Slashdot Mirror
In Your Face, Critics! Red Hat Passes $1 Billion In Revenue
head_dunce writes "Now that Red Hat has officially posted more than a billion dollars in revenue, ($1.13 billion to be exact), the company's PR department sent this funny list of quotes predicting doom. For instance, 'We think of Linux as a competitor in the student and hobbyist market but I really don't think in the commercial market we'll see it in any significant way.' Bill Gates, 2001."
More like Green Hat! WOOOOO!
Redhat contributes a TON to open source projects, and a lot of the time I find their online documentation to be the best available. I am very glad they're doing well.
Was that Bill Gates quote from 2001, or 1999, as a Google search suggests? I'm a little wary about its authenticity when I see people, especially on /., think that he actually said "640k is enough for anybody" when that is definitely not the case.
;)
Maybe I should use Bing!
50,000 characters used to live here.
I wonder how much more they would have made if Oracle didn't rip them off. I dont count CentOS though. The vast majority of people using CentOS either can't afford Redhat or will move up when they can.
Trending: http://www.redhat.com/about/news/archive/2012/3/A-billion-thanks-to-the-open-source-community-from-Red-Hat?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook
Thanks to both RedHat and OpenSource communities!
"It feels like I'm at the Zoo when reading this thread - I'm frightened, but it's interesting" (c)
Red Hat also announced that they will be donating $100,000 to each of the following organizations; Creative Commons, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Software Freedom Law Center and UNICEF Innovation Labs. http://www.redhat.com/about/news/archive/2012/3/A-billion-thanks-to-the-open-source-community-from-Red-Hat
---- Fight to protect your right to keep and arm bears! ummmm... ya I think that's right....
But, does it run linux?
That's great that RH finally passed that mark... that's on top of the good news they've been announcing for the past few years.. from their revenue growth through the recession (thanks to the subscription model), to their entry into the fortune 500.
But does anyone here think Bill Gates or Microsoft stays awake worried about RH? They pulled in 72x more revenue, 159x more profits, and have 63x more cash on hand (50.69b vs 808m) than Red Hat. Microsoft even has a better profit margin than RH (32.5% vs 13.3%).
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=msft
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=RHT+Key+Statistics
Perhaps there is a billion dollars worth of revenue from the hobbyist and Student Market?
What Red Hat did which was shift away from trying to compete on the Desktop Market (Microsoft bread and butter) and focus more on the Server Market where Microsoft while a major player has more of an equal footing. Where they had a lot of legacy Unix shops that wanted to get off Unix Platforms but still keep the Unixy goodness.
In general most Novel Shops went to Windows, most Unix Shops went to Linux. By "most" meaning there are exceptions, and plenty of anecdotal stories. As moving to the other platform was much easier for the company.
For new companies. They would split across Microsoft and Linux (With Red Hat offering enterprise level support) Some would go with Microsoft and Other with Linux...
So in a competive market I am not supprised that Red Hat made money. They played smart business and they made money.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
... King George III probably said that those rebellious colonists in America would never amount to anything, either. Freedom rules.
Did you post that from a tablet computer by chance?
To a large extent, Red Hat is cashing in on a much broader community effort that has developed Linux and sold it as a viable platform to software developers, says George Weiss, an analyst with the Gartner technology research firm. But Red had a hand in this. “Give credit to Red Hat for fashioning a business model that created value from subscription support,” he adds.
Emphasis mine. I don't think that the success of Red Hat depended on Linux being a viable platform for software developers. Rather, it depended on Linux being a viable platform for servers (I'm not meaning to under-emphasise the desktop users, or the developers, here; all I'm trying to say is that the success of Red Hat probably has little to do with Linux being "developer friendly" and more to do with the server market [and all that entails]).
Why do they need to "win the war"? We don't need software monoculture. We need interoperability. Redhat is successful and doing well in a market where others are also doing well.
Desktop Linux is slowly but steadily making progress and getting more polished every day. Who knows if at some point we pass the critical mark.
I'm a developer (on RHEL 5/6) in a company on the same size order as MS that deploys RH or the CentOS derivative on the high tens-of-thousands of nodes scale.
Congratulations and all, but how could you not be successful when providing such a superior product to your competition. RHEL beats MS server variants in every way for ease of development (integrating dozens of nodes is a breeze, IA is consistent and well documented), cost, features, and support (we can call up RHEL developers at any time to request they investigate problems and push out fixes on timely schedules).
They are a great company, and don't make you feel dirty for using their product.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
OK, how about it? Are they from industry leaders?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Yeah, it's easy to make a lot of money when you trade the freedom of your users for cash in your pocket.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
How about quotes from the same era about Linux on the desktop? Or quotes from every year since about how this year will be the long heralded Year Of Linux on the desktop?
It started as media hype but this is the era of mobile computing and I would say that Linux has done extremely well in that market. Apple is still #1, Android is #2 but Microsoft is 4th when there is a huge gap between 2nd and 3rd. Android is still a consolation prize until they can start running neck and neck with the iPad and when that happens, you'll have more PR hype asking "Is this the year the [mainstream] desktop dies?" It's all part of the plan for Linux world dominance. Bow down to your root overlords!
What I find impressive about Redhat is not Linux volume per se(woah, you mean that a world with a zillion cheap webservers wants an x86 unix for free? I never would have guessed); but that they've continued to sustain demand for paid offerings in the face of free-if-you-bring-your-own-expert stuff(which is unattractive at a small scale; but becomes economic if you are big enough) and various 'appliance-ized' Redhat clones put out by the vendors of the software designed to run on top of them(eg. Oracle's database + I can't believe it's not Redhat offering)...
It seems totally unsurprising that much of the internet hosting going on today wouldn't even be economically possible if they were paying a tithe to Redmond, and it is similarly unsurprising that vendors of expensive applications would really rather that you pay for their software, not for the OS it happens to run on. Much more interesting that there is a place for Redhat in all this...
Well It isn't the same war.
Red Hat has distance itself from its consumer business. So they are not competing with Apple who has distance itself from its Server Business.
For Microsoft how much of their business is in B2B sales. That would probably give a closer number.
I like Apple, I like Linux and I like Microsoft (Lately). They seem to fill different Niches.
Apple - Has gotten really strong on Mobile. While I have been dishearten with OS X and Macs Apples mobile Offerings are still top of the industry.
Microsoft - They finally got Windows 7 to do what they promised us for Windows 95. And I find it a good Desktop OS, even better then Macs, or Linux.
Linux - If I have a back end server. I want it to be a Linux server. Linux can be stripped down to the basics and do what it needs to do and do it well without all the touch and freely stuff Microsoft gives us.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Congratulations Bob and Marc! To this day RHEL is probably my favorite distro (not trying to start a distro war), and I've been using RH it since apollo. They were cool guys then, and I can only imagine they've stayed the same.
I love Linux (lowercase l), and RedHat does good things - worthy of being a going-growing concern. "Winning the war", they are not.
Red Hat has a poster in almost every office quoting Ghandi:
First they ignore You
Then they laugh at you
They they fight you
Then you win.
That quote permeates most of Red Hat Culture.
---- Fight to protect your right to keep and arm bears! ummmm... ya I think that's right....
I think they mean winning the war on perception. Plus, their business model is markedly different. Apple is a hardware vendor (with some software thrown in) dedicated to consumer grade equipment (mac pro being the exception, and the now defunct xserve line). Microsoft is like GE where they have their hands in 80 million different pies, consumer and enterprise. Red Hat essentially offers support and maintains an extremely stable distribution (with a ton of kernel development thrown in) - and they're only in the enterprise market - and they're growing. I'm pretty sure that their install base across the world is higher than both OSX and and Windows in their chosen market (though the latest releases from windows do have some nice teeth).
Progress like Gnome 3 and Unity?
When Bill Gates made that comment, Linux was already the most deployed HTTP server plattform, in our datacenter there were lots of customers running large deployments of 1 HU linux servers and Linux was encroaching the embedded market with lots of appliances being built on top of a linux base installation.
Android is #1, iOS is #2. You have to be very careful of weasel words from Apple supporters: they'll make claims like "Apple is the largest single mobile vendor!", but of course all of the Android vendors put together still outnumber Apple. So Android market share is larger than iOS.
Two things:
>> "'We think of Linux as a competitor in the student and hobbyist market but I really don't think in the commercial market we'll see it in any significant way.' Bill Gates, 2001."
#1: That wasn't a "prediction." That was a positioning statement, meant for the ears of commercial buyers and software channels, that Microsoft will remove its good graces from anyone who tries to interfere with Microsoft's business operating system sales.
#2: Microsoft revenues in Q1 2012 were $20B, or about 60 times Red Hat's. If anything, Microsoft is probably thrilled to have a relatively tiny, but still growing competitor in the market to keep the anti-trust folks at bay. (Remember those guys from about 10 years ago?)
The point being that Red Hat is not competing against Microsoft but rather they are filling a different market than Microsoft. Make no mistake that Red Hat software is cheap. The TCO is fairly high since Linux Admins tend to command a much higher salary, generally don't crossover as much (I know plenty of Windows guys that do all around IT and fewer Linux guys that know Windows....far-fewer), and require much more manual care than a Windows environment.
I've found completely different purposes for Windows and Linux environments most of the time, they solve different goals. I prefer IIS/MSSQL/Windows over most stuff in the enterprise but put in Linux when it fills a void in either licensing or application compatibility.
Just goes to show that nobody can predict the future with any accuracy, eh? Which makes you wonder why companies would listen to them in the first place.
Who would have guessed that a cheap, ad-supported Worms rip-off (which itself was a Scorched-Earth rip-off, etc.) would get 10m downloads in the first day of the release of its... what... fifth title? And make an awful lot of money. While the Worms sequels tended towards the dire themselves?
Who would have thought that the idea of a Linux smartphone would be a success? Who would have thought that just indexing the web and running statistics on the whole damn thing would make a better search engine than anyone else had ever made and create one of the most powerful companies in the world? Who would have thought that tablets wouldn't be successful until, well, Windows Tablet Edition's were dead and buried?
Who would have thought that IBM would be sued by a dead shell of a company and it get drawn out to a multi-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit? Who would have though that just changing the screen type could make people buy MILLIONS of a popular e-book device?
Things happen. And the WORST people to listen to are a) critics, b) "industry experts" that post popular columns in papers and journals and c) potential competitors about how those things would never happen.
Microsoft keep trying to tell me that the cloud is the next thing I should buy into. Car manufacturers keep telling me that they'll make a fast, practical, environmentally-friendly car that I can afford. Solar / wind / wave power enthusiasts keep telling me that we'll all be running the country off them soon.
The shock here is not that Red Hat made $1bn (and some of those comments were made only in 2010, which I would have considered stupid and short-sighted back then), but that people still think that their opinion matters when they are talking about a competitor, or that people base decisions on what Gartner and similar tell them as if they were the Oracle.
The BIGGEST companies and successes in the world come about by surprise to even their owners. Who would have thought that the richest man in the world would be the one who wrote a BASIC interpreter?
You cannot make predictions like that, and trying just makes you look stupid.
How many other failed Linux distros had the same poster hanging in their offices ? It's great to hear Red Hat is doing well for themselves but it's not like there's a vibrant market out there for Linux. Few companies are left standing, and most of those are struggling, Novell, Mandriva, ... Even the successful Red Hat at 1 billion in revenue is making a 14th of what Sun was doing just before they were acquired. In that sense Gates was right: Linux hasn't turned out to be the competitor that would sweep everything away in its path like optimists at the time predicted. Instead there's one company left standing enjoying moderate success, nothing Microsoft has to worry about.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
I believe Linux has more "market share" on mobile than Apple at this point.
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
..."Soaking the most cash from the consumer", they are not...
If you want a server you can spend a pile of cash on windows and it will run ok-ish if you take a lot of care setting it up or you can get better security, performance, and flexibility without the lock-in and at a lower cost from RedHat.
Looks like RedHat isn't winning the war, they have already won it. The only thing they are not so good at it is using that leverage to collect massive amounts of cash from their customers and from people who are not their customers via dodgy bulk licensing deals.
If he did, it's odds on it was running Unix variant, not Linux.
I've been using Gnome 3 exclusively for nearly a year now. I love it.
All four of my daughters have been using it. They love it.
My wife uses it. She loves it.
The only tweak I made was to reinstate the minimize button because I like it for a very specific workflow situation.
I haven't tried unity, though, only Gnome shell
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
If they earn $40 billion more next year, they could make the bottom of the Fortune 500 list.
I won't argue with their success and I'm happy that they're happy, but in the grander scheme of things, they have a long way to go.
Depends on what war we want them to win. MS are brilliant at extracting money from customers and even non-customers who buy computer hardware, that's not the kind of company I'd like to deal with as a customer.
The 2011 Q4 stats from IDC show a 56.1 per cent increase in overall slab sales to 28.2 million units; up from the 15.8 million that punters splashed out on in Q3.
In three months Android's percentage of the tablet market has shot up - Android was loaded on 44.6 per cent of tablets sold in Q4, up from 32.3 per cent in Q3.
WebOS and BlackBerry have been practically crushed into the ground: WebOS had zilch and BlackBerry clocked a 0.7 per cent. Windows didn't make a showing. But while iOS is top, it won't be top forever.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/14/ipad_market_share_slips/
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
“Indeed, I would go so far as to say that very few open source startups will ever get anywhere near to $1 billion. Not because they are incompetent, or because open source will ‘fail’ in any sense. But because the economics of open source software – and therefore the business dynamics – are so different from those of traditional software that it simply won’t be possible in most markets.” – Glyn Moody
There have been, in fact, very few open source startups to get to $1 billion. His quote seems right on.
And before I get flamed, I and my family use Linux exclusively. I sold a mildly-successful, Linux-based business a few years ago.
Of course, if you include any business for which open-source software is critical to its operations, like Google, Facebook or Amazon, then yeah, the quote is nonsense.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
Nope. from my ancient steam powered single core Win XP machine.
Albeit a modest one. I went to a week of Redhat server administration training back in 2005 and promptly went out and bought some stock which is now worth over twice what it was then.
... to their entry into the fortune 500.
The S&P 500 is *not* the same thing as the Fortune 500.
Redhat would need 40X their current revenue to have a crack at the Fortune 500.
If anything, Microsoft is probably thrilled to have a relatively tiny, but still growing competitor in the market to keep the anti-trust folks at bay. (Remember those guys from about 10 years ago?)
No. They are not. Because that $1 Billion revenue of RedHat's represents Hundreds of Billions of dollars of lost revenue to Microsoft. Every server running Linux is a server that MIGHT have a Windows license if free offerings such as Linux weren't so capable.
Without RedHat and other tiddling (compared to Microsoft) companies improving Linux every day, Microsoft would be the highest revenue company in the world and their stock would still be increasing in value.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
Actually, MS never had a monopoly in the server space and really has nothing to worry about in terms of anti-trust investigations. Outside of corporate IT (which itself is undergoing a huge transformation due to BYOD), corporate IT spawned app/web development (.NET/ASP), and gaming (which itself is debatable due to the looming death of dedicated gaming devices and the rise of smartphones and tablets), MS has no real momentum in software platforms.
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
It was, then the whole fucking thing up-ended. Ubuntu 10.10 caused me to switch to Linux and 11 caused my to switch to Windows. It wasn't just the buggy interface, there were other problems with the 64bit distro on top of the train-wreck UI and graphical anomalies, and disappearing menus.....
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
That quote sounds more like Strategic FUD. It doesn't take a genius to realize that when students and enthusiasts are, in large numbers, rallying to a competing operating system, you've got some future trouble heading your way.
As the CEO of a large company, you're not going to say anything to try to *encourage* people to look at the competition, so you demean and minimize it.
As long as there are other desktop options that run GTK apps just as well, why does it matter? Don't like Gnome/Unity? Use KDE, xcfe, LXDE...
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
That quote permeates most of Red Hat Culture.
Know what else permeates most of Red Hat culture? Reality. They realized years ago that making it easy for people to get your product for free isn't going to make you much money. Thus, no binaries for non-paying customers. You've gotta be willing to compile everything from source yourself. We're making a big deal about a "billion dollar open source company" here, when Red Hat doesn't operate like an "open source" company. They're making money precisely because they operate as close to a proprietary company as possible without violating the GPL. Giving your product away, ready made, is folly if you actually want to make big money (unless you can make money by advertising, a'la Google and Facebook... but operating systems don't work that way).
How many other billion dollar open source companies are there?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Progress like Gnome 3 and Unity?
Sure. KDE4 is nice too.
Is the Linux Desktop actually growing? quotes a market share figure from Net Applications of 1.4%, up from 0.97% the previous July. Other estimates have put the figure at 1.67%. Some analysts are predicting the figure could hit 2% to 3% before the end of 2012.
The author states that 12% of visitors to his tech related web sites run Linux. If that is any indication, then the figure of technologically minded people using Linux desktops already exceeds 10%.
Keep in mind that Apple's global desktop market share is in single figures: Linux desktop market share doesn't have to exceed that of Windows to be considered important.
Now I do not remember the differences between expanded memory and extended memory, but at the time those differences were very significant.
Extended memory is memory at an address beyond the 1 megabyte boundry.
Expanded memory is memory accessed through a window (located somewhere in the area between 640K and 1M) and bank switching.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
What discussion? All you've done is pop up and post a bunch of hypothetical guesses about what Apple "could" or "might" do, and point out that a lot of Android devices are low end. How is that relevant? It doesn't change the fact that Android has a larger market share than iOS. How are Android and iOS "not comparable"? They're both mobile platforms. The hardware those platforms run on has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Android has a larger market share than iOS.
Your previous post doesn't refute the fact that Android has a large market share than iOS and added nothing to the discussion. So why did you post it, other than a lame Apple fanboy attempt to deflect away the awkward issue (for yourself) that Android has a larger market share than iOS?
Ubuntu is not representative of the GNU/Linux based desktop OSes.
Why don't you get an extra HDD that you can use to try out a couple of distros while double booting, also checking if your hardware (vendors) play right with Linux?
With some effort to climb a learning curve (even better, ask a friend with experience!) you'd be surprised. My example : the last Windows I used was Win2K, around 2003 and I could not be happier.
So basically, your claim is that if you had a penis, it would be the largest?
I seen fanboys make up some weird figures before, but claiming you are the top seller if you would be selling, that is a new one.
Apple is a big mobile maker, but it is not the biggest. About the only claim that stands is that of single model high-end smartphone, Apple sells the most. That is not a bad title to hold but it has rather a lot of qualifiers.
Mandatory car anology, Ferrari would be the biggest car maker, if they sold small cheap cars.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
... I said "freedom rules", not open source, per se.
You're going to be disappointed I'm afraid. A new iPad comes out once a year. That analysis covers the quarter before the new iPad. Since that was written, the new retina iPad has had huge sales.
there is a desktop???
Red Hat doesn't operate like an "open source" company.
They're making money precisely because they operate as close to a proprietary company as possible without violating the GPL.
Um, yes it does.
The source code for all their stuff is available for free here: http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en/os/SRPMS/.
They don't have to do that. They are only obligated to provide the source on request for a reasonable copying fee to people to whom they distribute binaries to. Instead, they make it freely available to anyone who wants it, without charging a cent for the bandwidth.
Speaking of cents, you can get CentOS, which is identical to RHEL minus the branding entirely for free because RedHat make the sources available freely. Also, redhat make the sources avaialble for non GPL software which they simply don't have to do.
So, the claim that they are as proprietary as possible is simply false.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
more to the point who cares if it replaces the desktop
I never thought it was going to do so, it didn't make sense. I DOES make sense to put it into every things that has a
a cpu and no legacy crap to force it to be something else. But yeah I own apps that go back more than 10 years I still use. And it makes sense
to have a pc or mac for those apps. and to continue to buy those types to continue to use them.
so I think it was naive to think that everyone would have linux on their desktop, no reason to.
But When the next thing takes over (like the ipad+ or something closer to a laptop/desktop/pad thing)
I bet ANYTHING it will run some variant of Linux. (or unix)
And that's how the microsoft monopoly will break up.
Solaris and HP UX are being run into the ground with customers scared of Itanium, and upset that you need a $$$$ Oracle Database license to run Solaris.
Linux is a much easier platform to migrate too.
If it were not for Linux many organizations would be in a pickle over this. Actually if it were not for RedHat as an enteprise tested and supported platform is essential in these envrionments.
http://saveie6.com/
Many and I mean many Solaris shops are fuming with steam coming out of their ears with the outrageous licensing and requirements for Oracle Database when all they need is to run some servers and not their crappy RDBMS.
Add to the fact that Oracle is scaring HP customers with Itanium away threatening to cancel support with the whole lawsuit there is making Redhat an attractive alternative to HP-UX.
Sure some Oracle shops maybe using it. But many more who are former Sun shops and even HP shops feel more comfortable with Redhat. Some are switching to Windows but the dumb PHBs already migrated a decade ago and the smart ones know it does not fit the bill for every situation.
http://saveie6.com/
When hell freezes over?
Desktop is becoming less relavent. Linux or at least a *nix variant will likely own the tablet space (does now but even in the future), I think people will have more tablet/phone like devices than desktops. They still probably will have a desktop/laptop too but they might have 2-4 other computing devices (car systems, phone, tablet, eReader etc) and most of those will be running on *nix I suspect.
Borat marketing strategist? :-) Great success, me have sexy time.
Have you seen the last gnome 3 and unity?
I was hating on them quite a bit about a year ago but they seem to have started maturing.
Now stop being learn shy and go figure out how to use those new DEs like a real nerd!
-- no sig today
This isn't Ubuntu.
I do laugh at Linux desktop users who think they are running a more stable, better quality, and desktop friendly OS when they run an update and their video drivers are toasted. The desktop distros are not that great as a single update can hose your system and not work with everything. Which is why Joe Six pack prefers IOS. ... however server ones are much morestable and cheaper than Windows. Redhat is one of those that is industrial enterprise tested. It is made for servers and not desktop users. Think racks of servers at ISPs for customers who need a cheap hosting solution with free development tools and great uptime?
Redhat is an enterprise player and is growing very nicely. Apple's growth is coming to an end as all the rich people have their expensive products and the rest can't afford them or already have one.
http://saveie6.com/
Nobody said evolution was perfect.
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
That was also before MS had a lot of success in the server space. In 2001 MS went from 42->49% of the server space: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-959049.html, in 2011 it was 73.9%. Linux gained marketshare but so did windows and they went from a minority share to a large majority share. As much of a flop as Vista was people forget that MS revenue has gone crazy mostly because they've started to dominate serverland.
It wavers back and forth.
But if you compare Apple having only a small subset of products it is more impressive.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
hundreds of billions? exaggerate much? A Windows Server Standard 2008 license is $700... for $1100, you can get 10 licenses. (from newegg)
cheapest RH subscription: $350 without any support
So even if every one of those RH clients bought Windows licenses 1 at a time, that $1b would only be $2b.
Then you could also give Windows 7 a shot. ;)
I see no reasons to do so.
What I use now is free and legal plus the neat separation of user and system files just makes managing it so easier. Add in central software management and no hunt for device drivers and such. Just much cleaner.
And, I won't trust an OS that needs 20GB space for installation.
This said, I don't hold any grudge against Windows, I just don't care any more :)
We're looking at this differently. I'm saying that if it weren't for RedHat and all the other people working on Llinux and/or other free offerings, Microsoft and proprietary Unix would be only choices for all those servers out there. Millions of them. And I doubt Microsoft would be selling licenses at 10 for $1100 if free competion didn't exist.
Every sale RedHat and every other seller of Linux makes supports not only their paying clients, but scores of additional users who make use of the software they write without paying. I think it is quite conservative to guess that every dollar RedHat earns equates to a loss of $100 of revenue from Microsoft.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
Single core FTW.
A P4 or Pentium M does what I need it to do, cheaply.
Apple's growth is coming to an end as all the rich people have their expensive products and the rest can't afford them or already have one.
I'm not so sure, the Applesauce for brains people I know upgrade their phones every other cycle, buy one of every iPad that comes out, and update their laptops about every 3 years.
You should upgrade your typewriter.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I really wish Unbuntu would change their name. It's killing them. I've started hearing users say "I have an android type computer at my house". I say "Linux? Unbuntu?" They say "No, let me check with Bob.". Check with Bob... yeah it was Unbuntu.
Anyway, go Red Hat and good for you! Red Hat got me respecting Linux years ago when I first touched it.
>>Red Hat doesn't operate like an "open source" company.
>> They're making money precisely because they operate as close to a proprietary company as possible without violating the GPL.
> Um, yes it does.
Actually, and I speak from a highly relevent perspective here, I'd like to point out that you are both wrong. RedHat is neither black nor white on this issue. They surf the grey area profitably. But I'll give them credit for surfing the gray, mostly on toward the better side. Yes, they do actually go a long way (in many ways) beyond what the GPL requires. And lots of people appreciate that. But both they and CentOS, will choose to take gray paths that inhibit the easy full harnessing of the source code in ideal form, without going through a path that requires one of those organizations to both have their logo all over the distro, and go through their compilation and distribution servers as part of your experience with the 'open source code distribution'. I've personally spent months of my own unemployed time trying to remedy this situation, such that anyone can easily leverage the nice srpms that RH provides, without having to deal with either CentOS or RedHat's logos and compilation servers (really, a $350 modern netbook can compile all of *EL-6.X in about a week, not something that demands dependence on an external corporation's servers).
Anyway, props to RH for getting their share of the $$ pie. And seemingly in less insidious ways than advertising companies have leveraged open source software to get their massive share of the $$ pie.
Apple Gets Lukewarm Reaction With New iPad
"Apple's stock is coming off a 52-week high of $548.21 during the March 1 trading session. The shares closed at $541.99 the day it launched the new iPad."
http://www.investoruprising.com/author.asp?section_id=1497&doc_id=240365&f_src=investoruprising_sitedefault
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
And just 3 weeks later, the price is $609.86.
That's 12% higher.
You make my point for me.
Honestly I don't see why so many people think that Gnome is the only answer. I have used RedHat and KDE for nearly 10 years without issues. I have supported DOD sites with this requirement due to the KIOSK features built in to KDE, which is similar to Windows group policy without the massive head cramps one can get from configuring the policy and pushing them to clients.
As the other person mentioned, I run RedHat at work and Fedora at home, because it's free and legal. No need to worry about the software police taking me to court and taking my house and firstborn because they claim I downloaded an illegal copy of Windows, or Office, or Windows Media Player, etc...
And before you say it - I know of a couple people that have been taken to court by the BSA for running work software at home illegally (Windows, VISIO and Office), so don't say "that does not happen".
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
These stats are for smartphones only. If you also throw in tablets, iOS is #1 again, and by a fairly large margin.
Except that MS can't sell the licenses for all their other products if the OS is RHEL.
So, they lose the OS license, but also the licenses for SQL, and CRM, and Exchange, and SharePoint, and Terminal Services, and all the other stuff that might be running on there.
You make my point for me.
No, there's more to the post that does not support your conclusion. However as a fanboi, you can only see confirmation of your existing bias.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
The only other thing in your post was the title and the link. As I showed, 3 weeks later it's clear that the article title got it wrong.
BTW, you look like even more of an idiot when you can't spell "fanboy".
Nobody said evolution was perfect.
No, but Thunderbird is pretty good.
Linux is used to power everything from ATMs to TV, from cell phones to servers. Android is based on Linux. Facebook and Google were both built on Linux and most of the Fortune 500 use it in in their data centers today. Linux also runs one-third of the world's websites, according to W3Techs.com.
The reason Red Hat made their billion is their services to companies who buy their distro - something they are professional at, in contrast to Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo, Slackware and so on. The only other companies remotely in their league were VA Linux and Caldera, but both are history. At any rate, Red Hat has nothing to do w/ Android, Facebook or Google. It's more a competitor to IBM and Oracle, which TFA also lists.
I'm glad that Red Hat is doing well. Hopefully, they'll clean up their RPM and YUMM installation packages, so that one doesn't run into dependencies all the time, and make them at par w/ apt get, pbi and so on. I also wish them well against the likes of Centos. Another thing they could do - acquire one of the databases out there, like Interbase, tune it to RHEL and make themselves a complete suite & solution.
Incidentally, what is RHEL's choice of DE? Is it now on GNOME3 like Fedora, or have they gone w/ something else? Another thing they could do - create a GNUSTEP DE that's like NEXTSTEP and make it their default UI, and make OO programming one of their specialties, just like it was w NEXT, and be recognized for that. It would give them something to separate themselves in the market, and add selling software to their selling services.
Well, Fedora is #3, w/ both Mint and Ubuntu ahead and OpenSuse and Debian not far behind. If Red Hat fixes RPM, Fedora can advance a lot more. Fedora ought to take a page out of PC-BSD's PBI so that they don't have those stupid dependency problems screwing up their entire installations.
Oracle is by no means alone in dropping Itanic. Microsoft, RedHat and Canonical had dropped it long ago (I'm not sure whether Ubuntu ever had it in the first place), and even among the BSDs, only FreeBSD supports it (although NetBSD may have finally ported 6 to it, but OpenBSD definitely hasn't.) If any company is using Integrity servers, their options are HP/UX, FreeBSD or Debian Linux. For databases, they can take ProgreSQL, or maybe fork MySQL. If they want commercial support of the type RHEL provides, they are best off w/ HP/UX. If they want to avoid complete dependence on HP, they're better off going the Debian or FreeBSD routes.
As for the Solaris shops, I'm assuming that we're talking here about those using Sun UltraSparc servers? If that's the case, there is a range of alternatives - all the BSDs, RHEL, Debian, so chances are whatever they'd be most likely to use if they had Xeon or Opteron based servers - they could use w/ their Suns. If we're talking about Opteron or Xeon based servers, the choice is even greater - they could switch to OpenIndiana and short-circuit Oracle trying to rip them off w/ RDBMS. These Solaris shops have plenty of options - only thing they're lacking is that if they are on Sparcs and want to go from Solaris to OpenIndiana, they're out of luck, and have to look into other solutions like OpenBSD, Debian, FreeBSD, et al.
This is not Canonical ( with the alleged 10 millions revenue due to goodies ), the details are on the SEC filling ( http://investors.redhat.com/sec.cfm )
Speaking of which, does Oracle offer OEL on their UltraSparc based servers?
It doesn't matter if there are more devices running Android because Apple is more profitable than any of them.
Also, Apple sells more iPhones than each of the Android licensees.
Comparing an operating system (Android) to a company (Apple) is really disingenuous.
This space left intentionally blank.
in the barrage of junk mail catalogs i get, all are android based except the ipad, the android ones are always cheaper (significantly) and there is decent offering of them from different companies. not everyone has a pic of steve jobs glued to the face of their inflatable sex doll.
Intelligent people will only buy cheap and nasty for so long.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/mobile-news/after-the-iphone-4s-android-just-feels-wrong/5068?tag=content;siu-container
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/im-sick-to-death-of-android/20242
You may want the linux desktop to forever be a clone of Windows XP (getting asymptotically closer but always staying an inferior replica)
Except for the long-dead XPde there never was a DE that tried to imitate WinXP -- probably because XP had absolutely terrible usability! Any somewhat popular Linux DE from XP's era was vastly superior to XP.
then you're a fool for thinking consumers are intelligent
"money talks and bullshit walks"... always
I never said consumers are intelligent. On average they're more like you.
more like you
care to elaborate?
http://xpde.holobit.net/
I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.