Slashdot Mirror


Interview with Red Hat VP Michael Tiemann

david_ross writes "An interview with Red Hat's Vice President Michael Tiemann has just been posted on LinuxQuestions.org. His responses in the interview show that RedHat's community product, Fedora, has a bright future: "The project has been incredibly successful, and we have a lot of people outside of Red Hat to thank for that. What Red Hat must now do is to finish the job of making Fedora a true community project by publishing, and getting accepted, a governance model". "

26 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. branding by insensitive+claude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I still say it was a mistake to kill off RHL. It made the name "Red Hat" synonymous with Linux, at least to the casual observer. And people like to stick with what they know.

    1. Re:branding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree, fedora is a better brand name. It disassociates the brand, ie "Windows" from the company, ie "Microsoft". Imagine if Microsoft had named its OS "Microsoft". Then it would be called Microsoft Microsoft 2004. Almost as confusing as the .NET fiasco.

      Try this new flash game... It's a strange blend of Dungeon Dice and Pacman.
      Chomp Dice

    2. Re:branding by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


      And people like to stick with what they know.

      Exactly the reason Windows on the desktop is such an entrenched force. Just Saturday I was getting my hair cut. The woman said something about viruses her husband downloaded. "Oh, you're using Windows I guess." I said a bit bluntly. "Yeah, it's all we know and we can't afford a Mac." So right there that told me A) inertia will keep them using Windows until they die and B) many people think the Mac is the only alternative (and are too expensive)

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    3. Re:branding by calibanDNS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The RedHat name is still branded on their Enterprise products. Brand recognizition if VERY important, as you've stated; especially when convincing management to switch to a new platform. If you're convincing management to buy a product, you're probably going to want a product from the RedHat Enterprise Line, and not Fedora. Fedora is, in my opinion, aimed more at the slightly more Linux-savvy crowd who don't need name recognition and care more about the use of Free Software and up to date software than the name of the distribution.

    4. Re:branding by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      B) many people think the Mac is the only alternative (and are too expensive)

      Well, for most people Mac's are the only alternative. What else is there? And before anyone even mentions Linux, show me one place a "normal" person can buy a Linux machine like Dell, Gateway, or HP. No, Linspire or Lindows at Walmart does not count either.

      Now with Mac's being too expensive, thats just ignorance. You _may_ write a smaller check the 1st time you buy a Windows box, but after you buy all the extra stuff you need like a virus scanner, and you take into account that there is basically no resale value for a used PC, you will probably end up paying more for WIndows in the long haul. Not to mention your cost of time putting up with various "features" in Windows.

      I read here once that somebody that works at CompUSA or whatnot once said. When people buy a Mac, they go home and we never see them again. When people buy a PC, they keep coming back and buy more stuff for it.

    5. Re:branding by Xerp · · Score: 2, Interesting
      show me one place a "normal" person can buy a Linux machine like Dell, Gateway, or HP

      Ok.

      1. Dell and Dell

      2. HP

      And if you want "shops" that sell Linux systems: Try here

      Obviously a quick google will find even more!

      The problem is that people think a "pc" is "windows". They simply don't know any better. Sure, the thing becomes trashed by spyware and viruses within hours and thats when the go and see "the guy who knows about computers". By then of course, they have already spent their money and may or may not take Microsoft Windows back to the shop as "not fit for purpose". They can't see that the TCO for a Microsoft Windows system is a lot higher than the alternatives.

    6. Re:branding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If 'A' and 'B' then 'Chair'? They want a Mac, they can't afford a Mac, so they stick with Windows. This is finance, not inertia. They stick with something they know to be unsatisfactory because the alternatives are beyond their means. Tip better!

  2. Take some of the load of of LinuxQuestions by teiresias · · Score: 5, Informative

    Michael Tiemann recently took some time to do an email interview with LinuxQuestions.org (Thanks Michael!). As you can probably tell from some of the questions, this interview is a touch old. If you have a question that you'd like answered, post it in this thread. I'll send a few of the best questions, as followups, to Michael.

    LQ) Tell us a little about yourself. Where are you from, where did you go to school and the other basics.
    MT) When most people ask this question, they mean "where did you get your degree?" I got my BS CSE from the Moore School at the University of Pennsylvania. That's the final resting place for several chunks of the first all-digital computer, the ENIAC. But I started learning about computers at home, about 1974, when my father bought and assembled an IMSAI 8080, then later a Cromemco Z2-D with three or four 64KB banks of RAM and a 10MB winchester hard disk. As I recall, the Z2-D computer cost as much as our station wagon. And that's when I started to learn BASIC, PL/I, Pascal, C, FORTH, LISP, and many other programming languages. It was a passion of mine since I was 12 to write a compiler, and after writing a few toy compilers in CS class, I got my chance in 1987 to transform the GNU C Compiler into the GNU C++ compiler, and later, to merge it as part of the GNU Compiler Collection.

    Believe it or not, the Z2-D from 1976 was my PC in college (1982-1986). With my summer job at Cromemco, I'd upgraded it with parts from the scrap heap: a 68020 processor, 1.5 MB of RAM (3 512KB modules), a 48KB two-port graphics card. I also bought a shiny new 50MB harddisk which consumed my entire summer earnings.

    LQ) What's the hostname of your favorite linux box and why is it named that? Also, if you couldn't use Red Hat or Fedora, which distribution would you use?
    MT) I haven't paid attention to hostnames in forever, but if I were not using Red Hat or Fedora, I'd probably use Mandrake. Mandrake seems to have a very large number of RPMs available for it.

    LQ) What was your first introduction to Linux? What was the reason behind you using Linux and was anyone in particular responsible for turning you on to Linux?
    MT) My first introduction was via Adam Richter, creator of the Yggdrasil distribution. He called me up and took me to lunch one day, mainly to try to understand whether what I'd learned at Cygnus (the world's first company to commercialize free software) could be applied to the business he was thinking about starting. I didn't think so: we were selling support contracts for $35,000 to more than $1M per year, and he wanted to sell CDs for $99 (or perhaps even less). The two models could not have been more different.

    I forgot about Linux until I got a call from Larry McVoy, telling me that there was this software company in North Carolina (software company in North Carolina!?) that had about 15 people and was growing by leaps and bounds. It was committed to free software, and Cygnus should look at acquiring it. While I was not that excited about Yggdrasil, I did become excited about Red Hat. We held a board meeting to discuss spending 10% of our equity in 1995 to acquire Red Hat but I could not convince the two other co-founders to make an offer. Four years later, Red Hat acquired Cygnus with 10% of their equity. Sigh.

    LQ) I remember reading an interview with you in late 2000 in which you answered the question "Which distribution do you feel is your main competitor?" with "Right now our main competitors are Sun Solaris and Microsoft." Fast forward to today, do you think that same answer still applies?
    MT) Moreso than ever.

    LQ) Now that the dust from the initial Fedora announcement has settled and FC has a couple releases under its belt, would you say the project is as successful as Red Hat had hoped? In what areas would you say it really shines and what do you think are its biggest shortcomings?
    MT) The project has been incredibly successful, and we have a lot of people outside of Red Hat to thank for that. What Red Hat must now do is to f

    --
    -Teiresias
  3. Directory services by Gentoo+Fan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Red Hat just announced the purchase of the Netscape Directory Server and Certificate Management System from AOL, which seems to be a slight departure from the usual business plan.

    What I don't get is if Red Hat acquired Netscape Directory Service why are they still claiming to be focusing on the "desktop" when Novell's NDS is Linux-friendly. Is it mostly because of the proprietary nature of NDS? I just hope there isn't too much duplication of effort with the directory services biz.

    1. Re:Directory services by Erwos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Red Hat recently came to our school and talked about this very issue (among many others).

      Basically, OpenLDAP sucks. OTOH, Netscape has a very good version that doesn't suck. Therefore, Red Hat bought Netscape's, and will be open sourcing it shortly. All the other alternatives were proprietary, and Red Hat will only ship free software.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    2. Re:Directory services by illumin8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What I don't get is if Red Hat acquired Netscape Directory Service why are they still claiming to be focusing on the "desktop" when Novell's NDS is Linux-friendly. Is it mostly because of the proprietary nature of NDS? I just hope there isn't too much duplication of effort with the directory services biz.

      The reason why is because a strong LDAP directory server is essential for a Samba PDC/BDC rollout if you're going to replace a Windows NT domain in the enterprise. This is a much needed piece to the enterprise desktop/server puzzle. I guess it's a little misleading to call it a "desktop focus" when what they really mean is that it's an enterprise Windows replacement focus.

      Believe me, I've been going through the hell that is replacing a Windows NT 4 domain with Samba running on Linux and it is just not easy. OpenLDAP is not scalable or reliable enough to be considered enterprise-ready yet, and Samba doesn't have enough support for 3rd-party LDAP servers (like iPlanet (Sun/Netscape) or IBM yet). Who wants to roll out Samba in the enterprise when you still need a Windows 2000 active directory DC or Windows NT 4 PDC to authenticate against? The whole point of Samba is to eliminate Microsoft's stranglehold on the marketplace, not to add to it.

      I've heard from a friend of mine at Redhat that the Samba team is so frustrated with OpenLDAP that they're thinking of writing their own LDAP backend to store all of the account information in.

      But trust me, once it's all working (it might be Samba 4 before then), single sign on using an LDAP server for the backend, and Samba PDC on the front-end will be the holy grail for end-users. Having the same password to authenticate against Windows, Linux/Unix, plus any web apps you might have is a good thing. Having a single place to manage your user identities is also a good thing.

      It amazes me to think of how many great technologies came out of Netscape and how quickly that company died... I mean think about it, they practically invented (I know they didn't really invent it, but they perfected it) the web browser, web server, directory server, certificate server, SSL, name switch service... You name it... Almost every core technlogy that the internet uses was built or perfected there. How much better off would the world be if Netscape had won the browser war?

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
  4. I do agree with Tiemann by kompiluj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) Fedora is a good distro, if you want the newest staff it will never be rock-solid, try for instance the debian-unstable, or Gentoo when it has a bad day
    2) RHEL is something important - RH needs money to support itself. A good UNIX operating system (like Linux cannot be cheap). Also people from management want to pay because:
    - they think if something is free cannot be good
    - they think that you should have someone you can blame
    3) RH didn't steal the Linux - it is free, what you have to pay for are two things: trademark and support - if you can support yourself and don't care about trademarks but have to use software that needs RHEL try a RHEL clone. On the other hand if you have enough money to afford such software (think Oracle) why not give some to the Linux community.
    But it's only my 0.02 Euro...

    --
    You can defy gravity... for a short time
    1. Re:I do agree with Tiemann by bogie · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wait...what's this? A sensible post from someone who isn't saying Red Hat is the "Microsoft of Linux" and how they've moved all of their computers to Gentoo because only wankers use Red Hat. Say it isn't so!

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  5. Redhat? No thanks! by asv108 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I gave them up a few years ago, ever since they decided not provide support for freely downloadable ISO's. I went to debian for most of our servers, gentoo on my own desktops. We still have fedora dual booting on our intern desktops but I have no interest in giving redhat money for enterprise linux. Debian has turned out to be a great solution for us. I'm not saying its a redhat replacement, the fact is, Debian really needs a "grown up" large company to provide commercial support, that will quiet the fears of managers. Yes, I've seen the the Debian contractors page.

    Our organization even has a Redhat site license that drops the cost down to $30 a desktop per year, but after they decided to effectively drop support for the millions of redhat 8 and 9 installations, I have no interest in dealing with a company that can make such a profound shift without considering the needs of their existing customers. Yes, we did pay for Redhat support! Suse looks like its moving in the opposite direction of redhat so that might be an option for a good option down the road.

    1. Re:Redhat? No thanks! by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Informative

      Debian really needs a "grown up" large company to provide commercial support, that will quiet the fears of managers.

      Is HP, grown up enough? http://www.hp.com/hps/linux/lx_debian.html

    2. Re:Redhat? No thanks! by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. I always thought Fedora was a bone thrown to those who had used RHL. They were actually making money on RHL which means they dropped it for focus, not profit. I think it's hurt them, no matter what they say. I think they are doing okay, don't get me wrong, but the community as a whole thinks less of them for it. I refuse to try Fedora for the reasons you stated. Red Hat doesn't want my business unless I buy enterprise versions which means unless I have a user base. Caldera got a bad rep for much of the same type behavior, back in the day. Hey, it works for them. Red Hat really has no interest in you and me until we code something, put it back into the community, and they incorperate it into their workstation distro.

    3. Re:Redhat? No thanks! by Anita+Coney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait a minute. You criticize Redhat for charging for support, but then you claim that "Debian really needs a 'grown up' large company to provide commercial support, that will quiet the fears of managers."

      Am I missing something?!

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    4. Re:Redhat? No thanks! by Neil+Watson · · Score: 2, Informative

      The last time I checked out Redhat's prices they were awfully high. My boss remarked that he could by a Windows server for less. Considering how much of Redhat's, or any Linux Distro company, work is done for free by the open source community I would expect the price to undercut proprietary code software everytime.

    5. Re:Redhat? No thanks! by mattdm · · Score: 2, Informative

      They were actually making money on RHL which means they dropped it for focus, not profit.

      Do you have a basis for this claim? From what I've heard from Red Hat folks, they were barely breaking even, if that.

      Red Hat really has no interest in you and me until we code something, put it back into the community, and they incorperate it into their workstation distro.

      And that's why all the stuff they write is released under the GPL. Those bastards.

  6. Fedora is good, but... by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
    There just aren't enough packages in it. It's just too damn small. That wouldn't be so bad, if there was any obvious way to submit RPMs. For a "community-driven project", Fedora seems to be very good at keeping the community out of things.


    (Although I don't have that much code of my own that I could add, I track oodles of excellent software and would be more than happy to roll up the necessary files to convert these to RPMs/SRPMs.)


    Mind you, other projects aren't much better. A lot of Gentoo packages are old and you have to reach some unspecified level of standing in the Gentoo community before they'll ask you if you want to contribute. I happen to like compiling my own software, but I've started souring on Gentoo as a way to do it. Rolling my own binaries is only useful if I've got recent enough software to make it useful.


    As it stands, for me, the score is definitely: Gentoo, Fedora 3.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Fedora is good, but... by LnxAddct · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not enough packages? You obviosuly haven't used it. In previous posts people were complaining that too many packages were installed with it. The thing with Fedora is it goes through extensive Q&A relatvie to the other distros so not every package you may find in gentoo will be in a defualt install of Fedora. This is why you can easily use outside reopsitories like DAG, Freshrpms, Fedora.us, Livna.org etc.. etc.. Fedorafaq.org is your friend. Fedora is really an amzing distro, especially Core 3. And more importantly, its community is gigantic and if you need help, the people at #fedora are almsot always willing to help and are very nice. If you try going to #debian, you'll get laughed at and ridiculed out of there. We've actually had people come to #fedora saying that they don't run fedora but the debian channel refused to help them so they came here for help, and sure enough they were helped. Fedora is also the only distro that works on my laptop, I can't stand Suse and that god forsaken YaST, but Mandrake is nice and I wouldn't mind dual booting with it, but it refuses to play nice with my laptop. So for the past year or so I've run Fedora and its the best decision I've made. I still do run debian on some older servers, but FC2 is stable enough that I'm phasing out the Debian with Fedora. If you haven't given it a shot recently, you should.
      Regards,
      Steve

  7. All we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    What Red Hat must now do is to finish the job of making Fedora a true community project by publishing, and getting accepted, a governance model.

    That and the public CVS server they've been promising for two years.

  8. hardware agnostic by asv108 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I should have been a little more clear, grown up support that is NOT hardware specific. Will HP support debian linux on Dell, IBM, whiteboxes, etc? When I pay for rhel i get hardware agnostic support from a name managers know, Debian needs a similar provider.

  9. Redhat/Fedora by Mentorix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although I wish RH lots of luck with Fedora I can't say that I'm interested in what they offer.

    Their commercial offerings are a pain in the butt, the kernel they use is patched all over the place and they don't even offer support for normal Linux kernels. For all intents and purposes they are *not* a Linux distribution but a clever new way to achieve another vendor lock-in scenario.

    My *proffessional* experience with their products have been nothing short of disappointing, all the advantages that Linux has, like flexibility and standardisation, RH has eliminated them one by one with their stringent support policies and nothing less then time consuming and awkward ways of keeping machines updated. They don't even guarantee API compatibility within major releases so I can't even update machines without testing the updates first. I don't want to start a "my distro is better than yours" argument but why would I go through all the aformentioned trouble when there a distro like Debian does guarentee API compatibility within major releases, can do security updates automatically without any worries, and is commercially supported by multiple companies as well? In every way I can think of it their commercial server products feel antiquated and awkward to administer.

    IMNSHO The products RH sells have nothing in common with Linux and the reason why it got so popular in the first place.

    1. Re:Redhat/Fedora by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since you (and 30 others) feel its your duty to spit at redhat while holding up your Debian flag I think its about time you guys answer some questions. Red Hat did SMP, NPTL, clustering, O(1) scheduler, O(1) VM layer Starting and stopping 100,000 threads used to take 15 minutes, now it literally takes one second.
      Had major contributions to or wrote outright Mozilla, Open Office, Kernel, GTK2, GCC, Glibc, metacity, wrote Java compiler, Xorg(xfree), stateless linux, SElinux, exec-shild, RPM, Anaconda. It bought out 3 company's turning previous closed source software the company's owned into OSS software like netscape directory and GFS, sistina's VM. RedHat promises to spend 1/5th of their income on R&D of free software.
      Now... What has Debian done for us? Thanks for apt-get.
      Which side is "just packaging free software" again?
      Some of us BUY RH because they take our money and INVENT software that is OSS, they don't just patch security flaws.

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
  10. I'm not asking them to give away support by asv108 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let me rephrase, I'm not looking for free support for a downloadable product. I want pay support for a product that I can download, install, and run for free.