased being Redhat+KDE about 2 years ago.

Mandrake has steadily built a strong foundation over the years of opensource tools it readily shares with others. Rpmdrake, harddrake, drakgw (the gateway/internet sharing frontend), there are dozens of good tools.

Mandrake also tries to stay as free as possible, as in speech and as in beer. The only cash they care about now is the cash that feeds their developers. Reading the article pretty much reveals this point better than I can express it though.

Bottom line: Mandrake != Redhat+KDE.

Re:My prejudice

[Hercynium]

Mandrake is still RedHat+KDE

Amendment to your statement sir: Mandrake is RedHat+KDE+more flexible installation+insane internationalization support+excellent config tools+an upgrade procedure that *actually* works! (at least for me, it did)

Not only am I using Mandrake on the desktop, I'm beginning to get friends into it w/ dual booting and jut today I used their minimum installation option for a server and I was *highly* pleased at how compact and easy it was. Last RedHat ver I tried was 7.1 and the same config would have probably forced me to install 500+ meg of software, vs. only 150 for mandrake and I splurged on documentation packages and some other niceties I wouldn't have otherwise! (this box will be doing mac&windows file sharing, as well as doubling as a mysql+php test server. Don't ask me why, ask the client.)

Re:My prejudice

[Apostata]

You might already know this by now, but the Mandrake version of apt-get is 'urpmi'. So long as you have sources set up in MandrakeUpdate/rpmdrake, you can launch urpmi at any time to update any package.

FYI...not preaching or anything. If you'd like more info on urpmi, feel free to contact me (taking a look at my spam-free email address first of course).

Re:My prejudice

[Doomdark]

I think poster didn't mean ease-of-use being unethical, but more the idea of starting not from scratch but by using somebody else's distribution as the starting point (in this case, Red Hat)? That is, attitude along the lines "but isn't it just a RedHat rip-off with KDE"?

Re:Why not e-learning?

[Doomdark]

Perhaps there was no money to be made from e-learning related products/services? Or is there something fundamentally profitable in e-learning that I haven't heard of?

Re:My prejudice

[deander2]

ahhh... the sweet sweet juice of a fresh debian server. how i love thee...

seriously tho - setting up a debian server as I post (apt-getting apache-ssl right now). making $70/hr to do it from my livingroom couch...

recession? i know no stinkin' recession! LIFE IS GOOD! :)


<dawning-flame-retardent-3-piece-suit/>
<watch-karma-drop-like-rock/>

Oh, God, they're doomed!

[1010011010]

Press Release

Andre M. Boisvert to Join VA Software's Board of Directors

FREMONT, Calif. -- March 20, 2002 -- VA Software Corporation (Nasdaq:LNUX), provider of the Source Forge(TM) collaborative software development platform, today announced that Andre M. Boisvert, former President of SAS Institute Inc. and software industry veteran, has joined the VA Software Board of Directors. [after being fired from everywhere else]

Re:My prejudice

[kfishy]

What do you expect? That's the whole point of having a downloadable version and a retail version, so that the version they sell would contain all those goodies that are not available in the "free" version.

Mandrake is already one of the biggest supporter of opensource, and until every single programmer/company in this world stops developing/using proprietary software, I think the actions of Mandrake and other commercial distributions are justified.

Re:My prejudice

[cornice]

You're not the only one but you need to look harder because you are prejudiced. The Mandrake team had done some fine work and it's not just a desktop distro anymore. I suspect that I'll get flamed by a number of other people who refuse to even try Mandrake but oh well. Mandrake has put together an up to date, secure, easy to install, easy to upgrade, feature rich distribution. That takes a lot of work regardless of the fact that they forked off RedHat some years ago. They have a strong support community as well. Their business model is a bit odd... I don't really think that a company that's based on a "street performer philosophy" should focus much on stock prices. Anyway, although I'm a big fan of Debian, Gentoo and some of the micro disros I still enjoy my Mandrake boxes and I look forward to 9.0.

Mandrake Club is a charity

[vlad_petric]

I was one of the people who responded to Duval's call in March. I thought I was doing a good thing (and actually still am)- giving some money to the company who created the distribution I had been using for one year on a couple of computers. The fact that I was getting something extra for my money was an even bigger incentive

The months have passed and I have discovered that the "benefits" were only marketing "painting"

the extra rpms were in their vast majority obtainable from their vendors

StarOffice 6.0 - well, you actually pay for it. Only 120$+ members can get it, not the 60$ ones

the unsupported rpms, made by volunteers, sometimes cause more trouble than .tar.gz source compiling

direct trading ? yeah sure, what a benefit. Even if I were investing with my heart, I would still prefer a regular stock market.

not to mention that we, mandrake club members, don't even have a priority ftp!

Overall, I don't consider I was ripped off. The quality of Mandrake is reasonably good. And because the distro is so user-friendly I'm actually migrating my girlfriend to Linux as well (with some Codeweavers help). But there's no real advantage in MDK Club, and I fear the worst for Mandrake in the next year, when the 2001 March memberships will expire.

The Raven

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[robson]

I agree regarding Mandrake Club. I've resolved that it's enough for me to buy the boxed versions of Mandrake's major releases (so far that's the "Gaming Edition", 8.2, and the upcoming 9.0 DVD.) At about $60 a pop, that seems like a reasonable arrangement. I get a good OS for a (relative) beginner, and they get an extra $60 a year and my brand loyalty.

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[Sunnan]

There's only one real benefit of the mandrake club, but it's a major one. You keep the distro/company alive so they work on your favourite distro!

I'm not a member, I'm a debhead, but I don't think this is a "bad" business model. It's one way to pay for software.

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[deno]

Raven,

I'm the guy who came with idea of the MandrakeClub in the first place, and I'm the one who developed it from "idea" into the status you can see today, and I can tell you one thing: MandrakeClub is NOT a charity. It's a busines model which has been used in various sectors for a long time, with more-or-less success, and which can work well for Linux because of the internet. Let me name a few sectors which have similar financing schemas:

- churches
- public radio stations
- Non-governmental organisations

Last but not the least important, there is a long tradition of "street music", which happens to be very strong in Paris, and which has given a name to this type of busines model ("Street performer").

The fact that this model has not been used in software busines until recently is completely irrelevant, unless you want to apply for a "bussines patent" in US. But, I'm transgressing, let's go back to Club...

You are right in one aspect: benefits one gets with MandrakeClub are peanuts compared to the value of MandrakeLinux distribution - which everyone can download free of charge.

This isn't a secret, nor have we ever tried to hide this fact - In fact, this is clearly written on the front page of MandrakeClub site:

As explained in the announcement, your membership in MandrakeClub is, above all, a sign of your financial support. Membership
fees are directly used to cover the costs of developing the distribution and the various services that are offered free of charge to
all Mandrake Linux users. The Club isn't meant as a replacement for paid support or similar services -- you are here because you want to help make Mandrake Linux become even better in the future.

Nevertheless, Club members do receive certain privileges and benefits.

etc.

However, you are also wrong: MandrakeClub is NOT a charity, and even the direct/short term benefits are getting quite interesting with a time. Indirect and long-term benefits (most notably the influence club members have on future of MandrakeLinux) on the other hand are enormous, and yet many people tend to dissmiss them as not interesting, like you did.

Let's take just the example of "RPM-voting" system which you were so quick to dismiss: this system gives you a chance to get new RPMs built because you asked for them. There is a testing stage, in which the folks who asked for a new pack are supposed to report problems, and in the end the system produces higher quality RPMs than what you'll usually find outside of the main distribution. RPM-voting system is now about one month old, and there are still some rough edges to streighten out, but it's quite clear that it's quickly developing in a right direction.

That's a direct/immediate benefit. There is also an indirect benefit, which may be even more important: RPMs Club members ask for will eventually be given higher importance than those noone asks for, and thus the Distribution will change...

The problem is...

Now the problem is: You say that you don't feel ripped off, although you don't find the direct/short-term benefits attractive, so I assume that you actually understood the value of the long-term/indirect benefits, and that you may in fact be ready to remain in the club next year.
At the same time, you discourage others to join the club by writing a comment which will be interpreted as "MandrakeSoft is lying about MadnrakeClub, don't join".

This is sad. :-(

We are not lying to anyone, and Club idea is clearly presented everywhere withouth any exaguration (on the contrary, I'm from Central europe, and can't stand false advertising - therefore Club benefits are rather deemphasised than emphasised), so why do you have this urge to present it in such a bad light?

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[tmark]

MandrakeClub is NOT a charity.

According to the Oxford dictionary I have here at hand, "charity" is defined as "a) giving voluntarily to those in need.... b) the help, esp. money, so given".

MandrakeClub might not BE a charity, by the legal definition you're operating under, and I can understand from a PR standpoint why Mandrake would not want the Club or Mandrake to be viewed as a charity, for all the stigma that comes with the word.

But by this dictionary definition, at least, it seems very arguable that MandrakeClub IS a charity. MandrakeClub appears to be a significant portion of the Mandrake "business plan", and it seems plausible that Mandrake instituted the Club because it NEEDS these contributions, and it seems clear to me that Mandrake is appealing to users for support as much as they are offering benefits that users really want. When there are people who are giving money to the club to "support" Mandrake, (as opposed to paying for whatever benefits are supposedly provided by the Club), the Club starts looking more and more like a charity.

And yes, Charities do have business plans too.

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[deno]

Yes but...

Does the Oxford dictionary have a word for

"giving voluntarily, because you will be better off that way"

or such? It would be really cool if we would have such a word to stick to - "charity" unfortunately doesn't say anything about your motives, and there is a BIG difference between:

Giving because "someone" is in need and

1) you are such a good guy
2) he is working on something that is benefitial to you, and you want him to continue with that work.

I don't expect folks to join the Club because "they are such good guys", I want them to join the club because they really appreciate our work and want us to continue with it.

Re:Mandrake Club is a charity

[Tony-A]

Would you count the American Petroleum Institute as a charity?
The Better Business Bureau?

While I wouldn't call it uncharitable, it seems more like a business arrangement due to common interests.

Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[alain1234]

Compare the download page one year ago and now

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[Jason O'Neil]

I emailed them, and you can actually go right on through without paying (According to their support team)
But they still should at least have a "I don't want to donate, but I want the software" button.

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[Gabrill]

Yeah it doesn't exactly sound free, now does it? *pause for 20 secs to avoid robot filter*

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[tres]

I don't know how long it may have taken a genius like you, but it took all of two seconds to figure out that, yes I can download, and no, I don't have to pay for it.

What do you think that Mandrake is supposed to let you download without knowing that people's livelihoods rely on your payment? Do you think they should take you out to dinner too?

For someone who wants to USE their computer, Mandrake has the best distribution out there. There's a small learning curve compared to your other "high performance" Linux distros. They should get paid for that, or at least you should acknowledge that yes, you do want to take from the mouths of the people that put it together.

Mandrake sells Free software. They've held up to their end of the bargain. Schmucks like you who'd prefer to i-opener Mandrake and then bitch when they make you think about it should just go back to downloading your Warezed OS of choice and leave the good-guys alone.

I for one appreciate the value added by Mandrake. I appreciate that they are trying to protect the interests of the company by letting freeloaders^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H downloaders know that they are, in fact, abusing the system upon which they rely.

You schmucks should go back to Warez; give the little guys a chance before you i-opener them into oblivion.

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[fireboy1919]

If downloaders are freeloaders, doesn't that make Mandrake a freeloader, too? After all, they do have LOTS of open source software. They even built upon another distro themselves. Plus, its not really ethical to force people to lie (click here if you're a member) is it? Especially when they're obligated by the GPL to offer the software for free, and they've got lots of nonprofit orgs providing them with free mirrors.

I have a solution that would allow Mandrake to avoid what you would consider their current hipocracy.

They can post a link which says:
"We got most of our software for free and then tweaked it, mostly with the help of a large group of volunteers. However, we packaged it, and while we can't legally require you to pay for it, you should anyway. Click now here to see the list of mirrors."

I give out my code for free. Other coders give theirs out for free. That's how the system works. Mandrake is just using the system to make money. Abusing the system would mean charging money for things you're not allowed to charge for, that is, not giving out your code for free.

The little guys of open-source aren't in it for the money. They do it because they like it. I speak as one who uses one of the little distros which made it into the top 10 less than a month after it went beta, and which still doesn't make money (and doesn't plan to). And I have contributed a couple of improvements of my own to my disto.

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[tres]

The system works, not because programmers give away their code for free, but because they give it away so other programmers can help them improve it. It's an effort of a community. It's a giving culture that depends upon others giving back. The problem is, that most of the people who are coming into the fold these days have nothing that they can give back in terms of time or skills. They will be using the software, nothing more. The only thing they can give back is money.

But when they don't even do that, the system is bound to break.

And while you're speaking of Gentoo Linux, doesn't Daniel Robbins, creator of Gentoo, have a wife and child he needs to feed?

The little guys may not be in it for the money, but there are plenty of wives and children that do need to eat.

Freeloaders are the guys who don't give back time, code or money. Mandrake gives back all three. I'd say that makes them a pretty good community member.

Re:Change in Mandrake's marketing attitude

[rifter]

If downloaders are freeloaders, doesn't that make Mandrake a freeloader, too? After all, they do have LOTS of open source software. They even built upon another distro themselves. Plus, its not really ethical to force people to lie (click here if you're a member) is it? Especially when they're obligated by the GPL to offer the software for free, and they've got lots of nonprofit orgs providing them with free mirrors.

No, Mandrake is not a freeloader. The people at MandrakeSoft have created all-new software (most notably the Mandrake Installer) and have written a good chunk of code. They have worked to create an entirely new product which, while based on the products of others, does contain the fruit of their labour.

The labour was not provided without cost. In the article, two points are clearly made: 1) there are a substantial number of developers working daily at MandrakeSoft and 2) the result of these costs is that MandrakeSoft is not profitable, i.e. they are NOT making money because they are working too hard to make a better product for you who wish to download it for free. The GPL, contrary to your belief, does not preclude charging money for software. In fact, the idea that those who work should not receive any form of compensation is in itself absurd. If you are giving the fruit of your labour out under the GPL and did not want people making money from it, you chose the WRONG license. Perhaps a license such as that used for the Diku MUD code would better suit you.

The little guys of open-source aren't in it for the money. They do it because they like it. I speak as one who uses one of the little distros [gentoo.org] which made it into the top 10 less than a month after it went beta, and which still doesn't make money (and doesn't plan to). And I have contributed a couple of improvements of my own to my disto.

Let's face it. Right now any group producing a Linux distribution is a "little guy" in the Open Source world, with the possible exception of the NSA. And I don't know that any of them are currently profitable entities, though several are corporate entities. It would have been a better deal for all of them to be nonprofit orgs perhaps, and indeed this is the direction, again stated in the article, that Mandrake seems to be going. Of course the problem with this model is it makes it tougher to get the money which has driven all of this. I think you are forgetting there are costs involved no matter what, for servers and bandwidth and people to work on this stuff. This is why these groups who are providing the software you want are trying to find services people will pay money for to fund that work. And don't think just because you are firmly esconsced in some random distro of the month that hasn't figured out it might have a big bill from its provider yet you are not profiting from this work. People all over on different distros, including lots of coders working for corporations working often on employers paid time are making improvements to tools you care about as we type. It is good that you contribute code. I applaud that effort. I want to encourage it. But it is unfair for you to discourage people from contributing monetarily, or distros from asking for such contributions. In fact if you one day wish to be employed as a professional coder you will find it is helpful if the company you work for has money to pay you with.

The pursuit of money is a necessary evil in a Capitalist society. Money pays the rent and the electric and the help. Money makes this stuff possible. To deny this is folly. But then this is /. ...

Re:My prejudice

[leviramsey]

OK, exactly what is that policy?

Mandrake refuses to put any software that does not qualify as Free Software into their download edition. This includes configuration tools and the installer, all of which are GPL'd (work is being done by some to port the Mandrake tools to Debian, among other distros). Mandrake only makes non-Free software available on their retail boxes or to Club Members.

Me TOO!

[Idou]

"Am I the only one?"

I totally agree!

1. Kernel 2.4 -> Rip off of Kernel 2.2

2. Bash -> Rip off of Bourne Shell

3. . . .

Or maybe that's the point? Don't "reinvent" the wheel. We're talking about "GPL and friends" software, right? Everything is a "Rip off" of something else. That's how the code doesn't get "wasted".

And, if Mandrake never added anything new, they would have disappeared. But . . . they added a lot of things that *some people* found valuable (I know you don't . . . but you're not the only one here).

And, if you wanted, you could create your own distro based on Mandrake, but you probably would not be able to convert the users that the current Mandrake appeals to . . . some might call your ditro a rip-off, regardless of how many new features you added. But, you might, just might, meet the needs of some folks that the other distros (including Mandrake) didn't. So who cares? Maybe one flavor of OS is not enough for 6 billion people. If everyone only wanted Mandrake (or Redhat), why aren't they all using it?

Re:My prejudice

[decefett]

Yeah but how does that give them a much stronger policy regarding Free Software than Red Hat who have also always made their tools GPL and AFAIK distribute no non-free software at all?

Official Statement from a Mandrake User

[antisocial77]

I love Mandrake. It never gave me any problems with the install, it works incredibly well for all of my normal desktop needs, and it helps me with my Calc homework. I've also heard it works well in the server environment, which I never get to try out since I live in a backwards hick town that has little use for anything other than Windows.

If Mandrake says they had problems with a third-party management team, I believe them. They have yet to give me a reason not to.

Reminds me of the two letters joke

[PaxTech]

The outgoing CEO sits down with his replacement and hands him two letters and says "You may get into some trouble you can't get yourself out of in this job. The first time it happens, open this letter. If it happens again, open this second letter."

Sure enough, the new CEO gets into some hot water in about a year and decides he has to open the first letter. Inside it says "Blame everything on me." He goes out and blames everything on his predecessor and the problem goes away.

Some more time passes and the CEO gets into some more hot water. He opens the second letter. Inside it says "Sit down and write two letters..."

"World Class Managment Team"

[namespan]

Malcom Gladwell of the New Yorker recently wrote an article about some of the problems with "World Class" management teams, and in general, certain myths revolving around the concept of "talent". It's an excellent read.

Re:"World Class Managment Team"

[davidu]

Slashdot'ers read The NewYorker?

Really, I'm shocked.

Anyways, that was a *great* article and hopefully it will get more slashdot readers to think about reading some real articles. (well researched op/ed, features, etc)

It's nice to see some people get it and realize that while a college degree *IS* worth something and does speak about commitment and a certain base level of info, it does not mean that GPA==success. I've seen it over and over again, especially in CS -- people who do the best in CS do the worst in the real world and are forced to stay within the towers of academia. As this article points out, the same is apparently true for business.

-davidu

-davidu

Re:"World Class Managment Team"

[Tony-A]

Excellent read.
Modern version of The Tortoise and the Hare.
Pyramid scheme -- of talent!

A few star performers is a good thing.
Everybody a star performer -- doesn't really work.

Risky business during boom times can be a good thing.
But this only works for a *few* people.

( The New Yorker, but the *mindset* is very consonant with slashdot ;)

Re:My prejudice

[phatvibez]

There are no apt-rpm repositories for MDK-9 probably because MDK-9 hasn't actually been released yet...

on that note though Texstar of PCLinuxOnline.com has brought Synaptic/apt-rpm stuff from Connectiva over to Mandrake 8.2 and provides an apt-rpm repository.

I am sure he will do the same for MDK-9 when it finally gets released!

Re:My prejudice

[jred]

I kinda thought that was part of the point of open source. I know I've heard "if you don't like it, fork & do what you want with it (provide the source if you distribute)" before.

Re:My prejudice

[fcrozat]

You don't need apt-get on MandrakeLinux, just use urpmi instead..

I also became a member

[Idou]

Eventually put in 120 bucks . . .

-The extra downloads are "extra" (consist of commercial packages) and only attainable from the Mandrake packaged distro not the mirrors. I don't think other vendors let you download Star Office.
-Star Office is like $72 . . . you wanted it for $60 and were considering this charity?(for who?)
-unsupported rpms are "unsupported," but I haven't had any trouble (are you using urpmi?). Plus, I found Mplayer that way, which has been worth the $120 (since I don't have enought time to find such software on my own)
-direct trading only applies if you wanna own their stock, but this really is a revolution in the trading of equity (all they did is put up a little system that allows you to trade stock at volumes as low as 50 shares, without having to pay a 3rd party commission. Nothing special EXCEPT no other company seems to be doing this . . . ). So let me get this straight . . . if you had the choice, you would prefer to pay a 3rd party commission just to buy a stock that you have already decided to buy?
- As far as the priority ftp goes . . . it is unfortunate. However, if you spent some time reading posts at mandrakeclub you would know that something of that nature appears to be in the works . . .

I'm sorry the club isn't what you expected but calling it charity seems a bit of an extreme. I wish you could be more specific about what you want out of the club instead of what you don't like.

". . . I fear the worst for Mandrake in the next year, when the 2001 March memberships will expire."

Mandrake 9.0 seems like it will bring in a lot of new members and another 13 new members joined in the last 24 hours so it doesn't seem as bad as you think. Of course, spreading your discontent here, instead of at Mandrakeclub really isn't helping the situation much (though I am sure a lot of mandrake folks visit slashdot on a regular basis).

In conclusion, I really just joined at first to help insure that the distro would continue. The "services" (call them what you like) were really just extra treats. Since I graduated college, I really don't have time to fool around with Linux the way I used to. My job, though it pays well, treats me like a drone and does not allow me to implement most of what I learned during my days in college (both from classes and from playing with Linux). Mandrake is easy enough for me to still play with during my short breaks and the mandrakeclub allows me to give something back since I don't have enough time to learn how to code. Oddly, I don't consider either side of the realationship to be "charity."

or rpmdrake ; )

[Idou]

I know this is dumb advice to a Debian user, but the graphical frontend to urpmi should work pretty well if you don't want to bother with the CLI version. Please ignore if not applicable ; )

Re:Don't you know better than to use a .0

[knowsnotmuch]

Come on, its unfair to quote failure of X.0 releases - everyone gets things right only with .2 - look at mandrake 8.2

Please explain

[sepiroth]

"and partly by companies that make money with Mandrake products, including MandrakeSoft"

I'm not sure I understand the concept. Does it imply for me being a developer, I will be made to pay for using ML on the commercial basis?
Anyway, will ML stay free?

Re:Please explain

[deno]

MandrakeLinux will remain free as a bird if and only if we can afford it. No money no show, so we have following possible scenarios:

1) Enough MandrakeLinux users understand the fact that producing the distribution costs, and join the Club/buy products form us so that MandrakeSoft can be a profitable and triving business.

The more $$ we get this way, the more important Club will become, and eventually we come to a point where MandrakeSoft primarly produces a distribution for Club members (i.e. collects requests of all types from Club members, and fullfills them as good as possible).

That's the one I would like to see. .-)

2) MandrakeSoft gets much more money from B2B type of deals (OEM, professional training, high level services for companies, custom-made distributions) than it does from end users, and decides to "forget" about end-users. You can still download the distro, but nobody really cares about you anymore...

This may sound good at first (it saves you some money, no?), but in the end YOU will have to use the distribution which was made for busines customers - for better or for worse, and have no influence on its development anymore.

RedHat built their busines on this model. Nothing bad with it (I've used RH for years), but I prefer a distribution which is built to fit my needs...

3) Someone with a different vision takes over MandrakeSoft, and we put a special non-free licence on all the software which has been produced by MandrakeSoft. No more free downloads, no more Mandrake CDs from cheapbytes either...

SuSE managed to build their busines on this model, Caldera and TurboLinux failed. Personally i simply don't like it, even when it works.

4) Finally, there is also a possibility that MandrakeSoft may go bancrupt and disapear. This is definitively NOT the scenario I'm interested in. .-)

Re:Please explain

[bryanbrunton]

"...we put a special non-free licence on all software which has been produced..."

More fine FUD from deno the Mandrakian.

Deno when are you going to stop lying out of your ass about other distros? I guess this would be the same time you stop deleting ever post from MandrakeForums that is slightly critical of Mandrake.

Wrong deno. SuSE doesn't put a special non-free license on all the software that they produce.

Re:Please explain

[deno]

Oh, sorry - I haven't noticed that Yast licence has been abandoned...

Re:Please explain

[bryanbrunton]

" Oh, sorry - I haven't noticed that Yast licence has been abandoned..."

Then you also should also notice that they don't apply the license to every piece of software that they release.

Go back to MandrakeForum. Your time is better spent there performing your petty censorship.

Re:Intel/Windows2000 is clearly the winner over su

[ToasterTester]

Well you have never worked on enterprise class systems. I work in a Sun and Windows shop and both systems have a place. For large enterprise databases you aren't going to run Intel servers they don't scale. Intel really only scales to four processers, with briding componets eight. But the eight-way server have a performance hit for the bridging. Yes, there are the datacenter servers but they are a even bigger kludge. Sun hardware is designed from the CPU up to scale from one CPU up. Plus dynamic reconfiguration. Try replacing memory or a CPU in a Intel server without shutting it down. Then the bus design on Sun, and ability to split servers into multiple domains. Then clustering the Windows clustering is weak only handling two nodes and four in some case. In fact on Windows I use Veritas clustering for up to 32 nodes and multiple heartbeat support. Intel hardware is good for small to medium systems, not large and enterprise class servers.

They never had one

[mirnav]

MandrakeSoft contacted us for financing some months ago, proposing a chunk of the company in exchange for a chunk of cash so that we would become significant shareholders.

We were interested until the moment we realized that, although possessing a good distro with a significant user base, MandrakeSoft would never be a successful company because it never had a business plan. (Pause here for a chuckle at the thought of "world class management team")

I have all the respect in the world for people who code/invent/create for the pleasure of that moment of coding/invention/creation and do not say that all such moments need be related to an eventual profitmaking plan. However, I do ask that from a company who asks us for millions with the promise of return in the (not so far) future.

This is where you will ask about the ingenious subscription/donation plan of MandrakeSoft. In my humble opinion as a financial investor, this revenue model will probably keep the company afloat, but will never make it a very profitable company, because the subscribers/donators are only agreeing to this because they wish to see MandrakeSoft survive, not to see it thrive! Once the company starts making a little profit, these revenues will stop. In short, with its current "business model" based on subscriptions/donations MandrakeSoft can and will probably be a non-profit organization that can cover its costs... maybe with tiny little profits if its supporters are feeling particularly generous that quarter.

RedHat entering the business desktop market is not good news for MandrakeSoft either - that is one market they could have earned real money from and now that chance is going... going... gone. How can they possibly compete? I have a company that already runs RedHat, who also provides me the service I need. Who am I going to choose for the desktops - RedHat or MandrakeSoft?

I hope MandrakeSoft survives. They do cool software. However, their story would make a brilliant Harvard Business Review and should be taught in schools to show the perils of going ahead with an idea without a thought of how you intend to eventually make money with it.

Re:They never had one

[joestar]

Actually, if you have this vision of how doing money with Free Software, do it because there are very few companies that succeeded in this way. The perfect model is still to invent! And I'm very confident Mandrake is on the _good_ track for one year.

Re:They never had one

[mirnav]

Your reply tells me you are French ("how doing money"="comment faire l'argent"?). Perhaps someone who works in/with MandrakeSoft?

If your confidence in MandrakeSoft has any rational basis, then perhaps you should have shared it with us some months ago. Dunno... the management is a little confused there. They do not seem to know what a business plan is, nor why it is so important.

Re:Mandrake and Gentoo

[Daengbo]

Yeah, except that it F***ing broke itself yesterday on an emerge rsync, and now nothing works...

Re:Then why is apache called aPATCHy ?

[hdparm]

Because of this, viruses, software development errors are a common occurance.

I really hope you are just kidding.

If you're serious, then only two words can describe you - COMPLETE MORON.

One more thing.

[deno]

In case that wasn't clear enough: I can't stand beggars, and they stand no chance to get any money from me. On the other hand, I'm handing out a lot of money to street musicians. So, what's the difference?

BEGGAR: this guy attempts to get money from me by showing how miserable he is. For many of them, begging is a profession of choice. Others really end up being beggars out of misery, but I live in supposedly "social state", pay high taxes, and demand from my goverment to take care of people who can't take care of themselves. Begging is a shame.

MUSICIAN (anod other street performers): These guys entertain me, make my kid happy, and generally "make my day". I WANT to give them some money, because I WANT to see them again. Beeing a street performer is not very lucrative job (they can only reach very small public), but there is no shame in doing it. On the contrary, a town withouth street performers would IMO be a very sad place.

Re:One more thing.

[Tony-A]

There's an important distinction in there somewhere.
Seems like it has some similarity to tipping the headwaiter.
Seems like something important gets lost when cost and value get too closely tied together.

Re:My prejudice

[prefect42]

Why do you miss apt-get? I've never been a Debian user, but I've heard arguments from people at my local linux user group, and they're all obscenely biased.

What can apt-get do that urpmi can't?

Re:My prejudice

[TheTomcat]

Mandrake.

MDK is finally starting to put config files in /etc where they belong.

S

Re:My prejudice

[GauteL]

They made a strong statement that this patent would be freely usable in any GPL-based code (and other approved licenses, like the IBM Public License, The Qt Public License. This also covers sale and other redistribution of free software.

They will probably require a patent-license for proprietary code, which is fine by me. This patent is mostly for leverage against other companies that have software patents.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:My prejudice

[prefect42]

But what does that do? Term it for a non apt-get user.

That downloads the dependencies required for building the package from source? I'm not certain here.

I'm not sure urpmi supports anything source related yet, but I could be wrong.

Okay, carry on, what else...

jh

Re:My prejudice

[Strog]

Of course Redhat went out and wrote everything from scratch. Wait a minute, they "stole" software from everywhere.

Mandrake was the result of someone loving a product but wanting to add something to it. Mandrake gained popularity because many other people wanted the same things(mainly KDE in beginning). Mandrake has done a lot of good things and given a lot of software, patches, etc. back to the community.

It's not like a lot of other people. "I'm going to take my ball and you can't play". This is all about making things better. Use what you want.

What if they charged $1000000 instead?

[sonamchauhan]

> I don't know how long it may have taken a genius like you...
>...freeloaders...
> Schmucks like you ....
> You schmucks ... Warez...

Hey ! Wash your mouth out and consider the following instead of being abusive:

The Mandrake download page requires you to either:
A. Have previously *paid* them a minimum of $60
OR
B. *State* you *will* pay them a minimum of $60 in future

There is no other option that allows you to download their software.

What's to stop them hiking this 'download price' from $60 to $1000000?

Sec 2.b. of the GNU license states that packages based on GNU-licensed software must also be licensed "as a whole at no charge to all third parties". What they are doing seems to violate this section, and Section 3 as well. (though I cannot say for sure).

Re:What if they charged $1000000 instead?

[tres]

Hey, sorry if you consider my post abusive.

If you haven't paid for a Mandrake subscription, the Mandrake download page requires you to a)pay, or b)lie about paying. That's all. All they've done is remind you that you are abusing the system.

There's nothing that keeps you from lying but your own conscience.

Re:What if they charged $1000000 instead?

[jonadab]

> The Mandrake download page [linux-mandrake.com]
> requires you to either:
> A. Have previously *paid* them a minimum of $60
> OR
> B. *State* you *will* pay them a minimum of $60
> in future
> There is no other option that allows you to
> download their software.

Bear in mind, they're not required by the GPL to
provide a public anonymous ftp server. What they
_are_ required to do is to allow anyone who does
acquire their software to also acquire the source
code in similar fashion and with all the rights
that the license grants. Translation: they can
stop offering a public download and only sell the
boxed set (with sources included), but they can't
stop CheapBytes from purchasing one copy of the
boxed set and burning copies of all the freely-
licensed software in the distro and selling them
at a reduced price. The public download is a
service they choose to provide. Bear in mind that
bandwidth costs money. They would be completely
within their rights to shut down anonymous access
to their ftp server and supply accounts to paid
subscribers. Alternately, they could provide
accounts only to mirrors, and make everyone use
the mirrors instead of downloading from their own
server directly. That would save them a lot of
bandwidth and thus money. (Some of the mirrors
might not care for it, though...)

> What's to stop them hiking this 'download
> price' from $60 to $1000000?
Nobody is likely to pay that much.

GNU licence.

[deno]

Get a life. GNU licence doesn't say "you have to put all your work on public FTP servers, in a most convenient form for downloaders, send a letter to every citizen with a list of these FTP servers, and kiss their asses."

As far as GNU licence goes, it would be perfectly OK to send CDs with sources of everything which is in the distribution

Sec 1:
You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an
appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee

Got it? No need to make ANYTHING available for download on public servers, no need to provide ANY binaries to freeloaders, and a nominal fee for all the folks who ask for sources. Btw, sending these sources on 5 1/2` floppies by camel-post is (legaly) perfectly acceptable too.

It's even legally acceptable to put a proprietary licence for installer and configuration tools if you feel so...

It isn't NICE to do so, and MandrakeSoft is a nice company, but folks like you make me wonder...

Re:My prejudice

[deno]

AFAIK, RH has been a very good citizen as far as their policy towards free software goes.

One can easily argue that they don't care as much about "small users" as we do, but that's a completely different thing. Besides, one can't blame a company for maximizing the profits, as long as they adher to the letter and spirit of Free software movement.

In short, RH is a positive player in my book...

Section 1 isn't it...

[sonamchauhan]

Firstly, I'm no lawyer.

However - I don't think the GNU license Sec.1 that you quoted (which deals with verbatim copies) applies to the Mandrake Distro. I think rather that Sec 2 and 3 (dealing with packages *based* on GNU-copyrighted works) apply. These are also the sections that talk about availability of sources.

> Btw, sending these sources on 5 1/2` floppies by camel-post is (legaly) perfectly acceptable too.

Yup, that's fine, except the offer isn't visible on the Mandrake website (I guess making the offer visible *isn't* required by the GNU license, but the offer itself must exist)

IIRC, one restriction in Sec.2. is that media copying charge be reasonable. I'm don't think US $60 is currently a reasonable media copying charge for a couple of ISOs worth of data transferred over the *Internet* - so I guess Mandrakesoft have an unspoken , (possibly cheaper), offer to copy sources.

> It isn't NICE to do so, ... but folks like you make me wonder...

Get used to the wonderous world we live in!
Seriously: I hope you got my drift. I'm not trying to suck Mandrakesoft dry. My point is if they can set an arbitrary price now for access to s/w, what's to stop this price reaching a zillion dollars in the future? What would people think about the concept of 'free software' then?

To answer my own question: I guess its the 'reasonable' copying charge clause (for sources only) under the GNU license.

I could be wrong about this but I wish this GNU license clause 2/3 had a sub-clause forcing the provider to publicise the clause somehow (like a statutory reference to the GNU license Version 1.1 somewhere in the sales page).

Re:Section 1 isn't it...

[deno]

OK, my apologise.

I thought you simply want to troll/FUD, but it seems now you may be really concerned. No need: Mandrake distro including sources is on public servers all over the place (as soon as the distro is done), so we have absolutely no means to do anything along the lines you are worried about.

MandrakeSoft managment doesn't have the will to do anything of that type either (on the contrary), and the same is true to developers. If you want to look for some examples of the company which hesitate to publish the source code of the "derivare works", you are looking in a wrong direction.

Thanks Dude

[sonamchauhan]

> Hey, sorry if you consider my post abusive.

Thanks dude. I'm sure the parent to your original post would appreciate your candor here.

About the rest of the post: I just wasn't comfortable with a Corporate setting a arbitrary price on all access to GPL code, but as I understand (see discussion below) there is a third unpublicized option for transferring sources.

Correcting myself.

[sonamchauhan]

Just thought I'd correct myself on one thing - parent poster is right in that Mandrake don't have to put their programs (DiskDrake etc) under the GPL since they aren't derivative works of existing GPL programs. However since they have done so (I think), most of my points above, stand.

Mandrake is getting better and better

[Eric Damron]

Mandrake has always been very close to the "Bleedng edge." Up until version 8.2 I would always install it, be very impressed but find a bug that I couldn't get around. I would revert back to some other distro.

8.2 however has been rock solid for me. I'm hoping that 9.0 will also.

Don't knock people who do well in school!

[Shabazz]

I've seen it over and over again, especially in CS -- people who do the best in CS do the worst in the real world and are forced to stay within the towers of academia

No offense, davidu, but this is the type of drivel that people who do bad in school say to make themselves feel better about themselves (I'm not calling you one of those people, but the remark you made did increase the chances that you are). I'd be willing to listen if you had said that there is very little corollation between success in university CS and the "Real World" but to draw the inverse conclusion is offensive.

People who do well in school often do so because they are smart and work hard. Those types of things pay off in the "Real World." Those "ivory tower" arguments just don't fly.

I, of course, do not offer myself as proof of someone who succeeded in university CS and the real world.

Re:My prejudice

[Doomdark]

Ever heard the phrase "don't shoot the messenger"? I'm well aware of Mandrake having been branched a while ago, and personally don't have problem with their approach. I was merely pointing out what the poster seemed to imply.

Re:My prejudice

[Doomdark]

Indeed. But keep in mind I didn't claim there's something unethical, just that the original poster said he did... and even he thought it's just this nagging feeling of something being wrong (instead of being something de jure wrong)