Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Listed Among 50 Top Tech Companies
Kelvin Ekston writes " Red Hat is listed among ZDNet Asia's 50 Top Tech companies 2006. It is also one of the fastest growing companies with 210.4% year on year income growth over 4 years.
While almost all Linux companies grapple with the perennial question of how they can make money through software subscriptions and services rather than selling packaged boxes, Red Hat finally managed to improve credibly and match the hype with substance and show the way to do business with Linux. That's the way to go!"
The ad sponsors for the link are IBM, EMC and Redhat. Can you guess which three companies are on the list?
check out http://www.centos.org/
Twin or more? ITA
Apache/Spring/La
One thing that killed their PE was constant dilution via secondary offerings, convertible debentures, and compensation stock options.
If you invested in Red Hat, you really invested in them.. Your money went straight into the companies asset sheet through their extreme dilution.
Red Hat is making good on it now for us long-term investors finally at least. They are buying back the convertible debentures and some of the stock. This should bring their PE down even if the P part stays constant.
It's going to take a while though, Red Hat effectively borrowed billions of dollars from their stockholders and they aren't going to pay it back overnight.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Redhat merged with Cygnus, didn't they? Cygnus have been profitable using an open-source business model since the late 80s/early 90s. And Redhat as a whole have been doing business for 12 years too - although they haven't always been in the black, they have still managed to pay the bills, pay wages, and put out products that people buy for well over a decade. Redhat aren't as unproven as you make out.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
really? what you point to is still on RHEL 4.1 while centos is already at 4.2 and I have never had a problem like you described.
Maybe back in the 3.x series they were lagging, but they have a crapload of people working on it now as well as their own yum update repository instead of pointing at redhat's.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
You're so obviously retarded, I need to work through this one point at a time.
> BAH!!! REDCRAP is the WORST piece of shit I've ever used. We just bought a bunch of
> RHEL 4 AS licenses, and it has been a freaking nightmare. Support sucks, and takes
> it own sweet time if it's not something easily found. And they'll ask you to test things
> out for things that they've confirmed to be issues - WTF? If you FSCKING know it's an
> issue, you can FSCKING TEST IT OUT YOURSELF, damned lazy bastards.
Lazy? Have you any idea how long it could take to *accurately* reproduce a problematic
environment for this kind of work? It may not even be possible. By asking you to help out,
they are helping *YOU* out - FOSS is all about co-operation btw.
> I also like the way they push things off to others. Oh, disk druid is broken? Use fdisk.
> Umm, excuse me, but where's fdisk when I'm trying to install? And why aren't you putting
> in a ticket to engineering to get it fixed?
It's on virtual console 2 (Alt-F2, or Ctrl-Alt-F2 if you're using graphical). Learn to use
the tools in your hands before criticising the help offered by others. Or find out what a
kickstart %pre script is good for.
> And I especially love the way everything is bundled together. So, now, my choice is waste
> 1G of disk space on win2k, or waste 1G of disk space on REDCRAP, when all I'm trying to
> do is run a freaking web server?!
You installed your webserver with a pre-defined package profile? What are you? Fscking crazy?
Learn to do a kickstart like everyone else and have *only* the packages you select.
Oh, wait, you probably don't even know what packages you want or need.
*sharpens the clue-by-four*
> Oh, oh, lets not even mention the fact that RHEL4 can't even run, out of the box, on
> platforms that they advertize for!!!! Yeah, go perform a default install of RHEL4 on a
> dual core opteron, reboot, and watch it hang. Why the fsck do you put in the smp kernel,
> if it doesn't fucking work?
You mean the dual core opterons that weren't even available as engineering samples at the
time RHEL4 was being cut? Ahh, of course, Red Hat should have just used their magic crystal
ball. In the mean time, install update 2 like the rest of the sane world.
Oh, and RHEL doesn't even come in a box. It's a *subscription*. But you knew that right?
> And of course, the support and registration sites going up and down, and taking more than
> 24 hours to get my damned registration in.
Works for me. Perhaps you need to use a working web browser? Or maybe the fault is between
chair and keyboard?
> And lets not talk about how much fun it was doing an up2date to go from RHEL 4 to RHEL 4
> U1 and U2. Freaking dependency failures, and killing the box so bad that it can't reboot,
> and needing a re-install.
OK, now I just don't believe you. Oh, wait, you didn't kill an up2date/RPM process did you?
Or reboot? Bwaahahahahahaaaha HALOF!
> 2. ftp and http both support resumption of downloads, so if REDCRAP's servers can't
> support this, this is a REDCRAP issue, isn't it?
RHN downloads use wget or curl by preference. Please consult the manual pages.
Also, please investigate the carriage return key on your keyboard - it's very useful.