Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat CEO Decries Open Source Pretenders

Posted by Zonk on from the put-up-or-shut-up dept.

OSTalent writes "The Register has an article about Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik's recent remarks...'For all his enthusiasm about the community and sever-side Linux, Szulik provided something of a reality check on the much debated theme of a Linux desktop. According to Szulik, the huge presence of legacy infrastructure like Microsoft's Exchange and PowerPoint has prevented a lot of people making the move.'" From the article: "It's very difficult to shape the development agenda of the community... every day people comment to us on the quality of our products through Kerrnel.org. What's important is staying true to the premise of the GPL model ... It starts with the APIs now, then it moves into content. Try to put [Microsoft's] Windows Media Player into Firefox and see what it looks like. In a world where application-to-application interaction becomes the norm, where does that innovation come from and who owns it?"

2 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Bitching doesn't help, action does. by Trigun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hurry up and release the Netscape-LDAP 100% free and unencumbered.
    Pick an open project for calendaring/mail and make Outlook work with it.
    Create better tools for identity management.

    The problem with people not embracing open source is not with open source, its that nobody knows what they're looking for with open source. Focus on what small business needs, and what open source can offer. Create small, turn-key packages. Create an LDAP authentication server. Create an LDAP mail server that operates as a drop-in replacement that works with the identity server. Create a Document Management System that works with OpenOffice, so that you have it part of the file-save dialog. Give business the tools it needs to work, and work efficiently!

    The tools are better. Everyone keeps saying that they are. The design is sound, the pieces are there, but nobody has stepped up to the plate and sewn it all together. Stop the development of new tools. Take the tools that we have already and put them together. Industry needs more than Google and a Howto posted on an undergrads website.

    Everybody knows that there are a million ways to authenticate a bunch of workstations to one or more server. LDAP, LDAP and Kerberos. GSSAPI, Radius, whatever, but for the love of all things sane and holy, pick one! Pick one, and build the turnkey solution to do it. /phew.

  2. Re:non-sequitur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmm...

    Redhat. Lets think about this.

    Oh yah. They do large amounts of development work and stabilization for the 2.4 and 2.6 series kernel.

    Hrm. I don't seem to be remembing anything abotu rewriting stack smashing protection and getting it actually incorporated into the GCC 4.x series.

    Oh, and making SELinux usable. Na. That couldn't be Redhat. Could it?

    Getting OO.org 2 ported to work with the gcj compiler instead of requiring a java runtime for many of it's features. THat couldn't be Redhat, eh?

    Or how about GCC? Redhat couldn't be putting developers and resources into that project either, right?

    And open sourcing GFS.. or netscape directory services, or developing and improving the ext3 file system.

    Or how about Cygwin? I bet Gentoo did a lot of work on that one. Didn't they? That couldn't be Redhat could it?

    I guess that doesn't amount to jack shit compared to your massive contributions to F/OSS software.

    This couldn't be the company that allows projects like CentOS and Whitebox to download source code to their entire operating system and build 100% compatable clones either. Gee since they don't do that I would expect that Redhat would be big hypocrites.

    Hey, how about this. Maybe Redhat has a business, and has employees and stockholders that they are responsable for. Hrm. Seems to me that each peice of software they buy or develope ends up being open source, isn't that funny for a company that doesn't give a shit?

    Seems that they would behave more like original Suse did and rely on closed source management tools like Yast, or be like Gentoo, whose founder now works for Microsoft.

    Give me a break. All Redhat does is:
    1. Charge money for support
    2. Protect their trademarks (which if you don't protect you loose unlike copyrights and patents. It takes a active effort to protect trademarks or they are invalid and anybody could use Redhat icons and call themselves redhat; including MS or IBM)
    3. Don't provide binary downloads for free, except thru Fedora and Rawhide.

    But they do provide the source code for everything they use... which is pretty open source, isn't it?