Layoffs and CEO Resignation At OSDL

lisah writes "Big changes are afoot at Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) with today's surprise announcement of the departure of CEO Stuart Cohen and the layoff of nine other employees. Details are still emerging about what exactly this means for OSDL but according to a preliminary announcement, Cohen is 'leaving to pursue other open source opportunities' and OSDL is 'refocusing the scope of [their] work to better align resources with [their] revenues...'" The article also mentions the last year's layoff at OSDL.

Comments

Re:Ouch.

[PinkPanther]

Lessee, GM's on the list (see "Who Killed the Electic Car") along with the obvious Microsoft, SCO, Walmart, etc

So you are against companies that give consumers exactly what they want?
That kill products that aren't selling?
Boards that do what (they believe) their investor base is demanding?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of those on your list...however they are big targets exactly because consumers support them (or don't, in the case of layoffs and the "electric car").

Re:Ouch.

[tshak]

As for Microsoft, it got to where it is now in large part to shady deals (QDOS, OS/2, etc.) and illegal business practices.
 
This is so far from being proven it's absolutely rediculous. Anybody who worked software retail during that timeframe (I did) knows that you A) had droves of people lining up for Windows 95 and B) and droves of people returning OS/2 Warp because of technical issues (e.g. data corruption, not "lack of programs cause MS screwed us").

Re:Ouch.

[mr.warmth]

I just wanted to point out that you're not giving the EV1 story a fair treatment.

It is true that there were many leasees who were dying to own one outright. However, that doesn't mean that GM would have obviously made money from that. For example, I believe that there're laws requiring car companies to make parts available for some amount of time (maybe 10 years?) after a car is manufactured. That would mean that GM would have to maintain this stock or production just to make the EV1 leasees happy.

This is not to say that GM did not have an ulterior motive - they may have. But to conclude that they were motivated by something other than profit from the fact that they crushed rather than sold their production run is not fair.