Slashdot Mirror
IBM, Compaq, Novell invest in Red Hat
Luca Lizzeri writes "The WSJ reports that IBM, Novell and Compaq are taking equity stakes in Red Hat (subscription required).
An excerpt:
"Red Hat Software Inc. [snip] said it obtained equity investments from three more computer
companies: International Business Machines Corp.,
Compaq Computer Corp. and Novell Inc." Pretty please
will someone find a link we can read and post it? And
guys, don't just post the article contents in the comments- if you
guys keep doing that I'm gonna get sued for copyright violation.
Update: 03/09 09:33 by CT : Joy!
stick sent us a free version of the story.
But the info WANTS to be free! How can we possibly stop it from escaping into the world? You can't continue to bottle up and sell information any more than you can bottle up and sell humans into slavery.
News.com's top story is here, although they say Oracle rather than Novell.
Oracle, Novell, what's the difference? They are both smaller than Microsoft therefore irrelevant to the computing industry. ;-)
Before you start penning missives complaining that there is only a year of columns available and that "information wants to be free," please remember that this information actually wants to one day be bundled up and sold for $9.95 at a store near you.
--
Jason Eric Pierce
I thought Novell was an investor in Caldera?
More likely Novell = NDS and/or SCADS(=NDS++).
Just chuck the text through Babelfish twice (once into jibjab, then back out again) and then you don't get busted for copyright crap.
(or cypherpunk the b*stards as usual)
Caldera is financed indirectly by Ray Noorda, former CEO of Novell. As far as I know, Noorda still has close ties with Novell, and quite possible a fair bit of Novell shares. But I don't think Novell has any Caldera shares.
Whats so special about Novell investing in RedHat?
And I must say I certainly hope Caldera and RedHat doesn't merge. We don't need no new juggernauts dominating the market. Caldera and Redhat have been targetting different market segments, both doing well. No need for that to change as long as the Linux market is expanding as rapidly as it is.
Red Hat is Linux. You just created another Microsoft. Just deal with the concequences when all those nice investors start to flex their INVESTMENT MUSCLE.
Linux is free. Like Communism, you just have to take the ONE choice on offer.
According to Robert Hart of RH, RH is commited to making their distribution completely open source. I don't know whether Caldera has such commitment. I think the big boys are more interested in RH because RH is more commited to the open/free source community, beside being the most popular.
So what have YOU done for the industry lately that makes you an expert in technology? IBM for one invented pretty much everything involved in modern PC's today.
So in summary that's IBM: 1,000,000 inventions
Ellis-D: 0 inventions
You lose. Better luck next time.
- Pissed off IBM employee #503293.
Gonna download Red Hat and install it over the other crap distro's right now. Hell - they didnt get any investment and I dont have to use them!
Does anyone keep an archive of distros? It might be nice to someday try some of the ones that are going to disappear due to all the money that's starting to get thrown around. What's to stop RH from buying up the other ones eventually? Sure you'll still be able to build a personal one, but I can see a future where there's just RH and maybe one other distro.
Nothing to do with Openness. Just M O N E Y
Caldera was squished by Red Hat *AGES* ago.
In a way, this is good news because it is an endorsement of Linux by non M$ companies. At the same time RedHat is becoming more commercially democratic, thus less muscle power to each investor. On the other hand, more commercial control over Redhat will be somewhat problamatic to free evolution of Linux. Any other thoughts ?
to everything they touch. Net Winder (anyone remember it); WP8 (forgot to include the CDs in the box); Wine; and now Linux.
Corel; why not just let Red Hat run Linux while you try to do *one* thing?
Is it possible to network two PC's with token ring cards without using a hub, like ethernet?
Trust me, RH will invest primarily in the things they OWN such as a service center and their brand marketing.
They will not throw much more money into (l)gpl software development which any other distro could resell.
Did anyone notice this article from a few days ago?
l ?99035.whlinser.htm
http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.p
Redhat now has less incentive for Standards because they can now dictate the standards.
Just like they've tried to do right from the start with RPM.
this is pretty bad news. redhat just opens up
their collective butthole to commercial interests.
pretty soon we'll see the results.
Redhat Linux is Linux?
What happened so that only one company get invested in? I'm not trying to flame Redhat.. hey did IBM, Compaq, Novell ever look at what is available beside Redhat Linux? I mean Redhat Linux is nice with install for some maybe, but other vendors: Caldera, S.u.S.E, Turbolinux, Mandrake need to work on public relations..
i used to think redhat was a bunch of misguided hippie folks.
now it seems like maybe they are just a bunch of
guys trying to make a $ off linux. so i guess
well everyone else is just trying to make a $ too,
so who can blame them. their product, though, will
start to suck due to the inherent mental breakdowns
that come with some suit screaming at you to make money,
kiss ass, follow orders, bow down, suck butt, kiss pinky,
lick ring, cow tow, choose $ over family, choose $ over friends, choose $ over everything, etc etc etc.
oh well.
lets say a big greedy company buys out redhat.
so what?
redhat is already a big greedy company.
perhaps the current 'lets see how much $ we can make' attitude
will be intensified, but its not like its something new.
now im not against whoring or anything,
but if i was a whore you bet your ass i would be
trying to get the big rich customers not the small timers.
I've got a fairly good collection from old CD-ROMS
We are btw gaining no losing distributions;
We've lost
o SLS Linux (Slackware kind of took over)
o MCC Linux (Became a step to Debian, now dead)
o Craftworks
We've gained recently
o Mandrake
o Stampede
o LinuxPPC
o Definite Linux
(numerous 1-3 disk mini Linux setups)
and probably others too
IBM are doing deals with SuSE and others
PHT have some huge asian deals
SuSE have a lot of european especially deals
as well as being partnered with VA research
Corel have a prebuilt sales setup but a big
problem in that who else will work with
an app competitor
And Debian just is. Furthermore its on a
development model where its sustainable in its
current suitfree format.
Why not ask Richard Stallman what he thinks about
Debian, Red Hat, and SuSE.
Uh. In what way has corel been a "kiss-of-death"
to the WINE project? On the contrary, WINE
development has really taken off since Corel
and the hired guns (i.e. Macadiam) joined.
Watch the ChangeLog for "corel" and "macadiam",
it's like 2/3 of the posts these days.
And WP8 is doing just fine here on my
desktop.
RTFM.
You obviously can't interpret what the man is saying... he wasn't 'bragging' he was making a statement.. a truth statement... RedHat is synomynous with linux... ask any 'non-geek' they'll tell you real quick... if you're to blind to see what is taking place.. well im sorry... continue to live in your little world where everything is just how YOU say it is...
Good day.
Everyone, go read a book about how Microsoft came to be the corporation they are today. It all came from big companies like IBM investing in them, having them develop DOS and OS/2 for them. And look where Microsoft ended up. All the signs are pointing the same way for Red Hat. If things play out the same for Red Hat as they did Microsoft, is this going to become a BeOs friendly site? Just remember, all flames and attacks come back to haunt you someday.
Despite what everyone is saying here, Red Hat cannot become another Microslop, no matter how much $$$ IBM, Intel, etc. pump in. As long as anyone has a distro of Linux (no matter where he/she got it) that person can make and sell his own version as he sees fit (following the GPL, of course).
If I had the money, I could take my Red Hat CDs, add some good OS software from elsewhere, fix some others, plop them on my own CD, make a million duplicates, then do a mass-mailing AOHell-style. And there isn't squat that IBM, Red Hat, or anyone else can do about it!
So let's knock off the "Red Hat is going to take over Linux" whining. There is no basis for it.
IBM has done a great job; they've managed to bungle three of the largest potential wins in this computer age:
One, they went from inventor of the personal computer, (the first revolution of its age), the inventor of technically superior products that suck. (Microchannel, tokenring)
Two, they handed the OS/2 concept over to Bill Gates, and inadverdently created the Windows-on-Intel phenomenon. (OS/2 isn't dead, the IBM heart-lung machine will keep it alive forever.)
Three, if any company was poised to take advantage of the prevailing winds of the Internet, it was IBM. Did they do anything? No! Late in the game they are buying up anything E-Commerce-like and marketing it.
IBM is good at one thing: buying marginal companies and making them worse.
The only role IBM can play with Linux, is a murdering Doctor. Linux doesn't need a Dr K. (Unlike OS/2, IBM has no incentive to offer the heart-lung machine to Linux.)
BN
I've tried both Redhat and Debian and I find the Debian dist. and it's packaging system to be much nicer to work with.
Now let's say my company--whose IS dept doesn't know much about Linux--wants to use Linux for some servers.
No matter how good of a case I make for Debian, I'm going to have to fight uphill against all that Redhat marketing--because that's all they've heard of.
It's becoming a "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM/MS/Redhat" kind of thing where the inferior product with the better advertising wins.
exactly what uphill battle woudl you have?
the product is free..you can install and use debian whereever you like. no PHB is going to stop you cause
1- they wont know
2- they wont care to know
3- its not costing them anything
redhat only becomes dangerous when it starts muscleing its marketshare and mindshare into playing the standards game
Hmm looks like its MONEY after all. Can they redeem by making all programs developed at RH open source and say devote X% of their earning to fund open source development? Any suggestion to them?
everyone keeps saying that redhat can't become the next microsoft, becuase if they did, people could just create a new distro, by taking the linux cd and adding or removing things from it. however, I don't think that this is the case. redhat will probably start making (started already?) "redhat specific programs" and not license them under gpl. if these programs are good enough, everyone will want to use redhat, since it comes with these programs. people couldn't just stick these great programs in their own distro, since they're not free! see what i'm getting at?
Quite the thread going here. One thing you can't do is fault Bob. Anybody that has followed Fud Hat marketing and engineering for more than 3 years, knows that they have always had the goal of BECOMING Linux.
Keep in mind perception is reality in this world. Whether or not they actually control Linux, which we know can never happen, they can create the perception that they own. This is exactly why these companies are investing in Fud Hat because they are perceived to have substantial influence over Linux and the Open Source movement.
There is a very good reason why they changed their web site. They are postioning themselves as the premier place for all of your Linux needs. Self-serving advertising, slanted news briefs, and more, are all ways that they will try to dominate the way you think about Linux, worse than that, the way less knowledgable people new to Linux look at Linux.
The answer, don't buy their stuff, don't browse their site, and always, always, develop to the kernel, not to Fud Hat's distro.
I certainly hope this investment means continued support of non-Intel processors. IBM and Compaq's investment should help to offset Intel's continued investment in all kinds of OS companies. Intel has been investing in all kinds of OS companies to assure a market for their chips. Call me ignorant or biased but I think the x86 architecture has been stretched beyond its years. Give it a rest already Intel! Lets see some lean and mean processors for once.
Whoa! The kiddiez are out en force today!
All this stone-throwing, FUD, conjecture and complete rubbish being spewed all over slashdot re: RH becoming the next MS, etc
Get a grip. And grow the fsck up.
- Redhat have contibuted a great deal to the Linux community, monetarily, through gpl software and through marketing Linux, also by providing tech. support, etc. RH are a great FUD-disspeller.
- Their site is now redesigned, with links all over the place to places like this, freshmeat etc... If anyone visits the redhat site and clicks on a link or two, they will soon read the phrase "Linux was developed by Linus Torvalds, a Finnish University student.... blah blah" It doesn't take long to work out who owns what. Redhat have _never_ claimed to BE the only LINUX.
- Has anyone got any examples of Redhat doing something terribly wrong/ anti-gpl/ anti-linux? No?
Well shut the fuck up.
I fail to see where RedHat are going wrong... is it just because it's a popular distribution?
Regardless, who cares? Are you afraid RedHat is going to steal marketshare away from Debian or Slackware? Wake up: Debian and Slackware will still be there, chugging along nicely, as they are volunteer efforts, based on technical issues rather than market demand.
Please wait until RH fuck up, THEN complain. Otherwise I'll just assume you have been using Linux for maybe a few months and don't really know what's going on at all.
Thanks
AndyM
Come on guys. Let RH suck dummies away from M$.
Just move to Debian or SuSE. After Windows is dead, how to release pressure?
Simple. "You SUCK. You brain-dead CompHat sheep."
Red Hat is still privately owned. I imagine that they will want to go public at some point. Their strategy of getting broad industry support in the form of minority stakes will protect them from a hostile takeover when they go public. This can only be a good thing.
right on, but I reckon there will be profit in conversion tools and services, getting commoners unaddicted, and on to an open platform. Just need to whack that wedge in and .. .crack.
besides, with source, can't play any interface games to protect miiiinopoly. Only because of shifting interfaces, do you find miscosffft toadys.
The real bucks are in support, education, and how well you can build an integrated package without bugs.
whatever that is + growth factor = share market When it becomes click here to fix bugs and update drivers Linux will snowball
oh yes, only a several comglomorates in pack formation can take on wintel. And when they start giving it away for free(at cost), MS will loose grip on market share.
At a 2000 roadshow (com virus demo), more bundled pricing (so using Linux/MS combinations does not make economic sense), even if you craved reliability (get 6 MS software components for the price of 2).
Head to Head, it will be whos got the best wizards
Now if MS hopes to sucker folks into buying the premium edition, they will be right, initially.
As soon as there is enought linux support bodys to set up a set and forget site(presence), the gravy of licence renewals will go to shit.
I'll be out there saying why pay x thousand of ongoing server fees. I'll convert it to Linux, it'll look and feel the same, and be more reliable to boot.
The latest gmmick is a shopping cart - wow getting desperate
How would you buy them? Most distros are based on free software, you can't buy them. Debian, Slackware, Stampede, to take a few examples, are completely based on free software, so even if you were to "buy"(/assassinate/imprison/whatever) all the people working on them (which would be hard to achieve), they could, and most likely would, live on.
Oh, yeah, you're right. And I guess I'd better watch out... I'm sure the Red Hat Inquisition'll be by my house later this afternoon to confiscate my Slackware servers...
-plonk-
Oh, yeah, and I'm wrong because you say I am, with no supporting evidence. That's a lot better than the blindness you accuse me of.
Look. Red Hat is popular. Red Hat is getting investors. But Red Hat is not the next Microsoft. Red Hat *cannot* be the next Microsoft. Microsoft got where it is by using the power provided to it by having sole control over a popular OS. Red Hat couldn't do the same thing even if they wanted to, because they don't control the OS. No one does, not even Linus. Red Hat doesn't even control their own distribution. If they were to somehow drive all the other distributions out of existence (even the non-profit ones... there's a challenge) anyone who wanted to could build their own new distribution from kernel.org, sunsite, and other places, burn it onto a CD, and sell it to anyone who wants it. They could even, if they wanted, take Red Hat's *own* distribution, keep, remove, or add anything they wanted, and distribute the result. And there'd be nothing Red Hat could do about it, because of this little thing called the GPL...
As for what the non-geeks think... well, they can think whatever they want. It won't change reality. They can think that NT is stable; it won't stop it from blue-screening once a week. They can think that Intel is the be-all and end-all of processors... it won't stop AMD from stealing their marketshare. And they can think that Red Hat is synonymous with Linux... it won't make my network of Slackware-based boxes go away.
Novell, Caldera, and that other recent Linux-newsmaker Willows Software are all heavily invested in (or outright owned) by the Canopy Group, which is owned by the Noorda Family Trust, which is of course Ray Noorda's holding company of sorts.
And yeah, Novell owns a small stake in SCO. Big enough the make them buy that whole UnixWare-load-of-junk, but not big enough to make them actually do anything useful with it. Of course, the fact that Microsoft's stake in SCO is bigger than Novell's wouldn't have had anything to do with that...
Dunno about Compaq, but one of IBM's goals in their "big Linux Announcement" was to make Linux available on the RS/6000, which *is* PowerPC-based. And BTW, I tend to agree, the Alpha and PowerPC processors have been relatively ignored for way too long.
Wouldn't worry about it...can always take the code & make a derivative distribution (Mandrake, BeRoLinux have already done this). Or even develop your own distro (even better--natural selection will decide which home-grown distro will take off).
IBM = Intel-based PC, PC-DOS (Ininitely better than MS-DOS), OS/2 (Infinitely better than Windows... marketing notwithstanding), etc. out the yin-yang.
IBM Has been around for over a century. It out-lasted smaller companies (And yes, Microsoft is still a smaller company), and has kept itself in front of the larger ones. It was producing FULL TILT during the depression in the 30's, and it survived just about every market shift since it's inception, without so much as a lost breath.
It even survived Antitrust Litigation (even if Microsoft DID assist it in that direction).
In short I would say that if Big Blue is backing Linux this much, it's almost guaranteed that Linux will be the winner in the race against Microsoft, even without Thomas J. Watson (Jr. or Sr.) at the helm.
--
Keep working at it... you will either succeed, or become an expert.
The Penguin Producer
It cannot be denied that Red Hat has contributed a lot to the Linux community. Red Hat has contributed RPM, a GPLed program, and is now supporting GNOME, also GPLed/LGPLed. Red Hat served as the seed to start other distributions, like Caldera and SUSE, and two new ones recently (Independent Linux and BuroLinux). It is really hard to find another company with this kind of pro-Free Software record. Red Hat probably has the best record of all commercial Linux distributors.
Hopefully as long as the current leadership stays in charge, Red Hat won't change its ways.
Free Software: the software by the people, of the people and for the people. Develop! Share! Enhance! Enjoy!
I don't mind Redhat "playing the standards
game" - just as long as the standards are
open.
Danny.
I have written over 900 book reviews
See the Raleigh News and Observer online.
Well, it is official, the game is over for Red Hat.
Sure they will make money.
And for a little while they will think they are something.
They're not.
But then again, if they continue to win the distribution wars ( can we say make it more complicated, needlessly) so goes Linux.
Pity. We have allowed "Everybody but Microsoft" to buy the hope and turn it into a handgun.
It was nice while it lasted.
Remember when Microsoft tried to hire Alan Cox ( supposedly, anyway) and many applauded his integrity?
So, where is Red Hat's integrity now?
Same place as the town whore.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
That article quoted me *badly* out of context. The author was asking about why Red Hat had "not signed on to the LSB". I informed him that this was ancient history and that we didn't sign on to the original LSB because it was an implementation and it "didn't exist" and we "weren't 'signing on' to anything that didn't exist". I then went on to say that we have "signed on" to the current LSB committee effort and are working right along side the other vendors on the LSB. We also hope that the LSB becomes something *everyone* can agree on and use and if that happens we will certainly sign up as well.
Of course, none of *that* got printed.
--Donnie
Last I checked, IBM now ships their desktops with ethernet, and Compaq with a somewhat standard bios. Novell has seen the TCP/IP light. It's unfair to permanently label these companies because of past technologies (innovations?).
Considering how IBM has supported apache and linux in recent months this makes a lot of since. I think all these companies have a legitimate contribution to make to linux in the comming months and years and I'm expecting alot from IBM this year, I hope they don't let me down...
- dw
Imagine Microsoft turning their website into a portal where one of the most prominent links is to a "news" site where clueless nitwits post all kinds of flaming ridicule against them, that is contradicted by all available evidence. Red Hat has already shown an acceptance of Linux diversity and a willingness to accept critisism, deserved or otherwise, that puts the lie to any claims of them as a monopolist. They have earned a steady customer in me.
---------------------
John 3:16 - God's Public License
I was wondering about all this - redhat now has
sold minority equity stakes to 5 massive companies
(intel, netscape, oracle, ibm and compaq)...
how many minorities does it take to become
majority? does this worry anyone?
Obviously this is true! Look how much money these
companies have donated to Debian.
Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.
Then the programs would have to be good enough and difficult enough to produce that they could not be duplicated by others. They would have to do it without using GPL'ed code. Furthermore, there is no example I can think of in which they have done *anything* like this.
BTW, that reminds me. Anyone know anything of the history/status of Caldera's Netware for Linux? How did it happen? Is it open-source?
They have close ties with Caldera, since Caldera was started by former Novell employees, and is funded by Ray Noorda. This has made it possible for Caldera to produce "Netware for Linux". I don't know if Novell is actually invested in them, although you would think Novell would choose Caldera over RedHat.
Novell is invested in SCO, a company that is being slaughtered by Linux.
Of all the comments I've ever posted, this is definately one of them
If IBM invented most of what was surrounding PCs, then we'd be using the MCA bus. Most specific PC technogy was developed by Intel.
Or are you referring to the technology in general? In which case you may have a point.
IBM's problem was they had the Microsoft mentality in the old days. They wanted to do things IBM's way, even though the rest of the industry didn't.
Examples: EBCDIC, Token Ring, 3970/3980 tape cartridges (as opposed to DLTs)
Of all the comments I've ever posted, this is definately one of them
Visa is a nonprofit organization. Tough to fathom, but it's true. It's owned and funded by a big organization of banks. They basically use it as infrastructure through which they compete, yet they all reap benefits. Note that this same conglomeration owns MasterCard, hence, you only see Visa commercials targetting American Express (independant company, afaik).
I see Redhat becoming the operating system equivalent of Visa. The conglomerate of hardware manufacturers, will use linux via Redhat as a playing field to compete against each other.
- Brian Chrisman
In response to your questions:
Essentially what pulls E-net ahead of TR is switching. Switching aleviates all the above problems with Ethernet - unlimited number of cascaded switches, no colision problem, # hosts based only on available switch RAM.
Token-ring technology is indeed nice for high-load environments: FDDI is much preferable in my server rooms to FastEthernet (until maybe I see a _working_ Gigabit Enet solution). In a large-scale user environment, though, switched 10Mbps ethernet performs better than 16Mb TokenRing. And the cost is far less these days...
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
Saying Token Ring is slow seems to me like you're comparing the line speeds between, most likely, Ethernet. Don't forget that TR holds it's line speed even under heavy conditions and does not have the sever restrictions on number of hosts/distance to repeater that Ethernet has.
With 100Mbit and GigaBit Ethernet, ENet takes the speed lead (for years 16Mbit TR was still faster, by the numbers not just tech, than 10Mbit ENet...which I would pit against 4Mbit TR in a 5000+ workstation environment).
Unfortunately, I have not followed the progression of the new Ethernet technologies. Can anyone tell me if the repeater and number of host limitations have been reduced or eliminated? Also, has packet-loss for high volume ENet networks been brought to the same reliability that TR has (something I failed to mention above)?
Jesse Tilly
No investment, but they have worked closely with Caldera on integrating Netware into Linux.
Steven
Senior Technology Editor
Sm@rt Reseller
Bad: More news stories saying that Red Hat invented Linux.
Would you care to cite a single news story that claims Redhat invented Linux? And quit that bad-mouthing Redhat thing at once. Redhat has done, is doing and will continue doing a lot of good for GNU/Linux/free software in general. Much more than nay other distribution has, so far.
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
I should also mention that Token Ring takes the cake in terms of QoS: I have an (ancient) copy of IBM's Resource Reservation System, and it does *quite* nicely streaming a dozen 150kbyte/sec at the same time on the same ring (not that I ever do that).
--jon. Postel is dead. May we all mourn his, and our, loss.
The GPL avoids the BSD/X11 (well, X10 had it to <grin>) problem where greedy companies grab the source, add their logos to the startup screens, and resell it (while at the same time making it incompatible with the original distribution).
It can't happen with Linux, and never will. It should also be noted that a very large part of the community seems to be uniting behind Debian—much of the Slackware crowd (may ``Bob's'' name endure forever) seems to be migrating to Debian (such as myself). Redhat is quickly becoming a very uncool distribution for the hacker crowd.
Well, time to get back to hacking XGRADD, and happy Kernel 2.2.3 release to everyone.
Joshua
--jon. Postel is dead. May we all mourn his, and our, loss.
I really don't even know where to start with this kind of paranoid ranting. What reason is there for me to believe that Red Hat of all distros will start creating non-GPL software? They have recently dropped some of their value-added products that used to ship with Red Hat (BRU2000, Metro-X) so that their distro will include no non-free software. In contrast, both Caldera and SuSE happily ship propriatary software with their distributions (Star Office, Netscape web server, KDE, etc.), with Caldera also selling much closed source commercial software with per user licensing fees. The anti-Red Hat types seem to be suffering from a knee-jerk reaction to any company that grows. The real threat is from distros like Caldera that have very well developed reseller channels and are targeting the corporate market as well. Basically, I hear lots of speculation about Red Hat becoming another Microsoft, but it seems to be only speculation. If you look at the actions of companies like Caldera, you can see a company that is targeting a very similar market to the one Red Hat is after, and is actually engaging in all the practices you claim to be worried about. As to what they develop to, Red Hat has financed development of only GPL'd software, how about the others?
Well I'm the doctor and I say you're dead, so shut up and take it like a man!
where are you getting the cards so cheap, and what brand are they??
the place i work for is buying Madge cards for $200 each. I didn't think you could get token ring at an affordable price.
http://www.redhat.com/corp/press/current_invest.ht ml
They're right here.
And I've never had any problem with WP. The incident to which you refer (I believe) is about the CorelCentral program. It was not ready for release when they shipped WP8, so they included a coupon for a free copy after it was released. This is unlike MS, who shipped Outlook 97 in its current sorry alpha/beta state.
Mike
--
Mike
--
"Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yër?"
If Novell really took an equity stake in Red Hat, that means a very deep line has been drawn in the sand between Caldera and Red Hat. For Linux' sake, I hope Caldera and Red Hat merge.
Caldera + Red Hat = Strongly unified commercial oriented Linux
Caldera vs. Red Hat = Bitter fighting and extreme fragmentation of the Linux market. Just what Microsoft wants to see...
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2222 361,00.html
enjoy.
They think (not unreasonably) that Red Hat is the best investment. I understand the logic behind *working* with multiple distributions, and I applaud IBM for doing that. But when you're making an equity investment you want to do it with the company that will get you the best return for your money. At this point in time, that company is probably Red Hat.
Maybe, if several distro companies decide to go public, someone could set up a Linux mutual fund.
IBM(r) = Token Ring
Novel(r) = Netware
Compaq(r) = Bios in the mbr
I don't care for those products.. Why would I want something develope by them together.. It would be like buying a linux distro from AST(r).
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Ok.. I know.. The IBM thing was a bit harsh.. I know they have done alot in the computer industry, but token ring was a good idea, but it's still slow.. (I should know, they use it here..blech) Well I guess IBM can help alot, since they did make AIX (if i'm not mistaken)
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
I'm talking about time sharing..
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
Good: Red Hat can hire some more folks full time to crunch bugs in GNOME and other projects.
Bad: More news stories saying that Red Hat invented Linux. Worse yet, more vendors dying to install an "official" copy of RH Linux, jacking up the cost, rather than just installing a free copy of it. Why would I POSSIBLY want to pay for an installation manual and installation support when it's ALREADY INSTALLED?!? These people just don't get it. RH has always said that they'll get their revenue from support when things have taken off, but they're becoming just another software company. . .
Future: Obviously a lot of shakeout in the market, but we'll continue to see more distros like BeroLinux and Linux Mandrake that build on Red Hat. Of course let's not forget that Corel's distrobution will shake things up a lot once they come in. Red Hat on all the servers, Corel on all the desktops? I don't think it'll be quite that stark, althogh I do think that KDE 2.0 (which I think we can assume Corel will use, although they're technically 'evaluating' GNOME too) will be REALLY good. Check out QT 2.0, on which it'll be based. Much slicker, plus support for the mouse wheel. Or don't. GNOME's buggy, but I do like the way gmc and gtk+ look.
-JZ