Slashdot Mirror
Community vs. Corporate Linux, The Coming Divide
tobyj writes "MadPenguin.org discusses the great divide that will separate corporate Linux (companies that are working with Microsoft) and community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft) and their impact on Linux as a whole. Matt Hartley writes, "For Linux enthusiasts, the rules are simple and clear to interpret. But for Microsoft and its Linux partners, we will see plenty of them pointing to self-created loopholes, which will result in fierce debate, and perhaps even worse, blatant defiance.
As a collective community, we'd like to think that this whole issue will just blow over, but with the massive migration of so many Windows users and companies that wish to capitalize on this migration, defiance of the GPL will happen and more so than ever before."
"community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft)"
What?!
Rather think "When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won.", as said by Linus Torvalds
-
I don't see that ending any time soon.
Seriously, how did this get to the front page? What is newsworthy about the link? 60% of the page is advertising/links bundled with a few small paragraphs of mindless speculation.
What about the kind that realise that Microsoft has screwed so many business partners in the past (Spyglass, for an excellent example) that a partnership with them is not sound buisness.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Rather think "When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won.", as said by Linus Torvalds
It's not that easy.
When M$ becomes a free software company, we will all win. If M$ becomes a free software owner, we will all lose. The whole point of free software is to avoid software owners - people who make you pay for the privilege of using and improving their software but who will restrict those uses and improvements so that you never get what you want.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Last I heard, Red Hat was about as "corporate" as Linux got. (Before we start murmuring about Novell, why don't we check the size of Novell's customer list vs. that of Red Hat?) And, last I heard, Red Hat flat-out rejected a deal with Microsoft the likes of the one Novell signed. On the other hand, is Red Hat "working with Microsoft"? I don't have examples off the top of my head, but considering that it would be in the best interests of Red Hat's entire installed base, I would say that it is more than likely. I guess that's why they call it a line in the sand and not a line in the concrete.
Breakfast served all day!
I saw this coming after Redhat stopped making Linux for everyone and went corporate only. Sure there is Fedora; but it's not Redhat. The same thing applies to SuSE/OpenSuSE.
I, for one, like corporate Linux. The support is all there. With community distros, I can't tell you how many times my questions have gone unanswered or have been mocked. With corporate editions, I can actually call/email someone with and issue and get a response in a timely manner.
I understand the whole attitude about keeping Linux free; but alienation of community users by community users is a good way for community Linux to shoot itself in the foot.
The game.
It's called "framing" -- as in framing the debate by choosing the terms.
This way anyone who might be sitting on the fence can clearly understand the consequences: If you think Microsoft is a stinky abusive monopolist but you are successful at offering large-scale 24x7 support to large customers, you're *community* Linux, not corporate, and your customers will leave you! Likewise, if you haven't upgrade to Shared Source Linux.NET, you will -- just as soon as Microsoft sends out the lawyers.
I thought this was going to be about desktop versus server linux. An Ubuntu vs IBM type of thing. Throw in some FUD about (un)fair schedulers and file access writes slowing things down, it would make for some interesting trolling. No takers?
Anywhile, tagging the companies that work with MS as 'corporate' takes some serious spinning. I'm sure IBM, Sun, Oracle, Apple, etc would all chafe at being left out of the 'corporate' segment. But then, all 4 of them might qualify to be 'corporate' under these terms since most are in bed with MS already, to some degree.