Slashdot Mirror
Is Red Hat becoming too powerful?
Robert McMillan writes "Nick Petreley answers the question "Is Red Hat becoming too powerful" in hist latest LinuxWorld column. We also have an interesting opinion piece by Bob Young on the site explaining why Linux won't Balkanize. " I feel like throwing more bait into the ring :) Anyway, I think
Nick hit on something big - if Red Hat tries to bully an OEM, the OEM laughs rather than trembles in fear like they might with a certain other vendor. Maybe that is stretching it too far, but it's food for thought. What do you think?
If Red Hat wasn't helping out the whole Linux ;)
community then I would say yes. But I find that
they are a key factor in getting people to switch
from Windows to Linux. Red Hat will lead the way
for the others to follow. We're all one big happy
family, can't we just get along
The article has a provocative title but the
content draws a reasonable conclusion that
any coup attempts by Caldera or Red Hat would
be their undoing anyway, so it's really not
a hot button issue.
Here's some real Grade A flame bait for you:
KDE and GNOME both suck!! Window Maker rules!!!
Yeah, yeah, yeah!! That's right! Read it and weep!!!
As a Slackware user since a long time, I always tough of RedHat as the linux distro for wimps with it's ugly config utils. I don't like that "corporate" image attached to the RedHat name.
But I don't think they're a threat as they help the Linux communauty. RedHat is not the only choice, there are other distros like Suse and Slackware. So if you dont like RH, just use another.
Besides that, why pay 50$ for RH when you can get Slackware for 2$ at www.cheapbytes.com
Yes KDE and Gnome suck, I don't need a desktop with cute icons. I just a fast WM like IceWM.
I'm sick of hearing comments that Redhat will just become the next Microsoft.
The GPL protects us from such things...as long as Redhat keeps using the GPL licence, then it is impossible for them to 'control' the code.
Currently Redhat is pumping alot of money into paying programmers to write GPL code. That code is now "free" and no-one can control it. ie: the gnome project is going to benefit Debian and alot of other distributions.
As long as Redhat remain ardent supporters of the GPL, more power to them.
Go read the stuff on http://www.gnu.org and understand how the GPL works.
The GPL should be the standard by which we mark all things... If it is GPL it is free. Not many other companies are willing to stick their neck out like RedHat are and put money into GPL code. (TrollTech are a great example of half wanting to give out open source code, but not wanting it to be totally free (ie: copylefted)).
Don't fear Redhat because they are successful. Fear those who are to weak to use the GPL license.
(Yes I wish that even XFree86 was GPL).
thanks,
wayne
Leave RedHat alone. What we have to worry about is when IBM creates a distribution based on RedHat. RedHat will then become insignificant and IBM will be the bully.
Just remember that you heard it first on the Internet!
SuSE does not provide an Open Source installer. RMS even said "SuSE is the worst". Well, I won't disagree with Richard Stallman himself! SuSE blows.
Why would either of these be scary? With Open Source you have nothing to fear.
Microsoft never did, and never will make me use any of their low-quality systems, same with RedHat. I use the best only, Slack, and that's it. A million people wont make me change.
Yep, Richard Stallman of the Free Software
Foundation said that SuSE is the worst.
Red Hat was second best, after Debian.
Redhat can't be considered a threat until they
start delivering real applications for Linux,
like Tomb Raider.
Linux needs big breasted women with guns.
Oh yeah?
TWM owns your lame ass!!!
The problem is not that RedHat is becomming too powerful, but that they release buggy distribution. It is very unfortunate that now many people associate Linux with RedHat, hence buggy RedHat = buggy Linux. People tend to judge by the first impression and for most people, RedHat is the first distribution they try. Imagine what impression they'll get when they suffer from RedHat's bugs?
You got the big money investments, now use it to
cut out the dead wood and put some polish on your
crappy distro.
the distro for wimps? You may not personally like their "corporate" image but then again that is the whole point of different distros. I see a good thing when I see different distros selling to different people. RedHat's focus is on Linux newbies and the young corporate managers and CEOs. Caldera is more for the traditional corporate types, Slackware is more for the die hard Linux geeks who don't want everything packaged in a nice neat box but who also don't want to roll out their own distro either. Linux is OS so there is no fear of another MS, if RedHat or any distro gets huge and starts doing crap like MS is, people can switch. Right now if you are forced to use windows you don't have a choice of *who's* windows to use. MS is the only one making it. Each distro has their audience and they all use the same linux kernel which is what really matters in the end, that Linux is linux is linux. One OS but different distros for different audiences just as their are different Window Managers for different tastes. Diversity is a good thing.
This has been lingering in my mind for the past few months! What if Red Hat did actually become the most used distribution of Linux? Would that mean that Red Hat sets the standards?
/. would like to work for Red Hat with hopes of tackling Microsoft. Also, that they also probably have idealistic hopes for what happens after Microsoft.
I guess we should keep in our mind that a good number of the CS majors who read
I don't believe Red Hat would have a monopoly on standardization. Almost everything they've done has been GPL'd, and everything they do will work with all other Linuxes... I really believe that the Linux community has nothing to fear of Red Hat becoming a standards entity instead of a Linux programming powerhouse.
- Shaheen Gandhi
gandhimail@worldnet.att.net
The SuSE admin/install program "YaST" is not
free software. That being a rather critical
part of the distribution, the whole thing must
be considered proprietary.
Proprietary Linux distributions are not much
better than the proprietary Windows distribution.
What if Microsoft actually DOES produce a Linux distribution. Using Linux as the kernel and replacing X with their Win32 (or Win64 or whatever) display server and controlling that with a vengence. Then companies would relase software for "Linux" but it would only run on the Microsoft API. Maybe it would only work in single user mode.
This would be an improvement for windows users because they would finally get a stable kernel, and at least the Linux kernel would get more widespread use. But, it would let microsoft get some controll of the Linux market. Many people would be shelling out money for Linux when they are actually paying for the windows API.
I guess things like WINE would help, but mocrosoft could change the API to break them. Maybe it wouldn't be all bad, It would probably make Linux a bigger player than it is right now. You could still use X or whatever if you wanted to (I'm sure it wouldn't go away). This possibility crossed my mind and I had to post.
I suddenly feel so dirty.
How's this for a slogan:
In a world without walls, who needs windows?
so you can have a libc5 linux
this way if you use WINE and want to run programs that use Win32 threading, you can't, among other things
it also has the added benefit of being more time consuming to upgrade/remove software packages
note that debian also "sucks" in these respects
what if some people like redhat's install/config tools better?
If RedHat wasn't on top, then some other commercial distrobution would be, thats the way it works. Do you people think that if Microsoft were to be completely taken out of the picture that everyone would be equals? No, of course not, someone would come into the picture and do the same thing. Welcome to the real world, like it or not business REVOLVES around money not making you happy. Companies make you happy to a point but their prime directive is, has always been, and will ALWAYS be - making money. Go ahead, rant and rave about Microsoft but watch, in a short while, there will be another company around just as big and just as bad. Get over it people. Its as simple as this: If you dont like the software, DON'T USE IT.
It's true that a lot of apps are distributed only as Red Hat RPMs. From an app vendor's POV, this makes perfect sense -- if you want people to use your software, you distribute it in the way that makes it as easy as possible to use for as many people as possible. Currently, that means RPM.
But that's not a Bad Thing. Last time I checked, anyone with a running Linux system could go to Red Hat's FTP server and download the source for the RPM software. I've had a Slackware system that grokked RPM files with no problem at all, so why is this a big issue?
For the record, I *have* worried about Red Hat's dominance, but I don't think there's really a need for worry. RH is one of very few programming shops that actually has *paid* programmers whose jobs are to contribute to GPL projects like GNOME and GTK and E! and... We need to encourage this behaviour instead of becoming paranoid about it!
It doesn't really matter how powerful they become, as long as they start delivering a quality product, and drop the crappy, frivilous toys they are working on, like Gnome.
What has made Red Hat a quality product is easy installation, and RPMs, plain and simple.
Red Hat needs to concentrate on their release, and
increase the functionality of their product instead of playing with junk that sucks, like Gnome, or fields which Caldera is beating the living hell out of them in like an integrated office product such as Star Office, or wicked
X-windows like window maker or KDE.
--Charles
Excuse me, NO other distribution ever killed my partitions. And RedHat's Disk Druid, the buggy piece of shit, did!!! Come to think of it, even winblows never killed my partitions...
RedHat is the only distro that doesn't have keybindings set up properly. Try pressing Home, End or Delete in a console in RedHat. Now try the same in SuSE or Debian. Notice the difference?
5.0 detected my video card and mouse. Since 5.1 video card detection was broken. Since 5.2 mouse detection was broken. (It's a standard serial mouse, for God's sake!!!)
In 5.1 bootup scripts had the stupidest bug in them I've ever seen:
if [ something ]; then
depmod -a preferred
else
depmod -a preferred
fi
Needless to say it didn't work.
Well, I could go on, but you pretty much get the idea (I hope). RedHat is *the* buggiest distribution I've ever seen.
I know RMS personally. You're on crack. He's a good guy, who's dedicated the past 15 years of his life to helping the world. He's also incredibly intelligent. None of your critisisms are even close to valid.
I *do* use fdisk. But the thing is that this *shouldn't have happened*. If they include Disk Druid with their distro, they'd better make sure it's bug-free. Playing with partitions is not a joke.
Everyone knows that Window Maker rules GNOME and KDE. Then again Window Maker also run GNOME and KDE (not in a literal sense, but you all know what I mean).
The source for everything in a SuSE distribution is included, with the exception of Netscape Communicator and some demo ware from ISV's. I chose SuSE for their better international support. SuSE and Red Hat have been working together to improve the Linux distribution. Beware: Some people say stuff that's politically motivated in these discussions...
The red hats are good guys, but I don't thing their priorities are right. Big bucks on Gnome, etc., but the installation software is still horible. I've been installing RH about once a year for four years usually with the manuals and each time I curse RH because the installation SW is such junk. Things flat out wrong or missing that they don't bother to change. So much knowledge assumed with only hints for help. And then they want you to use their "control-panel" which is even worse. They need to do less, better; and document it well.
I judge a distributino by its actions. To me, Red Hat has proven its commitment to free software. It's one of the only two major distributions with a strong ethical policy (together with Debian). Although I don't run Red Hat (I prefer Debian), I trust them in the positino they are taking. I trust them much more than SuSE and Caldera, both of whom have only shown a commitment to profit. I think a Red Hat near-monopoly, in the short term, is a good thing, because it prevents Linux from falling away from its free software roots. With theoretical ideal competition (lots of small distributions battling it out), the one most likely to one would be the no-holds-barred, which would include proprietary software, and would be a Bad Thing (tm) for Linux.
. . . including your dog! Yes, your fuzzy, cute, adorable, loving, happy, bouncy little puppy-dog named Curly! Oh, poor Curly . . . Poor, poor Curly! What did he ever do to deserve this cruel treatment?
He stood in the way of the Iron Fist of Rob Young, that's what.
Him and all the cuddly zebras and giraffes, all gone, all just ashes and dust. All of them. Every one. Even the dolphins, and the happy smiling squids will succumb. And why?
They stood in the way of the Iron Fist of Rob Young, that's why.
Oh, it's a terrible cruel cold world, I tell you. A terrible cruel cold world indeed.
Please consider these documented facts and make up your own mind about the nature of this terrifying threat.
Now the truth has been told, and you can make a calm, well-informed decision.
I was thinking how far MS came when they did the 3.1 to win95 jump. DirectX seems to give gamers some real benefits, the GUI is sweet (save for a pager.) The drawback is that you still have msdos underneath and NT isn't much better. It's not stable. But, if Windows had a linux kernel underneath, it would probably be a very successful operating system.
And you know, they could basically just work on the gui and api and be done with it. WINE shows it's possible and Microsoft clearly has the ability (and the right, I dare say) to produce a truly effective windows API in X. Hell, they could probably improve on X.
The more I think about it, the more I think that Windows with a linux kernel would rock. No kidding. Instant Linux Gaming. No more imposter-to-the-king-freebie-office-suites. Real MS-Office running fast and natively in Linux.
Grab another machine and make a boot floppy and then grab the stuff you really want off of the other machine. If you're trying to squeeze Red Hat into that small of a space, you need to already know what you're doing.
I thought we had hunted the last one down in December. It's your duty to kill him before his kind overbreed and ruin their ecosystem.
In a commodity product market like beer, tobacco, or even Linux distributions, BRAND is everything. Redhat has obviously figured this out and puts a lot of effort into their brand marketing.
Here's something I've wondered about. When Electric Eyes (produced by RHAD) is launched, it brings up a splashscreen which includes the Redhat logo (the cartoon shadow profile wearing the red hat). In the src this is "stdimg.xpm"
What if another commercial Linux distribution, not wanting to promote another brand were to include eeyes, but with a modified splashscreen which included Redhat's copyright text (as is appropriate), but with the Redhat logo edited out? Can that be done with a GPL application?
And this is related to the article because....
then Microsoft would dwarf RedHat and who would ever remember that they ever worried that RedHat was too large?
Well, that would be fine by me. It'd be great if MS Linux was what most people used and it was stable and nobody ever asked me about windows problems because they all disappeared.
And Linux users could get back to basics and away from this world-domination
Everyone knows that QDE will wipe out all three of them!
When Microsoft will be death who's going to get our frustation? RedHat? It looks like that it already started...
:)
And of course, this is not a flame
Yeah. I know Office is overweight. But don't you think it would run better on a solid operating system. I mean, with linux, that office suite could work over a network, no? People would rather use and have it not crash, right?
So, I can only imagine how fast you computer is. So I guess I'm asking whether or not you think that some of the crappiness of MSOffice is because of the operating system and not the program itself. So, wouldn't you rather use a crash-free linux/windows environment at work?
IMHO it's funnier about Red Hat, because some people are just as paranoid about Red Hat as they are about MS, but Red Hat just ain't that bad. If it were about MS, I wouldn't find it funny at all; absurd over-exaggeration of something reasonable (e.g. "MS is harmful") doesn't amuse me that much. But if you take something completely bass-ackwards and then absurdly exaggerate that -- well, then my li'l ears prick up and I starts a-gigglin'.
I think it's funny 'cause it's so bizarre, that's all.
For some reason their ipfwadm RPM didn't work. I
installed the ipfwadm from my copy of Suse 5.2
and then masquerading started working. And I
kept the config files from the RedHat RPM of
that package so the configs weren't a problem.
The link
easy as pie to create it, but why doesn't this
link exist? Guess what? Minicom doesn't work
without that link. Some newbie gets his new
copy of RedHat looks at a PPP Howo. Tries
to fire up Minicom and no luck for him.
I gave up on RedHat after this simply because
I feared these small problems were indicative
of an otherwise rotten core.
SUSE 6.0 is the best distribution.
> BTW, isn't Linux all about the kernal anyways? :)
oh, ask RMS about that one.
And ELEVEN OTHER essential vitamins and minerals, including eye of newt, toe of frong, a toad's eyelashes, a wad of hemp, a knot short of a hectare, a giant squid from schenechtady, NY, and a giant vampire bat's vestigial lower mandible, sauteed in a nice bordeaux with butter, rosemary, and some fresh chives. yum, ym!
(don't ask me what the hell a "frong" is; it was a typo that i liked and decided to adopt. i'll wash it and brush it and feed it every day, i swear mom! i swear!)
By "worst" he meant "least free" (where free==freedom). Whether this is actually true, I don't know. I don't use SuSE. However, the context in which RMS said this is important. He was asked which are the best and worst distributions, in his opinion, in terms of their degree of proprietary features. He WASN'T making a value judgement based on other considerations (ie. which is "best" for new users, "best" for business, "best" packaging, etc.) He also admitted a lack of direct knowledge in this regard.
Just to keep the record straight and the comments in context.
Chad Netzer
Why pay $39.95 for Slackware when I can get Red Hat 5.2 for $1.95 from www.lsl.com?
Screw Cheapbytes, support the Linux community!
I think RedHat couldn't pull a Microsoft with Linux. The kernel, and all the utilities (except the ones Redhat has developed) are GNU. If Redhat tries to throw weight around with its propriotary utilities, chances are people will get fed up and someone will write GNU versions of RPM and the like.. (humm.. GPM) Then some other distribution will take centre stage.
I think Redhat's best strategy is to make money by offering Tech support.
-> $0.02 (or &0.01) from Mori
Why don't you just buy a rear wheel drive car then? That's what I drive. In theory you should be able to as well.
-ANC
I recently published a piece of software the competed with one of RedHat's product. The name of the product, they say, was too similar to theirs, yet their product name was so vague they couldn't get a trademark on it if their life depended on it. They thretened to pull permission to use the RH name. We couldn't even have a "red hat" of any shape or form on the package. Just the word RedHat because they didn't want people to get my product confused with theirs..
This will certainly make me take whatever RMS says
again with a grain of salt.. obviously not knowing
for sure, means you don't make a public statement
about something - especially a false one at that.
-bastard
RedHat releases their distros too soon, before they even have a chance to test them. I would tolerate such behaviour in a beta-version. Perhaps even the destruction of my partitions (although that is a VERY bad bug). But havinig it in a distribution that is supposed to be stable??? Even worth, in a distribution with over 50% of Linux users??? I think not!!!
To reiterate, I don't really see a problem with RedHat being too big. But I do see a HUGE problem with them releasing buggy software.
hahahahaha! Crackdot! Crackdot!
I know a blind leper, who sits in the middle of Commonwealth Avenue over by BU and masturbates all day while spitting peach pits at schoolchildren and singing Taiwanese folk songs about kicking Mao's sorry ass. He does windows, too.
He uses a Mac, and he reads CRACKDOT! Every fuckin' DAY he reads Crackdot! Crackdot! Crackdot!
CRRRRRRRRRRRRRRACKDOT!
this is the most intelligent comment i have yet
to read
the problem is that too many people have installed Red Hat and then "forgotten" about it... leaving vulnerable IMAP servers and the like running.
:(
good news for stability of Linux and Red Hat's distribution... bad for security
get real. if not for RMS you wouldn't have the freaking compiler to compile linux...not to mention tons of other things. grow up
sure, but why would you want to do that seeing as Red Hat did pay the guy to write it in the first place?
Only 7 more weeks to spring break...
Ahh get fscked! The command line rulezzzz!!!
:)
bash rulezzzzz
Who needs X, let alone a cutesy fancy WM to run on it?
*grin*
AndyM
ps. Have you downloaded the latest E? It's getting pretty darn rockin.
i hate you fucking sonsabitches, you and your fucking desktop . . . nobody needsa desk fuck the top, fuck the desk, you all suck, you fuckers, fuck fucking fucker fuck, goddammit you fucking suck goddammit!
god, it makes my blood boil! i could just EAT HUMAN FLESH AND GNAW MY OWN ANKLES OFF just from THINKING about the EVIL gnome . . . evil . . . evil . . . EEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVVILLLLL!
gra! gra! gra! gra! gra! arggggaakasl sakl; se ek iljiwrg sk s fskl dflkj as jlk4 o4l sd d mene mene, tekel, upharsin! ze ma yesh! ohhhh, MOMMY!
GNOME has no "right" to be the standard Linux desktop anymore than KDE has the "right" to be the standard linux desktop. Come to think of it, how can software - an inanimate object - have any "rights" at all? It can't so therefore GNOME cannot take its "rightful" place as the standard linux desktop!!!
Anyways, now that Qt is being licensed under the GPL, the #1 objection the GNOME folks had to KDE is now irrelevant. Basically what's left are just religious wars - C vs. C++, GTK vs. Qt, etc.
Now, there is no way the GNOME folks are going to eradicate KDE, and there is no way the KDE folks are going to eradicate GNOME. (Although I have observed that there are a lot more GNOME folks who want to eradicate KDE.) The best thing to do is to make sure that the two environments can be used interchangeably through common drag-and-drop APIs and such.
hey, you don't get it. you're not required to, and that's okay, but the bottom line is that you just don't get it.
blah blah blah ducks in a row on the same page, see? i can talk like i got a tie too. now go back to the VAR and vegetate w/ the rest of the suits.
read businessweek or whatever you people do instead of working.
. . . with a knife and fork, don't think I can't see you, 'cause i got like super vision and all that, 'cause i et this little white pill and I AM SUPERMAN!
like, ubermensch, get it? oh, well.
redhat is already having people sign NDA
little by little freedom will crumble
because "well one more little thing
isnt that bad, and we need it to do X and
dominate the desktop and the world etc etc"
there was a goose that layed golden eggs
and then some farmer came along and killed
it to get the eggs out of its belly.
well i have farmer's urges of my own now and then
but damn, i dont celebrate it.
I have observed that there are a lot more GNOME folks who want to eradicate KDE
While I certainly got a kick out of your subject line, I don't agree with this point at all. From where I sit (on the GNOME side of the fence), it looks to me like more KDE people are more anti-GNOME. It's probably a matter of perception. As for your other points about working together and all that, those are valid and, while it's been said before, it needs to be said again and again until people calm down and listen (except that Qt ain't GPL, it's QPL, which is a different license entirely).
Anyhow, GAACCCKKKKK and a merry XMas to you all!
What I'm always curious about is what Sun thinks about Linux. Solaris/X86 seems as if it could really be threatened as an alternative anyone would choose by Linux now that major DB packages are being made available, and at least one major hardware company is supporting Linux (see http://www.hp.com/netserver/newsrm/prsrm/1999/1077 012699.htm), at least on PC hardware. Why buy Solaris/x86, other than "...that's what the in^W^Wconsultant recommended." Or does Sun simply not care -- they'd prefer you buy into their HW & SW solution anyway?
I was actually surprised to see HP supporting Linux at all -- I would think it would cut into their low-end HPUX business.
I guess what worries me more than anything is that we'll end up with integrated high-end hardware, but with non-GPL'd drivers or vendor-specific kernel releases. And then where are we? Might as well be running HPUX/Solaris/AIX. I hope that HP in particular submits their driver code to Linus for inclusion in general releases so that the open-source components don't get clobbered.
Here here! I like to use zip drives with bare-bones installations and a loadlin boot floppy as a rescue sytem. This was easy to do with RH4.x, but it seems the 5.x series INSISTS on installing a ton of stuff that's not wanted, even if you deselect it.
I don't have a particular beef with the installations "not working", but I wish they'd make "base" package selection a little more user-controllable, and quit throwing in all the "extras" in the base system. You should be able to get a usable minimum system in less than 100MB.
wow. then how come i'm running a SuSE installed from a CD published by third vendor, and upgrades from thier web site?
SO!! RED HAT DOESN'T INCLUDE COMMERCIAL APPS?
what is so evil about proprietary stuffs anyway, if it works and it's free.
"oh maybe they will charge more like MS someday",
well, then i'll use my slackware hard drive.
yeah right on.
i got people telling me all the time that they bought this REd Hat 5.0 CD set and shelf them. beh! sales don't tell you much.
the most install and most combined knowledge is still S-L-A-C-K-W-A-R-E !
i heard red hat has a "control panel" bwahahahaha..
all red hat users' knowledge combined cannot reach half of what slackware populations' knowledge.
hell they can't even configure X!
Slackware forever.
yeah, and red hat 5.0? even the lamest lamer wouldn't install it.
gives people bad inpression about linux
news to me!
and i had been using slackware for a while when i tried it. terribly misleading. i just tried SuSE, and i gota say, SuSE is just nice. i was impressed.
... makes red hat a MS in linux community.
That's he's opinion.
Just because he's respected doesn't mean he's right...
look at Hitler for example.
I actually don't mind SuSE, if I did I would surely HATE EVERY SINGLE COMPANY like Applix and so on, I don't!
Even if it's not it doesn't matter,
the src is free the entire thing is free.
The src went free about 3 months ago...
Just because Hitler made it possible for every german to aford a car doesn't mean he was right about most things.
And BTW, SuSE includes so many programs that are comertial demos, 5CD's, that's what you get.
Would you complain that you did't have to download 108Mb just to test `jc' ???
I actually think it's a great idea to have them on the CD's, even if they are not free.
is redhat gonna go the microsoft way?
RedHat is most certainly NOT trying to help out the entire Linux community. With a single press release they tried to discredit the entire KDE project with nonsense-speak about licensing (while still selling their own commercial, licensed Motif code).
Ok, I don't think RedHat is the big evil in the Linux world...yet. From a technical standpoint I still think RedHat is the slickest and best 'supported' distribution (having tried SuSE and Caldera, anyways).
However RedHat has already shown their political muscle on at least one occasion...their stupid boycott of KDE. The RedHat elite made a political decision that they didn't like KDE, and went out of their way to do PR damage to the entire project with their hypocritical press release about 'licensing problems'. Yeah, and what about the Motif license in their bundled Motif package? No word of a 'boycott' from RedHat about that, of course. No complaints about Netscape 'controlling the code' for Navigator, either.
RedHat isn't alone in being too political...Debian is worse (which is why I won't use Debian either). But RedHat reaches more people and THAT is why they are more of a threat.
People like YOU are the defacto reason that Linux is in trouble. Morons like you sit on your worthless asses, contribute NOTHING to linux, and yet see fit to make moronic commentary like this, endlessly bashing something you've probably never even tried (like KDE).
So, how many times did the bloated Gnome panel crash on you while you typed this? You probably didn't even have time to reset your X server because Enlightenment was busy popping up 'unrecoverable error!' dialogs all over the place. Or maybe you're still waiting for that dumb 'footprint' menu to pop up because your GTK themes have caused your harddrive to thrash! See? I can be a flaming asshole like you too!
So, you want Gnome to be a defacto standard eh? What ever happened to the mousejockey lament that KDE was trying to foist a 'standard' on all of us? I don't want bloated Gnome to be a standard...I've got better things to spend my CPU power on than stupid themes and k-Rad animated windows. GNOME HAS no rightful place as the standard anything (neither does KDE). Why don't you go back to Microsoft land? You'd be happy there, you only have to worry about a single UI...hey with YOUR great attitude I'm sure you could make head altar boy at the Church of Gates.
Idiot.
"9 out of 10 Linux users agree! Mousejockeys should stay with Windows."
You hit the nose right on the head (oops!).
However, most of the Gnome fanatics still foam at the mouth about Qt's license, even though they've got no reason to (and even Linus Himself has no problem with it). Most of these fanatics contribute zilch to either project...they just sit on the sidelines think they are 'a part' of the project because they make a lot of pointless noise about it.
Just one thing however...you'll notice that most of the Gnome fanatics are NOT the developers of the Gnome project. Don't confuse the two, the Gnome developers have a lot more sense than most of the juveniles that hang around Slashdot.
We've come a long way since the old Makefile days, haven't we? Now anyone with zero experience can set up a fully-working Linux system and install packages at the click of a button. I dont' see a problem in this per-se, but there is one thing...a lot of people I know are doing this and are now claiming to 'know' UNIX. They haven't written a single shell script, they have no idea where the libraries live or what they do, and yet now, because they can install RedHat, they are 'unix experts'.
I've been using and adminning UNIX systems for years but I would never claim to be a guru of any kind. I remember having to hack up makefiles and modify code right from the tar file to get it to compile on UNIX boxen...always a challenge, but you did get to know the system. RPM's take all that away totally. Not that I miss hacking up makefiles, of course...configure works like magic as far as I can tell. All I'm saying is that just being able to set up a Linux box and install software on it doesn't make you an expert, or even an acolyte...rpm's are as easy as installshield setups under windoze.
Read the quote:
He obviously doesn't judge by the quality, and, what's more, he's simply wrong.
SuSE gives warnings if you install non-free packages.
And Caldera, e.g, is much worse. You can't even download the regular version freely, as they've integrated proprietary networking stuff and their Looking Glass environment.
Yast is definitely included,as it is a core part of the distro.
It may not be GPL, but you can definitely copy it as you like.
... and moreover, it's simply wrong.
They're the worst. They're a little better than they used to be, but their policy used to be that they wanted to mix in the free and the non-free software as seamlessly as possible, and do their best to prevent any of their customers from thinking about the difference.
While I agree that SuSE integrates *all* programs quite seemlessly (unlike RedHat), it's simply not true that SuSE doesn't care about the licenses.
If you install a non-free packages in Yast, you get warnings about the license. This appears even in cases like Qt, which is 'nearly' free.
They ship with ~3 times more sw than RedHat, so you can't blame them for including non-free stuff (even Debian has a optional 'non-free' directory).
That's why you (and maybe RMS) criticise it.
Caldera is the worst in case of non-freeness, but this isn't an argument pro/con quality.
IN fact SuSE comes with a lot of non-free stuff, as it comes with virtually everything that is useful (5 CDs). But Yast warns if you install non-free apps.
So at least be honest, US chauvinists, and tell what's the real reason for bashing SuSE
In this thread, and in many others in reply to this article, I see people once again rehashing the value of the GPL and copylefted vs. non-copylefting licenses. Have you forsaken your brains? Some of you responded to challenges to QT's license saying, "It's fine un-copylefted! We can still use it for free!" (and not to start a QT flamewar again; I've seen the same response for other licenses as well).
Now I see some of the exact same posters expressing fears that RedHat might, indeed, monopolize the market.
Don't you get it, people? It's the copyleft that keeps you free! Without a guaranteed future, you are right back in the path of a future microsoft. You cannot say the GPL's copyleft is irrelevant or invaluable on one hand and then fear the rising of another monopoly on the other. There is a specific reason why RMS crafted the GPL, for good or for bad.
Therefore, to those who fit the description of the hypocrite I just told about, and to anyone who has yet to do so, and especially to new linux users: go to http://www.gnu.org/ and read the founding principles and philosophies behind the GNU GPL. Whether you agree, disagree, or don't care, you need to at least understand it before you open your mouth in a public forum such as this.
RedHat is really a crappy distro if you look at the quality how it's put together and tested.
/. is a part of it) of all Linux companies.
But they've definitely the best marketing division (sometimes I think even
But as M$ shows, marketing is what counts in the end.
Improving on X, binning it is the first step.
Also, MS would be better off buying Be, and using
BeOS as the platform for Windows.
RedHat pulled the final straw for me in 5.2:
.tgz self compiled source code. Redhat moves all of the binaries and control files around to their own special directories.
They dropped the Redneck language option. It was one of the few good amusements there was.
5.1 wasn't bad. Of course they never have fixed the install. Anybody notice that Shift-Tab (to go backwards in a dialog) never works, even though they mention this prominently in there instructions.
5.0 was so buggy I didn't even bother.
4.3 was pretty cool, but it had none of the nice text mode tweaks that I was so used to in SlakWare.
But there is always bugs, so many bugs, at least there are lots of bugfix releases. Whatever you do thought, don't try and upgrade some Redhat version with a standard
Time to find another distro. I will say that was awfully considerate of Suse to post an ISO of 6.0 on their ftp site. Took 2 hours to download and 15 mins to burn. Sweet.
Please read with a smiley in mind!
--
Uptake of the free open source operating system Linux
has gown exponentially over the last few days since
Microsoft launched it's distribution of the popular
hacker platform.
Microsoft Linux 2000 is proving to be a big success
amongst the non hacker populous and corporate giants
alike, who until now have only seen Linux as a 'possible'
alternative to NT. With the combined expertise of
the Microsoft programmers behind MSL2000, the free
O/S has been transformed into one of the most easily
installed and most flexible platforms currently
available.
Being sold at a price point just below rival RedHat
Inc's offering, it promises and indeed delivers much
additional functionality which only MS could offer.
It is also available for free download from their
site as a single 2000Mb file, although this does
not include the additional personal applications suite.
It has become clear now that part of the reason for
the lacklustre content of Win98 and the delay to NT5
(aka windows 2000) has been due to the redistribution
of core resources to the MSL2000 project.
Consequently, personal editions of Word, Excel,
Access, Internet Explorer 5 and Visual Basic 6 are
all available for immediate use on the platform
giving buyers a head start in productivity without
the need to delve into the Linux kernel. The
applications are only available in a binary format
and Microsoft have adhered strictly to the
GPL by only using MS sourced code to produce them.
MS have decided to use the new PIII id number
scheme to ensure that the personal editions of their
products remain on the machines which they have been
bought for. They have made a small application
for determining this number available on their
web site. Users then send this number along with the
package registration number off to MS to
register their distribution and unlock the free
applications. Up to 5 copies of the apps can be
installed on 5 different machines for free,
allowing the familiar propogation of their Linux
package amongst friends and collegues in the same
way that Linux is often distributed now. Professional
editions allow files to be saved in common windows
app formats as opposed to the special MSL2000
formats, although both formats can be read.
IE5 is, of course, available for free with no registration
restrictions and incorporates the unique "Linux Update"
feature. This is similar to the windows update feature
and allows an easy way of updating your MSL2000
release to the latest version directly over the net
from Microsoft.
The look and feel is 100% MS windows thanks to mswm,
an X window manager which succeeds in doing what
other hackers have only half heartedly managed to
achieve. Microsoft have said that after lengthy
investigation of the window managers currently
available, they came to the conclusion that what
people wanted was a win95 look-a-like. This is
demonstrated by window managers such as fvwm-95
and to a lesser extent KDE, both of which incorporate
many features originated by Microsoft.
Things like printer support have been completely
overhauled and the new mslpr daemon placed into
the public domain. Microsoft say that they are
trying to encourage third party hardware developers
to write device drivers for the platform and are
giving them as much help as possible in return for
early access to the latest hardware, which gives
Microsoft a head start for any new developments
which may come along and guarantee quality
software from the outset.
Microsoft's close collaboration with Troll Tech can now
be viewed as a very shrewd move on their part.
Mswm is based on the Troll Tech Qt library which
has been used to produce other windowing systems such as
KDE. This gives MS a large community of knowledgeable
hackers primed and ready to move to the new platform.
MS say that the current freely available Qt library
will remain available and that they will add functionality
to the commercially available version which will be
the mainstay of mswm and remain mostly compatible.
A port of the popular MFC architecture has not been
entirely ruled out but won't be available for some
time when the decision is finally reached.
Meanwhile the hacker community has been thrown into
disarray by the release of MSL2000. Entire Open
Source projects have been demolished as hackers either
embrace the new distribution seeing it as the first
positive thing MS have ever done, or jump ship screaming
that it's just a ploy for MS to take over their world.
Linus Torvalds has stepped down as co-ordinator for
kernel releases commenting that he doesn't want to
be "assimilated" whilst at the same time Bill Gates has
offered to step into his shoes saying "It's
about time I got my hands into some code again".
Things will probably be a little rough to start with
but MS now have the core software to produce the OS
the world always wanted and they can happily comply
to the requests of users for the source code as they
don't actually own it! In a single move, which more than
resembles the Internet U turn, they have, not to put too
fine a point on it, obtained the best of both worlds.
Most software (especially open-source) is mostly a re-write of stuff that existed previously. Basically what they are doing is taking the work of many who came before, and adding a few features. They didn't write it all from scratch.
One problem I see is that anyone can make an rpm
;)
package, as with tar.gz packages. One should be
mindful of where that package comes from in any
case. Generally speaking, whenever RH releases
a binary rpm, there exists a src rpm as well.
IOW, you have the power to make modifications as
need be. You also have the power to not use rpm
at all and install the old fashioned way. I
think the flexibility is a good thing, since many
admins do not have the time to hack every single
package they install, especially core libs and
bins. You try the rpm, if it does not function
they way you expect, you uninstall it and get the
src rpm or tarball from the original owner.
Lastly, anyone who installs any unix without being
mindful of network daemon security deserves a
crack on the noggin. It is an admin's
responsibility, not the packager's, to monitor his
or her machine's ports. Telling newbies otherwise,
i.e. that one distro is 'more secure' than another,
is misleading, as any of them are as secureable as
the next, given the proper knowledge and tools
(security-centric distros aside, I would think).
Maybe we should deny all services by default and
see if we can confuse the other half of the user
base
There are those who want to make sure that an opinion gets expressed, but they don't want to express it. So what they do is post the opposite opinion (usually as an AC), in a way that's easy for people to rebut. That way they make sure the opinion gets out there, but with more force and/or different posters opining it.
I thought I was the only one who did that! Heh heh. Cool.
people will get fed up and someone will write GNU versions of RPM and the like..
It really helps to have some semblance of a clue what you're talking about before posting blatant flame bait.
RPM is already GPL, dumbass. It's been used by Caldera, SuSE, etc. because of that. If you had taken five minutes to look at a recent RPM distribution, you would have known that.
Now please take your inflammatory bullshit elsewhere, or I will taunt you a second time.
A bit early I know but it's the closest one!
:-)
We had an article about RMS before this yesterday and it disappeared! It said something RMS said about GPL and LGPL, do I need to recover it from the cache?
You make it sound worse than it would be. Why would Linus step down just because someone wrote a window manager and someone finally ported commercial apps (like msoffice) to linux, which is what half of slashdotters have been begging for for six months.
"Please port some commercial apps so windows users can switch to linux. Wait, wait, not you microsoft, no ports from you. We only want ms- wannabes to port their ms look alikes for linux. And give em away open source. Yeh, heh, heh, open source, heh. Open Source rules."
not quite. we weren't trying to look or sound like redhat. We have a penguin on the front of the box and were thinking about putting a red baseball hat on him and that didn't fly.
> Just because Hitler made it possible for every german to aford a car doesn't mean he was right about most things.
Not accurate (the first part, at least): in fact, this was another of his sins (though minor compared to others).
The Volkswagen was _promoted_ as the peoples car, and a program was established through which German workers could sign up for a _lengthy_ period of payroll deductions. At the end, they would (purportedly) receive a car.
But none was ever delivered. Not one.
The workers were defrauded, and the only vehicles produced before the end of the war (except for a few for display purposes and party dignitaries) turned out to be kubelwagens or other military versions.
Small potatoes compared to mass murder, but theft nevetheless.
farmkid (password not at hand)
Yeah, it's a toy, to which other folks like KDE are more suited, and have more support to develop better, smoother X-window platforms.
KDE rocks, so bite me.
Alright. You should definitly follow your views and ideas. In that, since you think RMS is ignorant, you should not use Linux, the Internet, emacs, programs with extensions, since RMS was after all the first programmer to come up with that idea.
The Internet runs on 90% free software programmed in large by RMS, and programmed very well. Furthermore, you should officially pledge your life to Bill Gates since the only thing standing between you and Gates is free software - which wouldn't be where it is without RMS.
I think the main reason RMS is so rediculed by new users, coming from Windows is simple: stupidity combined with ignorance - like you! The ignorance of not knowing that RMS is the greatest programmer to have walked (or surfed) the face of the earth (or web), but the stupidity to broadcast your gross ignorance.
Thank you for using Linux. It gives it a better balanced between the reasonible and the stupid.
Call it BlueHat.
people who rag on Gui's just fear the day they won't be able to show off the size of their command line... To each his own
Thinks you should change your name to "Anonymous Spin Doctor"... you are all over this thing... like a man/woman on a PR mission. Having read a number of your comments, I'm wondering where they are coming from... others should too.
Right now I'm more worried about the following two possibilities:
* IBM Linux. Ok IBM's pretty hip to the open source scene, but you gotta admit this would become the number 1 business linux overnight.
* Microsoft Linux. The very idea makes my flesh crawl and the only thing that's preventing it is the overwhelming pride of Microsoft. As soon as the overwhelming business sense of Microsoft starts to overwhelm the pride... look out...
Alof of you guys just sit here and bitch to each others instead of remembering what Linux is all about... It's about choice... Like Redhat?? Use it...Like Debian ??? Use it... Like Hal911 ?? Use it.... Like all of them?? Use them all then...
Why don't people just respect each other and remember that they have a choice....
And for gods sake...Stop that bitching...It's worse than listening to 10 teenage girls...
Sure. Uh...which AC are you again?
Bill Kocik | Blackspring Communications
bkocik@blackspring.com |
Posted by obituary:
;-)
Hahaha. Yes, I discovered that "depmod -a preferred" bug for myself when a friend of mine asked me to fix the pages of "unresolved symbol(s)" messages he got from his newly compiled kernel and modules. After locating the problem, I nearly fell out of my chair in hysterics
I advised him to use Slackware. He is now a happy man.
Simplicity is devine.
Long Live Slackware!
Posted by Scott Francis[Mechaman]:
:) :)
..I must be evil incarnate, and a masochist, since I've been using RH5.0 of a Cheapbytes CD for the past few months. Never bothered to "upgrade my distribution" either; in fact I spent a few hours on Thursday and Friday last week making sure dependencies were up to date(and 5 needed a lot) for 2.2.1. A distro, for me, isn't a version to be upgraded like a software package, but merely a place to start a system. I'll just keep upgrading minor bits and tweaking it until for some reason I can't.
As for RPMs, I agree they're no good when you're installing applications(in fact, the RPM of yagIRC won't run on my system, since it assumes you have GNOME installed). What I do think they're useful for are the nitty-gritty bits; like modutils, util-linux, other things that aren't apps per se, but that run in the background. Eh, that's just me.
As far as the monopoly thing; the part about OEM's laughing them off goes. And for the NDAs that one poster commented, weren't those for the XBF program, since the video card makers are paranoid someone could steal their secrets?
Just because you can download the source code doesn't meen it's Free Software.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
I read halfway through this thing and thought to myself: "Wow, this article is way too long.. It's almost like Mr. Petreley is trying to convince us of what he doesn't believe himself."
I'm not a Red Hat user (GO SLACKWARE!), but I think they've done some good things, and hell, people seem to forget that Red Hat is in the business of making money.
-Erik-
Red Hat really is a buggy thing, but not just bugs. If you install as a server setup RH goes and installs pop2 as default.
What could be dumber, I have had two people attacked through this and of course when I find out we disable pop2. As a slackware user I never dreamed anyone could be so dumb, so it took the saint to find this.
The real problem for me is that with all the RH hype all the pointy heads want RH. It's a drag to install and a drag to administer.
"Pray arm me further by your reply" Winston Churchill
So, I just grabed an old SuSE 5.1 boot disk, and it worked flawlessly (and on ONE disk, yes, a ONE FLOPPY, NO CDROM complete install). Of course, then I had to upgrade a ton of packages.
I have a great deal of respect for Red Hat, and I wish them and Bob Young the best of luck. But, putting out 3-5 versions a year should NOT be a priority, getting it right should. 4.2 was good. Ever since that, I feel they have released to frequently, and too soon. IMHO 6.0 should have Gnome 1.0, and Kernel 2.2.x, and should be blanket tested in a widely distributed prerelease version before shipping. But, I guess I can't complain too much, 80% of my boxes run Red Hat :-/
I don't fear Red Hat becoming an "Evil Empire at all. It's almost impossable. I would LOVE to see IBM sell a distribution (especially on thier G3 boxen!). I don't think that any of them can be a treat when the source is GPL'ed. The problem comes for the lack of a standard, and that is currently being addressed by the LSB committee (still working slowly and quietly in the background).
The only real threat would be that with the lack of something like the LSB, if some distribution grows too big, they BECOME the standard, (for example, you _know_ people would port to IBM's or Microsoft's version of Linux), and what if the big name distribution is non standard, leaving apps only working on that distribution.
Long live the LSB.
I disagree, see my previous post one level up, same level as yours. I know my way around a box, and I can spark a shell and insert a kernel module on my own during install. But when they are rejected, the whole thing is fuxered.... Not just some little package that needs to be updated.
I remember when we started our developers IRC channel, and we had someone logged 24 hours a day for two weeks, often only opening his mouth to ask every new person that joined if he would like to drop KDE and join GNOME...
Now, was that lame or was that lame?
And that person was no fan boy, he was a developer, some would say a respected GNOME developer.
Of course those of us who saw his lame act do not respect him much anymore.
And no, I won't name names, unless someone from GNOME denies it, which I hope no one is foolish enough to do.
You can get Redhat for the same price at the same place.. or download either one for free.
That would actually be overstating it. Redhat is not a version of Linux. RedHat is a distribution of Linux. Versions of Linux bare such monikers as "2.0.36" or "2.2.1" or whatever version you prefer. Two different people may use RedHat but be running different versions of Linux, and two people may be running the same version of Linux but only one be running RedHat.
People attach far too much importance to what distro you use. Who cares where exactly your rc files are? Who cares where a specific binary is, as long as its in the path? Who cares whether you used rpm or tar to install them? None of this makes any difference to a properly written application...
--
Starting reality daemon: realityd
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
If there only was a version for the Alpha...
Hmmm... Maybe a good project?
Just remember, Redhat has GPLed *everything* of theirs, including the install program. This may have changed, but at one point the same couldn't be said about Slackware & SuSE.
If you like it, cool, use it. If not, use something else.
Look how many programs come out as RedHat 5.x binary RPMs only.
Bad trend. Bad bad bad.
Of course any distro could be made to be RH-compatible, but it doesn't seem like they should have to.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
Is RedHat using it's might to advance Linux, or are they using the might of Linux for their own advancement?
If RedHat started using the penguin logo rather than plastering their own logo on everything they do, and stop refering to Linux as "their" OS, I would beieve the former.
Ditto for Caldera.
"Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao
RPM is a tool, released under the GPL. Red Hat designed it, and then gave it up for grabs. It works, and people use it. It's freely downloadable to anyone and everyone. Utilities exist to translate RPM's into tgz's and whatever other formats there are, for those who wish.
The programs come out as 'RPM only' simply because that's what some developers like to use. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth!
If you feel really strongly about this issue, you can make a mission of converting all these binary RPM to tgz's or whatever, and send them back to the developer's to be put up for download by anyone. I'm sure they'd appreciate the help!
**>>BELCH
Red Hat has effectively prevented itself from becoming a tyrant by GPL'ing everything it feeds back into the Linux community. This very action has also led many Linux users to trust Red Hat as the "safe" distribution of Linux, because there's nothing proprietary in it. Plus, Red Hat has done much to make Linux easier to install and use. Tyrannical? They can't get tyrannical because the only thing keeping them at #1 is the fact that they have the best, most coherent product, and that's the way it should be!
Furthermore, RedHat's leadership will allow the rapid emergence of some de facto standards, as long as RedHat does not abuse its leadership position (in which case they will immediately lose it). This will allow GNOME to take its rightful place as the standard Linux desktop.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Just because RedHat is the biggest selling Linux Distro doesn't mean they are getting too big. There is a difference between a company that abuses its power (MS) and one that uses its might to improve the community by contributing code, utilities, and promoting GPLed software. All other Linux distributions benefit when one gets publicity, and you can't deny that most Linux coverage has been for Red Hat. In fact, that's the ONLY reason this argument is being made. Mainstream press like ZD are not covering the whole story. People who aren't familiar are bound to get the wrong impression. (No, its not Linux, its RedHat).
Brian
I started with slackware. Hard but fun and very
:-)
;-) Ideally MS should contract :-). Then :-) :-) [NG = New GPL]
/.! Doh!)
good for getting your hands mucky.
Then RedHat, simple to install but buggy, buggy,
buggy. Stupid simple things which I expected
to be set up weren't.
Finally, SuSe. It just works!
Still not perfect but moving in the right
direction.
I'll try MS Linux next, I'm sure it'll be the
best of the lot
out it's Linux distro to RedHat who then go on to
make billions from it because MS don't think it's
important enough to do themselves
comes MS Linux/2, a collaboration between MS
and Redhat on the OS of the future. But RedHat
will turn their back and leave MS struggling on
trying to produce it whilst they go on to release
RedHat Linux NG
(Funny, I was thnking about a MS Linux a couple
of weeks ago but decided it was too obsurd to
post to
Pete.
I think we should break up the Slakware project. I think that too many people are using it, and we must put an end to it at once. It has become too powerful and the ability to intimidate large OEMs to see things their way.
We must also force the KDE and GNOME projects to cease development to allow other projects to catch up.
Give the people what they want. After all, the consumer is the one who will make the final decisions on issues like this.
No animals were harmed in anyway during the beta testing of SuSE 6.0
Well. .it's your own damned fault.. you tried to ride RedHat's coattails... and when you try and do that to a company, they'll kick your butt for it.. I mean if you had a successful company and I immitated you on name/packaging .. what would you do?
The linux world seems to be a hash of various things, anyways, and i don't think that redhat necessarily has much power. If one looks at the distribution lists, there are a lot of redhat derived distributions. As previous comments have mentioned, if any distribution attempts a hostile takeover, people will just move away. This is something to be worried about in 5 years. It's too early now.
There is no such thing as a big free software distribution. Don't delude yourself.
Miles Lott
Red Hat is out ahead because they are being shrewd business people - making good deals and making them before the competition. This is a _good_ quality. Let the market sort it out.
/. poll indicated that RedHat was the most popular distro - you're voting with your wallets.
Obviously most of you agree, as a recent
Redhat has done some wonderful things in terms of contributing back to the *nix community, don't get me wrong--but I do fear that they will "Microsoft-ify" in a couple of years. By that, I mean that they will change the public's perception of what is allowable for an operating system to require, even if it's unreasonable. For example, their 5.x distributions have unreasonable system and/or installation requirements, which really hurts because I try to use Unix (FreeBSD, Linux, whatever) as an alternative to bloated OSes (like Windows NT) when you are trying to make use of perfectly good old hardware (386s, 486s) for DNS servers. But when Redhat 5.2 requires 8MB of RAM to install and 120MB minimum disk space for 5.2, what can I use?
:-)
(I understand that it's 8MB to install and that you can prune that down to 4MB after you install. But that's little help when all you have is 4MB in the machine. FreeBSD is a little better, but 2.2.* still requires a bit more (5MB to install, 4MB afterwards to run)).
I remember my original Slackware installing and running in 2MB. And this was before loadable kernel modules. So what am I missing? If Redhat becomes the dominant Linux distribution, and it eventually requires 16MB of RAM, and the other older distributions aren't available any more, how can I make use of perfectly good older machines with, say, 4MB of RAM and an 80MB disk?
(As a footnote, I attempted an install on an 80MB disk with 5.1, and it insisted on installing over 80MB of stuff, even with most packages deselected and no kernel source. It was a trip to try to delete binaries and directory trees while the install was happening in an effort to get the install to work.
Where do you propose I find 4MB of (old) 30-pin SIMMs?
And for the record, I don't care about a GUI. I want to turn the 30+ 386s here into something useful. DNS, FTP, HTTP servers are not impossible with 386s--hell, that's what they were 9 years ago...
Okay, it seems like I'm rambling, so here's a case of what I'm talking about: When I was at my university's bookstore (you must understand that our school has almost 0 nerd presence) the other day I saw that they had ordered massive amounts of RedHat 5.2 for Sparc and Alpha. When I asked the clerk why there were no copies of it for Intel (which is all anyone uses around here), he looked at me like I'm stupid and told me "Most of our students already have Intel computers and don't need a Unix emulator for that platform."
Unix emulator, indeed. These are the same people that are supposed to be convincing people to buy the software on their shelves. I think RedHat needs to do something to educate the retail outlets about their software before they continue to flood the market, or else it could give Linux as a whole a bad name (since as far as most people know, RedHat IS Linux).
When I first installed Linux three years ago, Slackware was definetly to prominent distro. When RedHat introduced the RPM facility, people migrated over to it because it was easier. One someone comes with something better, people will switch. Why? Because switching from distro to distro is easier than switching from Windows to Linux and vice-versa. There is nothing to tie someone down.
:)
BTW, isn't Linux all about the kernal anyways?
For me, I am happy with NT, SuSE and soon BeOS!
--weenie NT4 user: bite me!
"Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
Two weeks ago (in January at least), I saw ad's for the latest Red Hat Deluxe Edition. Media Play had it for $69 or more. CompUSA that had it for $29 (maybe the prices were switched). I don't know how much of this was mistake or stupid marketing.
Any dominance in the Linux world will come from a company that writes proprietary code. I just don't see how a Linux distributor who writes propritary code and limits the distributions can last very long. Some one can try and convince me otherwise.
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
"We could be happy if the air was as pure as the beer"
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
Richard von Weizs
There is this, PLUS the elitist attitudes of many of the posters here. Linux has, for better or worse, moved out of the realm of the hobbyist and into the mainstream. And as I have expounded upon many times, Joe Average User has no clue (nor even the desire to) about recompiling the kernel. He just wants his streaming audio to work and play music... he doesn't want to first have to compile the sound module or learn about insmod or any thing of the like.. he just wants to listen to his music.
To help these new users will require those geniuses amongst us to put aside their massive egos and gently point the new users in the proper directions. Merely saying Read the how-to at Sunsite is not enough. The how-to's were written by the hobbyist for the hobbyist. They were never meant for the typical user.
People, people, people...
If Microsoft really wanted to base their OSes on Unix, they wouldn't mess with Linux. Any of the BSDs would suffice. The BSD license is much less restrictive than the GPL and doesn't require the commercial party to release the source code! Microsoft could, for instance, take the latest snapshot of FreeBSD, make an MS-BSD and end up with an OS that runs BSD, SCO and Linux binaries!
Rich
Red Hat is also $2 on the cheap cd suppliers, just no books or support. Not that I use Red Hat, I am a slackware user too.
You can buy RedHat for the same price
RMS didn't write any of the router software that the Internet runs on. He didn't write any of the switching software. He didn't write Apache. He didn't author any internet protocol that I'm aware of. What did he write that "the Internet runs on." Most of the Internet runs on proprietary stuff like Cisco routers and Ascend switches.
And I highly doubt he's the greatest programmer ever. Even if you could come up with a list of criteria....
I have been using Red Hat and Suse for about a year now, and neither is buggy. Any of the bugs I have encountered are also found in Suse and sometimes Debian. The stuff Red Hat writes themselves is usually 100%. If not, it gets fixed quickly, and a patch is soon available.
-Master Switch, one more element in the machine
First of all Red Hat isn't even big enough.
Second They haven't Threatend other companies.
Third its not in there best interest.
While fears and concerns are necessary and just regarding Red Hat's apparent domination in linux distribution, comparisons to, even REMOTE comparisons, to Microsoft are completely uncalled for. Allow me to support my statement.
First, the obvious: Linux is not a controlled, or proprietary API. Second, there is no Billish prescence in the Red Hat camp. Third, RH's features/additional code
A: Do not corrupt the kernel
B: Is actually useable on other distros (after a few hours of CC)
C: Is available in full source on the web.
And finally, in a positive not to Red Hat, they've made Linux available in retail outlets.. where as a kid I first started my experimentations, and wasted all my allowance.
I've seen the 11 year olds in the stores carrying around 5.1. Unfludgingbelievable.
"To criticize those around you, you must be."
See this Obviously, not everything is free (applies to Suse too).
I guess most people here did not even test an alternate distribution, they simply say Redhat is best. Otherwise, I cannot see how anybody can say that Redhat is NOT buggy.
Compare it with SuSE 5.3, which is extremly stable. And it comes with KDE (and GNOME as well, if you prefer)
==
"99 of 100 people saying "KDE sucks" did not even test it"
This is what Linux users say. Most Linux users want it to take over the world. Well RedHat is helping to achive this goal. I would not be using Linux right now without RedHat. I had tried over the last few years several distros and discarded them due to difficulties, mainly with installing. Finally with RH I was able to install and use Linux.
Most people in my area recommended RH to me as that is what they used, and could help me with problems. This was the same reason that years ago I went with DOS/Windows on my first computer. I knew more people that used MS software than Apple. I am sure that when a better distro becomes avalible that will take over.
I think the problem is that the hardcore users belive in the GPL. This is not a bad thing, just a conflicting thing. RH is a corporation that is making money. They put out a good product that satisfies a demand for, of all things, free software.
Yes, they may become as big as MS someday. I wish them well on the trip there. The catch here is that most Linux users don't spend money on software. I am willing to buy one of thier boxed sets for one reason: a good product. Yeah, I can download it for free, go to Cheapbytes, or WC for less money. I buy the box set to support a company that I like and would like to see continue.
If you don't like RH for one reason or another, that is for you to decide. Use something else and convince your friends to use it.
I had an instructor in my network operating systems class (TEC 235 at Pima CC, www.pima.edu), try to tell me that "Red Hat is Linux". I pulled out my laptop running Slackware (my favorite distribution). He still thinks that Red Hat is linux.
Asking if Red Hat is too powerful is like asking who's the world's tallest midget...
Compared to Micro$oft, Apple (yes Mackos, Apple contains 7 essential vices and malices, and fortified evil), and even "good guys" like Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Oracle, AOL/Netscape (who are sorta like Two Face from Batman), etc.... Red Hat are nobodies, but good friends of the Linux world.
Commercial Linux distributions will allow the commercial world to more readily accept Linux as an OS, and Red Hat seem to be doing a good job of keeping prices low and maintaining the integrity of Linux.
Personally, I prefer a Linux with a solid base and an easy installer for servers and primary workstations, and more hackish Linux releases for stations dedicated to Linux development. Administering systems is enough of a hassel without making tools that make install and admin easier (like Red Hat and SuSE provide for Linux) into political foes...
I love my RedHat o/s. But they don't own Linux. They shouldn't.
RedHat could be a diferent kind of monopoly that we have not seen yet..an open source monopoly. I think that this stems from the RPM format in packaging filez, though I think RPMS are easier as long as the dependencies match up. I think that in the future we will see the RPM packaging format become a standard. I think Redhat will be just one of many distributors yet to come. Wait until the bigger companies get involved. Go!!!! SUSE
i'm sick of watching everything turn to RPM while tons of mindless drones download and update to a newer buggier release of whatever random package redhat distributes. i'm sick of people coming to me for every single little problem they have simply because RPMs don't fully cover their needed configs. if anything i've seen redhat and RPM's turn more people off than onto linux. after referring people to a simple slackware distribution and some howto docs, i find that they usually have a better outlook on linux in general than during their redhat experiences.
The bloke in the interview said, quite plainly, that Redhat is using its might to advance Linux so that the might of Linux can act for Redhat.
I thought the fact that RedHat is in it for the money was obvious, and I believe Redhat are quite proud of the fact.