SuSE CEO's Two-Distro World

FrankoBoy writes "CRN has an interview with SuSE CEO Richard Seibt in which he claims such things as 'Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else.' Another example of this kind of corporatespeak can be found in another interview he did with ZDNet last week. DistroWatch has an article about all this in its current weekly newsletter."

Comments

This is ridiculous...

[JessLeah]

It would be nice if we could get Linus, RMS and ESR to together pen a statement (together, so that their individual quirks will roughly even each other out ;) ) stating that Linux isn't just about two companies, or even about companies at all. Linux existed before any companies were supporting it, and it will exist afterwards.

And if he doesn't take back this silly, new-wave corporo-capitalist nonsense ("Linux is about two companies"? What, is he learning economics from Bill Gates or Darl McBride?), we should simply boycott SuSE.

Linus distro flame fest...

[sleepingsquirrel]

Might as well begin the linux distro flame-fest... SuSe? I had the unfortunate displeasure of installing it one one of my machines, I couldn't stand it for a month. Isn't it only the newbs who like those glorified menus wrapped around the config files? Why would any IT organization want to add another layer of cruft like YaST on their systems? It's just another possible point of failure. And, of course, it makes it so you can't use most of the documentation on the web, since most of it assumes you edit the files manually. So why not use MS if you can't really fix things when they break. Why anyone thinks they need a distro other than Slackware is beyond me.

it's disgusting

[nahemah]

I am really sick of watching these corporate politicians try to yank more money from the public for projects that began as free. It is disgusting that any companies out there would try to base a profit off of Linux distribution sales. It's even less likely that after reading this I will ever even attempt at purchasing, downloading, or wasting my time with Red Hat OR SuSE. I am a relatively new user to linux, but have only been using Slackware. Many people boast it's stability, many people blame evolution for the faults it continues to slip into each generation of this distro. I will never again attempt at installing Gentoo, Red Hat, or SuSE, mostly because the bloated methods used to install mean that I may not be getting what I actually want. I am not about bashing other types of OS' regardless of who might own a distribution company... and I'll say this much. Try it, and if you dont like it, don't use it. I was never really happy with the bloated SuSE to begin with, so it's kind of a relief that I have another justification to line up behind my own personal experiences... just a few words of wonderment from this linuxchick....

I don't recommend suse

[Gyorg_Lavode]

There is no arguement that suse is a good distrobution. But Suse consistantly does things which piss me off. They were part of United Linux. They don't make ISO's available. They say things like the quote in this post. While they may very well be the best distro for desktop use I will recommend Mandrake, Redhat, and even Lindows over Suse.

All press about the management of Lindows, points towards them being interested in bettering linux. Mandrake caters to it's consumers and redhat is a company that gives back to it's community. Suse seems to be out only for their benefit and while they might make a good product, I don't want to support their business style. Which is why, even though they may make the best desktop linux environment, I run and monitarily support Mandrake.