Slashdot Mirror
Re: The Charity Case for Red Hat
The following was written by Slashdot Reader knarf
Hi Jack,
Being a former journalist myself, I was rather disappointed at your recent column about the upcoming RedHat IPO. To be quite frank, there were more faulty facts in this short column than I thought possible. A quick summary:
1: Unix has been, and still is a money-maker for a lot of companies. Look aroud large datacenters, network hubs, computer centers ad financial institutions and you'll find a lot of big, expensive Unix-based systems doing all the heavy work.
2: Unix was not thrown in the `public domain' as you suggest. AT&T fought long and hard just to try to prevent others from making something which resembled Unix. The mere mentioning of the name `Unix' in connection to something not from AT&T was enough to be sued, hence the frequent use of words like `Un*x'. This also led to names like XENIX, AIX, SINIX, ULTRIX, DG/UX, etc. The rights to Unix have moved from company to company for a while, currently the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO) is the `owner' of the System V code. The Berkeley code was `cleaned' and released as BSD 4.3 lite (the `lite' stands for `without AT&T proprietary code'), and serves as the code base for some commercial and a lot of open Unix varieties. It is the Berkeley version which is in the public domain (under the BSD license), not AT&T's `original'. The BSD license has nothing to do with the GPL license, under which Linux is licensed.
3: The differences between all those Unix varieties have been greatly exaggerated, mostly due to marketing and media forces. Unix is not a perfect operating system, but at it's core it is rather clean and consistent. Any user of any Unix will have little trouble moving to another variety. That is not to say they'll like the experience, but THAT is something completely different. For some reason people tend to get religious about their choice of operating system, be it Unix version X of Windows version Y. For software developers, there are several ways the differences between the Unix versions can be solved. the GNU auto* tools are a prime example of this. Writing software for several varieties of Unix is no different from writing software for several varieties of Microsoft Windows, but at least the Unix developers have the benefit of the GNU tools and the often much better documented API's. In case of the free Unix versions, there ARE no `undocumented' API's since you have access to all source code.
4: Linux Torvalds did not create the `command set' for the kernel which got to be called `Linux'. He initiated development on the kernel, and has been managing the development effort ever since. What is generally called `Linux' is actually a distribution containing the Linux kernel combined with the GNU tools (which provide most basic user commands) and a lot of other software. From very early versions onward the X window system has been part of those distributions, making it possible to run GUI command interfaces on top of the kernel. Most early distributions contained the XView toolkit and the ol(v)wm window manager, giving Linux users access to the well-known `Open Look' style of user interface which has been available to Sun Microsystems users for a long time. Open Look eventually got replaced by CDE on Sun systems, while other toolkits (Motif, Qt, GTK) took over the Linux `desktop'. But early Linux users had access to a GUI interface as well.
5: Linux distributions all use the same kernel (give or take a patchlevel number, eg. 2.2.5 versus 2.2.9). They all use the same GNU tools (the `command set'). They all use the same X window environment. They all use the same basic toolkits and language interpreters (Perl, Tcl/Tk, etc.). The differences between distributions are mainly in the locations of these tools (`where are they installed'), and in the extra stuff they deliver (`what more comes with this thing?'. There are some cases where some distributors are quick in picking up on the latest developments, while others wait for stuff to calm down before moving to the `latest and greatest' version of some basic component. An example of this is the choice of C library (leading to incompatibilities between distributions) or the choice of loader format (a.out, ELF). There are all temporary problems though. The move from the a.out format to the ELF format is all but forgotten by most Linux users. The move to the GNU C libary will probably fare likewise.
6: There is nothing to be gained for Linux distributors in making their version of `Linux' incompatible with others. They rely on both open source developers as well as commercial vendors to supply them with software to run on their version of `Linux'. If they behave like you foretell, they'll loose support from the hard-core open source developers, and the commercial vendors will probably follow. Commercial vendors would rather support one or two basic varieties of an operating system, not a whole bunch of them. If a Linux distributor wants those applications to run on his distribution, he'll make sure it does. Now of course there is the question *which* distribution a commercial vendor will support. If they are smart, they'll support one or two (say RedHat and Caldera), but make sure their software runs on the `official' (not finished yet) `Linux Standard Base' or `File System Base' based distributions. That way, everybody wins, and they'll sell more software.
7: Sure, the Linux desktop user interface can be `improved'. But those improvements are probably not what you think they are. The command line will not disappear. It is a much to capable and valuable tool in the hands of even lesser Unix gods to be done away with. If RedHat is hiring people to make their Linux distribution more palpable to the Windows user community, that's fine. It will still be Linux. Until now, RedHat has licensed all their developments under the GPL (GNU Public License), and they are likely to continue doing this. If they don', they'll loose support from the open source developers (look at what happened to the KDE initiative, although that rift has been mended by making the Qt toolkit open source `compliant'). So they will most likely remain smart and keep the GPL flag flying.
8: RedHat is not losing $130.000.000, they lost $130.000 dollars. This is pure disinformation, and might be cause for RedHat to sue you. Please make sure you know what you write about before starting.
9: There is no such thing as `VA Linux'. VA Linux Systems is a hardware vendor in support of Linux. They support several distributions. They may have their preferences (on their website it says `...caldera is quite close to Redhat, but i've found I prefer RH's gui over caldera...'), but they point anyone interested to both RedHat as well as Caldera and SuSE and cdrom.com (Slackware, others) and linuxmall.com (all distributions, $1.89 per CD-ROM, also FreeBSD by the way).
10: I do not remember Microsoft being a proponent for open source software, not them being a beneficiary. On the contrary, Microsoft has from the very start supported a closed, `business-like' approach to software development. They have from time to time thrown some goodies at the developer crowd to get them aquainted with Microsoft tools, but that has nothing to do with `supporting volunteerism'.
11: Netscape did not create a `potential operating system', they created a browser with and API which was seen by Microsoft as a threat to their operating environments. The browser would commoditize Windows, since it would not matter anymore which platform was used to run the interface to whatever applications were used. Microsoft has done it's best to counter this move by embracing and extending Java and the `WWW protocol set', and Sun Microsystems has helped by being too tight-minded with regard to Java extensions. IBM has indeed helped the Java `platform', and is still doing so. They seem to be on a quest to keep Microsoft out of the higher-end application service market. Of course they are not benevolent gods, but they are much less malign than you portray them. Sun Microsystems HAS given access to the Java source code (throug htheir `community licensing scheme'), IBM HAS given and still gives a lot of software to the community (take a look at their AlphaWorks site, www.alphaworks.ibm.com).
12: Your comments about Microsoft flirting with Linux border the ridiculous. What do you think would happen if/when Microsoft embeds Linux in their products? What system would run Linux software better? A Microsoft operating system with embedded Linux, or Linux? You might want to compare this with running Windows software on Unix systems (which is possible by using products like WABI, or toolkits like WINE). Remember, when IBM called OS/2 `a better Windows than Windows'? What did you think when they said that? Did you try it? Now, Microsoft would come along and call their Windows 2001 `a better Linux than Linux'. What would you think when they say that? Would you try it? Even more important, what would you write about it?
13: My final comment, number thirteen. About your final comments. Why do you insist that people have to want to use `Microsoft Linux' to make it a viable proposition? I can very well do without Microsoft, and so can a lot of other people. This has nothing to do with ideology, but everything with stability, choice, and performance. I get more work done in less time using non-Microsoft products, and time (as you should know) is money, especially for the people who pay me to do my work. And why do you think the future and viability of Linux is dependent on the future of RedHat? If RedHat disappears of the face of the earth, there is still SusE (rather popular here in Europe), TurboLinux (rather popular in the Far East), Debian (rather popular amongst developers anywhere and everywhere), Slackware (with a dedicated crowd of followers), Caldera (rather popular in a lot of businesses), etc. Should I go on?
I won't. Linux has the marks of becoming an important player in a lot of markets, with or without RedHat. You may be right (or you may be wrong) when you say an investment in RedHat is not the best way to make money. But you are dead wrong in your reasoning against RedHat in particular or Linux in general. The IT market is not dependent on Microsoft, it can survive without them. So can Linux. Unix is not dead, and it does not seem to be dying either. There is a lot of money to be made in all thing Unix, and Linux is one of those things.
Linus did not start Linux to `kill Microsoft', and most Linux users use Linux because it fits their needs in a way that Microsoft Windows can not. If Microsoft embeds Linux within their own stuff, that's fine with me (as long as they abide to the licensing terms). Since Linux withoug any Microsoft-extensions fits my needs, I do not see what I would gain from such a development, so I will refrain from using `Microsoft Linux'. If they do produce some useful extension (and release it under the GPL) I will use it. If they embrace and extend Linux in the way they embraced and extended other `standards' I will not use their extensions, because I do not want to be tied to a single vendor. Such ties cost money, as experience has taught me. And I;ve got better things to do with my (or rather my employers) money than give it to some company because I am locked in their embrace.
My parting comment? Please do some more research the next time, or ask a knowledgeable person to proof-read your column. It may `only be a column', but a lot of people tend to trust the media a little too much for their own good. As you probably know...
With kind regards,
Frank de Lange
/* Former editor in chief, Unix Info magazine
* now full-time developer... mostly Unix, some Windows
* speaking for himself, not his employer
*/
A good reply but the original article was such a vapid pile of unresearched dogsh*t as not to even garner a reply.
You agree that this guy is totally off base with all of his arguments but go on to agree with his conclusion. How off-base is that logic?
is a spelling flame countered by a get-over-it flame which contains a spelling error.
:)
hint: rebuttal
Cracks me up everytime!
I can't believe you attached your name to this. Did you make the original post too?
The open source movement is built on a completely different mentality than anything most of the trade press has ever encountered before. Some of them can kind of get a grasp as to what's up with it, but a lot of them have no real understanding of the underlying motivation or why open source will almost invariably produce extremely high quality code. They definitely don't have an understanding of how it will produce money (But to be fair, the Open Source community really doesn't have that much of a grasp on that either.)
The Open Source movement is an intellectual square peg when it comes to the round hole of the current industry. It just doesn't fit. Trying to make it fit doesn't work. This journalist is just trying to make it fit. Don't hate him because his primative simian brain can't grasp two market models at once.
Is A.N. for real? Could you imagine any real publication stating "We are not responsible at all for the crap that our journalists write."? Obviously this the A.N. and this writer are just about right for each other.
Ahh.
Appache on Solaris.
What a nice combination.
i suspect that many of these "journalists" believe that there are no such thing as bad publicity - their intent is to provoke and generate reactions, the accuracy of their writing is secondary altogether.
so, it's a dillema, isn't it? to respond would be to fall for the scam, but not to respond would not help the lay people from being misled.
it's tempting though - these "journalists" go on talking outta their ass so cocky, as if they even have a clue to what they are talking about?!
this is not to bundle all journalists, some/many, i'm sure, well informed.
boink.
RedHat is a hot IPO because open source is fashionable.
RedHat has an $80 distro. It's right on the shelf at BestBuy next to the $30 SuSE distro. Oh wait! There's no SuSE boxes left. Plenty of RedHat boxes, though.
Hmmm...
Title says it all!
Red Hat do wonderful things, and as the man says, would be a fine company to support -- for a charitable donation.
But what on earth do they offer an investor ?
What would you be buying ?
Almost everything they sell is GPL and quite legal to copy and sell on by anyone who wants to -- typically within days, and for only two or three pounds.
I can't see them making much from pre-installers, who again can just burn their own CDs.
As far as I can see, that just leaves the distribution rights on the non-free software they bundle -- and it would lead to such a wall of bad feeling if they tried to negotiate exclusives there, that I can't see that giving them a very dependable market position either.
This isn't to knock all the excellent work Red Hat has been doing, and giving back to the community -- long may it continue -- but it just isn't going to lead to the kind of hard-to-challenge industry domination that makes real money, is it ?
Well, he could be a editor for a German magazine, or whatever...
Very good one, mate!
Hi,
I think it's time for us to realise that the world is changing, spelling and grammar will become less and less important because email takes a more important place in out lives. Over a few years people will put their old letters in musea so their kids can see how they communicated in the old days. This will be in favor of all geeks all around the planet because no longer we will be judged on our spelling/grammar but rather on your technical view and skills (Hurray)!
P.S. The author is from Europe so please forgive me my spelling...
Internet Explorer is an intergral part of the OS on top of the Windows API, therefore Netscape is an intergral part of the OS on top of the Linux API.
:-P
Ok, so I never took logic 101.
As has been stated several times on /. over the past week or so, Metrowerks is currently testing CodeWarrior against other distributions. Once they have good understanings of the potential problems and pitfalls their code can have on those distributions they will begin to offer customer assistance for those distributions. These things take time.
Metrowerks knows Red Hat is not Linux.
Now please shut the fuck up.
I feel kind of embarrassed now because I didn't notice the errors in spelling and grammar when I first read your outstanding rebuttal. Unfortunately, English is my first and only language so this makes me feel like an idiot!
I do have one suggestion. Next time write your response in German and then translate it to English using Babelfish. I'm quite sure that this will work just fine.:-)
My personal favorite is the usage of affect vs. effect. I've encountered it wrong (by my understanding) so many times that I'm beginning to doubt whether or not I use it correctly.
If this place was like most places I've seen, that SuSE box was the only one in the entire store, while the store had 10 or more packages of RedHat in stock. Face it, SuSE simply is not very popular in the US.
Nice UNIX bashing, Jack. Does anyone else think this idiot has not used Linux and its accompanying programs EVER? ....'' Ok, if I wasn't convinced before, I understand now: this guy got the anti-Linux PR job at MS.
``Unix is a mess.'' No shit sherlock! All the separation of the real Unixes lead to POSIX, which helped Linux and GNU integrate and reduce duplicated efforts that resulted from forking of original UNIX. This guy is living in the past. He also must read a lot of ZDnet and Microsoft propaganda.
``internal inconsistancy'' of different distributions. Hello! The differences are EXTERNAL -- dpkg, rpm, WMs -- Caldera and SuSE don't ship incompatible versions of the same programs. If anything, I would say that Debian patches some programs and gives them back to help out everyone.
``""''. Why the quotes around technical words? A little afraid to actually use certain words, because someone might ask you what it means?
``It will need to do what Microsoft
One other --clue indicator was the fear that Linux code could be used by MS.
Ok, last thing, which I might have said something about before. How the hell did Linus trim down the command set in this ``new improved unix?'' I thought he was a kernel guy (so only the first half of the sentence is right).
And he has definately NEVER used dpkg+apt.
Say, anyone notice if the MS PR job was taken yet?
``Not enough money to make money with tech support.'' Excuse me, I lied. He isn't knowledgable about either linux OR business. I was suprised to see andover publish this article.
``Sun+IBM didn't help Netscape become an OS.'' ROTFL@! Yeah, now I'm really convinced that they aren't charitable!
Jack uses the word ``free'' as in no-money-charged, and ``open'' as in public-domain. Sigh. Wonder where he got those meanings from words. Obviously not by knowing much about Linux and its community.
He hasn't mentioned the letter X or anything having to do with it. Yet I'd still take CLI over Windows.
BTW, sorry, I never read the original rebuttal. Hope this didn't say me-too too much but I just felt like saying it the way I wanted to. I feel sorry for his family. I hope everyone in his family reads the ``controversy'' at slashdot and tells him to give up writing these kinds of articles.
> If Linux were sold by Microsoft, would you be using it?
BZzzazzzzzppptt! (Sound of tape being rewound.) Did you say sold by MS? They CAN'T sell it. Now that this is clear, I will answer hypothetically. Now the question is incorrect. If MS had anything to do with what we know now as Linux, there would be no ``it'' to buy. There would be MS-Linux and Linux. Kind of like a really big exaggeration of the differences between different distributions. But totally different. If MS could somehow sell Linux, made their changes GPLd, and it was superior to any existing distribution, who wouldn't use it? People don't care how crazy RMS is, or how ESR is a freak, they still use programs by these people. It would be suprising to see how many anti-MS (for reasons of principle, not just having a crappy OS) people would trade their dislikes for a superior product. Now there are a lot of people who just don't like MS's products, who would have an even easier time using MS's linux (of course, only if it was better than deb^?^?^?the best existing distribution).
``Don't yell at us...''
You ONLY published the article. What do you think you are, andovernews? Some kind of slashdot-wannabee.. eh?
To be a bit cynical, I was actually very pleased to read the original at Andover News. Articles like these will probably help keep the price of RHAT down enough for us (foreigners) unfortunate enough not to get in on the IPO. After all the fuzz about this IPO, plus everybody waiting to finally get to invest in a Linux company, the price of the stock is sure to be crazy by the time we are allowed to participate. I therefore encourage more articles like this.
Tharald
Hey, can you add in the proper use of insure vs ensure? I've always wondered, like the guy who talked about affect/effect...
The name Frank de Lange sounds to me very Dutch or Belgian, and here in Holland, English is not the native language.
As far as I can see, his opinions are quite well readable.
The author was of the opinion that RedHat would not be a good investment and found somebody willing to pay for an article about that. So far, so good, so reasonable.
But posting his personal opinion would have taken just a few lines, which is not enough to make money on.
So he filled the rest of the artcile with crap that he vaguely remembered people having said, and quite a bit of his own invention. Since he did not get almost any hard fact right, it is reasonable to assume that he did not bother to do any serious research.
This is cheap money earned for shoddy work. The problem is that his publisher will see that he elicits a lot of response, so will be encouraged to deliver similar pieces.
So a calm response to the publisher telling them that you will stop reading their stuff if they continue to put in non-researched cheap stuff hacked together without information dressed-up as something serious.
Tell them that regardless of whether they post positive or negative articles about anything, you expect them to only accept articles where at least an attempt at getting acquainted with the relevant facts is discernible.
The article was an insolence to all readers, not because of the conclusions it came to, but because they were pulled out of the author's ass.
It would probably be very well possible to construe a solid argument against investing in RedHat with the expectation to profit. Unfortunately, the author did not even try to do this.
As I read these comments about grammatical errors and how they ruin the article, I can only hang my head in disgust.
- ----------------
Perhaps less time should be spent on perfecting spelling/grammar, and more time should be spent on the thoughts contained within any work of literature, especially if that work of literature is not being published in a book/newspaper, but rather in an electronic forum.
-----------------------------------------------
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." - Salvor Hardin
ensure = make certain of
insure = provide aid in case of loss
His email hosting site vermontel.com is using apache with freebsd! The Newsedge is using iis4/nt, 2 out of 3 is not bad.
"Only hold Red Hat as long as open source is fashionable. Those who go long on it will be burnt. Open source stocks are hot concept - as in hot potato. Hold it and sell it to the day traders when they see the article in Forbes."
Is there any evidence supporting this statement? Is RedHat a hot IPO because of their prior work or merely because open source is fashionable? Would open source be fashionable if it did not produce the goods at the right price?
A correction to your math 64 (original arguement) - 64 (no basis in fact) = 0
Your 0 + 128 (the state of the open source movement) = 128 which has no connection to your original 64
If a company or individual publishes blatantly false financial information about a company when they have filed for an IPO, is it fraud ?
In all this excitement I thought someone ought to point out that Red Hat has been really good about sending several folks to our installfests in the Washington DC area a couple of times a year. Imagine. A company helps the promoters of the installfest get their distribution onto the server and then spends the day helping everyone else download it onto their systems. Including some of the more difficult "off-the-wall" systems. For FREE! Not once have they pressured me to buy the distro. In fact, I've won it as a "door prize".
Imagine this from "the other" vendor.
That's all this is. You'll note that Robin Miller submitted the article to linuxtoday. It just so happens that he _works_ for Andover. What better way to increase the amount you can charge for advertising than to increase viewership. What better way to increase viewership by encouraging the /. effect.
Leave this one alone, people, or consider yourself duped.
/. account holder who is AC by choice for this post.
well i dont know about everybody else but i learned that an effective argument is always best presented in and intellegent and calm manner. knowing what not to say is often more important than knowing what to say.
since we now how a comment moderation system maybe it is time we need a posted article moderation system too. diatribes like this dont do anyone much of any good regardless of how factual their basis is.
If Unix/Linux is so bad, then why isn't andovernews.com using NT ?
My cat lost its mittens. (Rare: a possessive without an apostrophe).
Your check arrived. (ownership)
One error that was missed was a typo:
It's tough to bet against an operating system that has won the hearts of geeks across the world (damn few of whom actually have the software on their computer).
Should read:
It's tough to write about an operating system that has won the hearts of geeks across the world (when I don't actually have the software on my computer).
Actually Jack had an article on May 12 origianlly titled "AT&T - An American Zairetsu?" where he said (first line):
"If you've never heard the word before, learn it."
Uhh, Jack, that might be 'Keiretsu' or maybe 'Zaibatsu'. I guess it isn't a big deal, unless you are Japanese and see someone trying to teach everyone the wrong word. This article isn't a big deal either, unless of course you actually have Linux/Unix/BSD installed and you see...
That all being said, I actually get Andover in the mail, and Jack is generally a pretty good 'lets get some feathers ruffled' writer. I guess the budget doesn't allow for a ton of proofing/verification...
All opinions expressed are also the opionions of IBM, Microsoft, AT&T, the US gov't, and Maxwell Smart.
It's not the problem that he is arguing against the profitability of RedHat. Most of us don't even care about that. The problem is that he's done it in such an unprofessional way. This article shows no signs of research at all and as such does not qualify as a valid technical piece or as an investment piece. In addition, he states that RedHat lost millions of dollars last year - a gross piece of fiction. As for his "well researched historical perspectives and in-depth investigative notes on the tech industry." I can only marvel for he has demonstrated no knowledge of the history of the high tech industry especially that of the Unix world. ." I am sure there will no mention of the gross untrue statements he made in his column.
Will he get flamed? Yes, I'm sure. And what will his defense be? "Those Linux people are so rude . .
That original articel was sucha piece of crap I don't know how to begin. I thought these kinda articles disappeared in late 1998. If this guy is getting money writing sucha obvious flamebait it makes you wonder how hard it can to be a journalist nowadays. Apparently you can write any piece of crap and get away with it. This is a sad day for serious journalists. I'm sure this guy will get his mailbox slashdotted into the ground.
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
It's ok. You wrote a very good rebuttal. You merely made the mistake of associating with (and defending) a bunch of perfectionists ;). Think of the complaining as a sign of personal respect since you have said something worthy of nitpicking.
Oh, and I'm sorry to say that my Dutch is quite horrible but that's US public education for you (sigh).
Dude, answering you is like responding to a guy who believes Art Bell's "black helicopter" conspiracy theories so strongly that every time he hears whirring blades over his head he runs for cover.
I even used to read (and enjoy) Three Point's Linux News, the online publication Dave ran before he started Linux Today. In fact, I reviewed Three Point's favorably in TechSightings last September, which is how I originally started corresponding with him.
As far as Jack Bryar, his opinions are his own. I don't always agree with him (or with other Andover columnists, either). The great thing about writing for Andover is that the people who run it give all columnists complete editorial freedom, including the freedom to screw up now and then.
Perhaps you'd like Andover better if its owners forced all their writers to spout a Microsoft-style corporate party line?
Kurt Gray and I are both writing here as ourselves, not as corporate flacks. Kurt is a programmer. I'm a writer. We live and work 400 miles apart. We both use Linux. We both read and like Slashdot. Other than that, we hardly have anything in common -- except respect for our bosses at Andover, who let columnists write what they want, right or wrong, without censoring their words, even when they're a little, um, embarassing.
Since we're nitpicking the original article, I felt I should nitpick the rebuttal as well. FWIW, "$130.000 dollars" is incorrect. "130.000 dollars" or "$130.000" would be correct.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
DEFINITELY!! DEFINITELY!!! DEFINITELY!!!
Aaaargh....
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
First off, I agree with much of what you say.
Secondly, I wasn't going to say anything until I saw you are the former editor-in-chief of Unix Info, BUT this essay shares a great deal with other essays posted on Slashdot: no proofreading.
Worse, this essay wasn't just for Slashdot's consumption--you emailed it out as a rebuttal to a columnist.
And this isn't just idle "you mean 'lose' not 'loose'" complaints. There are many areas where I had to back up and re-read (and re-re-read) sentences until I understood how you meant to put them. Examples:
The line about Netscape creating a browser "with and API". I finally realized you meant "with an API".
"I do not remember Microsoft being a proponent for open source software, not them being a beneficiary." I must have read this 4 times before I realized that you meant "...nor them being a...".
Yes, I realize that the meaning is of utmost importance, but spelling and grammar are the road on which your message travels and potholes can slow or stop your progress.
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
Are you trying to say "it doesn't matter how he got there, he just got there"?
Because that translates pretty easily to "the ends justify the means".
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
1) The author is supposedly the former editor of a magazine. He surely should know how important basic spelling and grammar are.
2) By posting on Slashot and LinuxToday (as well as emailing the original author), this person is representing (infinitesimally, perhaps) the Linux community and therefore me as well. I am not an "illiterate hacker" and I don't want to be made to look like one through guilt by association.
3) Accuracy in spelling and grammar in written language is directly comparable to accuracy of syntax and semantics in a programming environment. Typos, especially those that are correctly spelled wrong words, are bugs that can cause all kinds of problems. Sure, many errors can be fixed with context. But a) that's inefficient not to mention annoying and b) what about those that aren't?
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
Which is why I would have someone proofread.
I'm not saying Frank is an idiot because he can't spell and he got a lot of grammar wrong. I'm saying his rebuttal would be more effective if it had been written correctly.
Compare and contrast:
"if he would of profered it might of ben easyer to read and uderstand"
"If he would have proofread it might have been easier to read and understand"
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
"You can use the wrong methods, and STILL arrive at the right conclusion."
No, you can STATE at a TRUE conclusion. You cannot ARRIVE anywhere valid.
"The fact that the origional writer's arguments are bogus, does not mean that his conclusion is therefore false."
No, just invalid.
If you then want to take his (invalid) conclusion and say, "No, I think he's right" you'll have to provide something to back it up. Which you did not.
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
otherwise agreed, though I'm not sure that it was actually illegal for AT&T to sell Sys[i]r[j].
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
It's possible (IMHO) that the Open Source business model WILL take off, and Red Hat will be wildly profitable. If that happens, it won't be the Open Source Fad that drives people to invest in Red Hat...it'll just be sound business practice. Who knows? ...not me, that's for sure.
Werd.
It's a shame they allow people to be journalists who make "mistakes" like multiplying a company's losses by $1,000,000 (oops! sorry!) under the guise of reporting. I wish my employer made that mistake with my salary. :-)
I hope someone at that site reads Slashdot... because I'm sure the author of that article will be mercilessly picked apart.
So here's a question: Can we, the Linux community, respond to this guy without sounding like zealots? Because that's what he's trying to tempt us to do. The angrier we sound to him, the more he'll prove one of his points (that Linux is best suited for enthusiasts), and the more our comments will be disregarded.
Werd.
Yes, Robin Miller (who sent the article
to LinuxToday) is also a columnist for
AndoverNews but he didn't write this column.
Robin does not have an @andovernews email
address -- his @home address is his only actual
email address (that I know of).
A tactic to boost readership??? I'm sure Robin
was hoping to draw some attention/discussion
to Jack's Linux rantings but unfortunately he
picked the wrong column to draw attention to!
The Slashdot effect is one thing, but the
angry Slashdot effect is not something to be
desired.
Maybe we need a disclaimer that our columnist's
opinions are not the opinions of everyone at
Andover.Net?
Believe me, we're big on Linux, sour on NT.
BTW: The DB backend of andovernews runs on
Windows NT -- and we hate it!
Full Dislosure: I work for AndoverNews as a Sys
Admin, I don't know Jack personally, but as far
as columnists go, I'm glad we have him.
In defense of Jack Bryar, his usual columns are
very well written and well researched historical
perspectives and in-depth investigative notes
on the tech industry.
This week's column I can't agree with.
I just had to get this word in before the
usual zealots sound off the usual accusations
that any writer who questions the profitability
of a Linux company is being paid by Microsoft
to make such remarks. Please.
He really doesn't understand what is going on all around the network. I feel sorry for him. It's his job to write columns about this stuff, yet he doesn't understand the subject material.
I wonder how many shares in M$ he owns, or how many shares in competing *nixes?
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
BTW, Knarf... The only vendor who has actually made real money on Unix is SCO. The rest of the vendors you find in the data centers made money on hardware running Unix. Sun, Digital, SGI, HP, etc.
As far as the complaints regarding the articles technical merits. I haven't seen anybody answer his question...
If Linux were sold by Microsoft, would you be using it?
From a financial analyst position, RedHat doesn't look like a very good stock. But then the same is also true of Amazon, Yahoo, Netscape and many of the other internet tech stocks that flew high on hype for a while.
That's really his whole point.
"It's tough to bet against an operating system that has won the hearts of geeks across the world (damn few of whom actually have the software on their computer)."
What was that? I dont have any statistics handy, but I think that more than a "damn few" people are running Red Hat.
The author's tone and phrasing are meant to inspire anger and trigger immature responses. We must treat this the same as a Jesse Berst article, and simply shrug.
It would'nt hurt to drop him a note, though.
Four-digit slashdot ID. Recognize.
OK, this is going to sound so nit-picky, but I think it's an important point. This is a good rebuttal, and things like this tend to pick up coverage by the media who just loves a good war, be it physical, or ideological. Due to this high visibility, and the fact that documents like this tend to be taken as a representation of the entire Linux community, we should attempt to sound as professional as possible. I am of course getting all riled up about the use of the word 'to' instead of 'too.' Small potatoes, sure, but the last thing we (the Linux community) needs is more FUD about how we're all illiterate teenage "hackers" or whatnot.
I'm from Europe as well. English is not my native tongue, but I've learned the language pretty well. I pride myself on speaking properly, both in English and my native language, Icelandic.
My knowledge of English comes from many sources (television, books, the web, irc, etc.) and I may have picked up some errors along the way. If I were mixing "its" and "it's", or "to" and "too", I'd prefer it if someone told me about it. Correcting someone's grammar and spelling usually isn't intended as an attack on them. It's not hate for the person, it's love for the language.
I don't think I'll ever understand people who, when corrected, respond with "so?", "I don't care", or "what business of yours is it how I speak?". Don't these people want to better themselves? Are they proud to be... (I don't want to say "stupid", but it's something like that)?
--
Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
Hey Frank - don't sweat it; most Americans neither speak nor write "Oxford" English, either. 8-)
It's an excellent rebuttal, and I note with interest that the website has put up a comment box pointing at slashdot, as well as a footnote:
Hey, don't yell at us! Yell at Jack Bryar. Reach him at Vermontel.com or harass him at work.
- alec (in the UK, lately resident of Oxford).
perl -nle 'setpwent;crypt($_,$c)eq$c&&print"$u=$_"while($u,
I doubt whether he'll publish an apology, but at least his mail seems to have been screwed. I just tried to mail a comment on the technical innacuracies in his article, but the mailservers refused it ...
Chris Wareham
Too bad that the author did not read "A Quarter Century of Unix" by Peter Salus, or watched my RealVideo show The Many Falvors of Unix to find out about the "Unix Wars" and why Microsoft had the chance to make Windows into the dominant OS.
I had to.
Would you care to comment on the viability of Microsoft stock, king tech stock of them all, yes the one that splits every cursed full moon?
I realize that it's almost balanced out though by Amazon, the worlds most well publicised "scam" in the world. All I ever hear about em is how "They lose money on every book" and "didn't make a dime last year" and yet the stock climbs higher and higher.
Perhaps it has occured to some people that a lasting and entrenched position in the market assured by long time standing in that market is slightly valuable, even if current profits are less than optimal.
Sigh.
Check my Go-related blog for beginners: DGD
Dear /. ers, I wrote the following note to Metrowerks regarding CodeWarrior for Redhat Linux.
Hope more of you write to them and get them to get over this stupid notion that Redhat is Linux.
@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#!@@#^@@^
Hello,
I'm a GNU/Linux Debian user and we recently replaced all our RedHat based servers with debian. I'm real worried about the fact that you wish to market your product (one that I respect a lot), only for a certain Linux Distribution. Most of us do not use Redhat, redhat is usually used by people starting out with Linux, I dont think your product would be used by this so called "linux newbies", I would appericate it if you could rename the product for Linux. Instead of RedHat Linux. Linux is not owned by Redhat, redhat is a distribution, just like Caldera, Debian GNU/Linux, SUSE, Stampede GNU/Linux and a number of others. If the requrements are a glibc 2.1 based system, say so instead of stating that this is just for RedHat. My Debian system was a glibc2.1 based system a lot time before redhat came out with RH6.0.
Also, it would alinate more than 70% of the Linux community if you just shipped this product as RPMs. My suggestion is to market them similar to how Netscape markets it's products for Linux. Put them out in tar balls, let the User install it. Put various compiled versions of your software on your commerical CD. and so on..
To sum up, Redhat is not Linux. Your release of CodeWarrior for Linux is not appericated in the Linux community with your current stipulation, this would lead to a massive anti-metrowerks/codewarrior champagn (which has already started, check major linux online magazines and news sites, Like LinuxToday, Linux.com and Slashdot), Our community is as devoted and as powerful the Mac Community, and if we see someone threatning the fabrics of what holds our community, we would strike back. Possibly boycotting all your products.
Thank you.
M. Ishan
Hacker.
--
i have to agree with the quality of investment comment - red hat will have to augment their business with other things in order to make money. i think they could be somewhat successful with tech support (they do that already), and more so with a consulting group. either way, i don't think selling a $50 distro will do it. but i do wish them luck.
Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
i hadn't read that, my apologies.
Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
Indeed!
Most "journalists" seem to miss the central theme about Linux: there is no splintering to be done - Linux is so splintered already who would notice the difference?
I truly believe that 90% of all industry journalists out there that write about Linux, FreeBSD, OpenSource, et al have no concept of what these technologies are about, where they came from, and what was the reason why they occured in the first place.
But that's OK. I fear the day that any of the free OSes make the transition to mainstream. Things are just peachy the way they are.
r@m
Sounds like everything I readed on books about UNIX and his history is absolutely wrong!
I will check Jack's column more often.
Now I will uninstall my Linux API and I will install my NETSCAPE OS 4.6.
And I'll install a command set like Norton Commander to run in top of my Mozilla GUI in order to use it's amazing SUN emulation system...
Yes!!!
I'm ready to have my own opinion column at the andover!
Doesn't Robin Miller, the guy who submitted the article to LinuxToday work for Andover? This wouldn't be just a tactic to increase readership numbers would it?
/. effect. Sounds good to me!!
Hmmmm.... How can we increase this months readhership? I know, write a stupid FUD article about Linux and then post it from an @home account to the Linux community. Then just sit back and wait for the
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
I don't care if you use Linux or not, if Andover has a giant love in with Microsoft, or what characteristics make up your persona. What I'm questioning (and has yet to be answered) is the/your motive in posting the article to the Linux community. I simply don't believe that it was to inform the Linux community of a graven stupidity attack that seized an editor of that publication. Simply stating "Hey, I'm cool, I code and use Linux" doesn't defend my accusation. Let me state it simply: Why did you post the article to Linuxtoday?
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
Big Fricken' whoop. See the "Defense of" thread above and tell me this isn't just a ploy to tame the /. effect for the purposes of viewership.
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
Dudette,
I hate those helicopters, they ruin my network connection!
Have fun Robin, email Kurt and tell him not to get so worked up -it's just a bit of fun to waste time and make money.
Alex
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
to that article how?
Mrow?
Windows is the Acme of computing -- in the Wile E. Coyote sense.
From what I remember, RH sold around 3-400,000 units last year. These are good, but not stellar numbers. Their sales growth over the past 3 years has been very stellar (don't know off the top). But I know it is pretty good, double digit growth at least... While RH may not be a strong stock out of the gate, I think over the next 5 years it will be damn good. Even if open source is just a fad (which a simple analysis of the total technology used on the internet will show that it isn't), but if we assume it is, we can still conclude that from RH's growth compared to the total growth of Linux systems we will find that in the next 5 yrs the stock will grow significantly.
My personal feeling on the long-term linux outlook is not good profit wise. Imagine over the next 5 years every computer desktop has Linux of some version, and RH's is a significant fraction. At that point, every one of those desktops could be upgraded directly over the internet from free servers. In fact, this is the easiest way to upgrade (or burn free cds). Even if most people don't upgrade this way, a downward trend for linux will be in the making. But in 5 years, I suspect an entirely new OS will emerge based on the incredible advances in technology that will inevitably occur within the next 5 years. If the new tech is open source, then RH can benefit.
But Linux itself will have a limited life. Even Linus has said that the 2.2.x tree pretty much has all the features a kernel could have (give or take a few). His view is that Linux will progress significantly in the userland stuff (not kernel stuff). M$ also knows that W2000 and Office 2000 will pretty much max out the potential utility of PC and Office software (Which is why BG bought a little boy genius to design M$ "AGENT" (my name) a face and voice recognition interface.
Linux is a good investment in the short-term, and M$ is way to rich to die. (I use Debian/GNU Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD so don't call me a M$ advocate; I'm just realistic). Finally, the wrong-headed opinion writer was right about one thing: Linux is not the object of total loyalty. However, Open Source IS and WILL BE. I remember reading the article about M$'s next gen kiddie and his work describing a usenet that M$ killed b/c M$ employees were trying to convince the child to license his work under the GPL. THE SAGA CONTINUES...
Andover News said, "Hey, don't yell at us! Yell at Jack Bryar." So why shouldn't we send Mr. Bryar a note?
Send your thoughtful yet polite comments to:
bryar@vermontel.com or
jack.bryar@newsedge.com
I think some one should send him knarf's response.
I don't know of any Linux users who reboot into Windows to use the Windows GUI. They /do/ reboot into Windows to use windows applications, and nowhere in his article did he mention the lack of solid GUI applications as a weakness of Linux. Personally, I think that's the worst problem Linux has.
For many years, it was actually illegal for AT&T to attempt to sell Linux at a profit. That might have something to do with their failure to do so. Even if we skip forward a few years to where AT&T did in fact make the effort, you have to remember that AT&T has always been a big, clumsy bureaucratic company. You can't expect them to be an entrepenurial powerhouse just because they're big; the reverse is most often the case.
I've moved C programs between SunOS, Linux and SGI Irix without incident. If you stay within a fairly simple set of parameters - quite easy in this web-based world - even C programs are very easy to port.
I think the idea that people are going to stop developing for Linux because Red Hat exists is pretty specious. People develop for Linux to solve their own problems, to scratch their own itches, and to help others scratch theirs. I don't see that vanishing from the Linux world any time soon.
D
----
Firstly, I hope knarf's response really was sent off to Jack. It does a good job of pointing out the errors. I also hope it was sent off to the editor at andover news, so that they know what kind of response the article has churned up.
I also want to make a call to all those in the Linux community: Articles like this are posted all too frequently. Journalists don't seem to care about the crap they're spreading. Please take it upon yourself to reply to the writers of these articles, explain to them what they've said that is incorrect. Also, write their editors! If that web site gets thousands of emails that point out the errors, I'm fairly certain that they'd pay attention.
Well, it looks OK right now, but I don't think Jack Bryar has had a chance to respond, yet. It would be far more effective if he would aknowledge the factual errors in his column, or if he would publish a response to Franks' article. Now it just looks like Andover is leaving him hanging.
Misinformation and FUD - intentional or not - shouldn't be countered with flames; reasoned argument works much better, and maybe, just maybe, it might convince Jack and others like him. One at a time.
--
-- Buddy
AT&T didn't try to make profits selling Unix ( back in the 70's ) because they couldn't. Don't know the complete case, but It was illegal for them trying to do that. Something to do with their own Antimonopolic-case.
Availability of Java sources is not like Sun would like everyone to believe. If you happens to live in a country where IP legislation is weak or there's evidence that's difficult or next to impossible to sue you using them, they WON'T allow you to download the source. That was my case, I'm afraid. Of course, you can manage to get them anyway ( that's the net way, isn't it? ), but obviously, illegally.
Anyway, the source of the non-native classes of Java ( that part IS distributed ), are so poorly engineered ( look the source! ), so low quality IMNSHO that, who cares?
OK people I'm reading alot of postings and stories here where people cannot distinguish between "lose" and "loose". Looz versus Loos
A screw that is not done tightly is loose, if I go to the casino, it is likely that I will lose some money. Please adjust your proofreading skills accordingly.
Linux is not RedHat.
A well thought response, like the one above, is an effective means of countering a poor piece of journalism.
Unfortunately, its author's credibility becomes strained when it contains spelling and grammar errors.
Please, I must urge those who elect to take a high profile stand in any cause to ask somebody to review your writing for errors. A well crafted, well thought response will always be better received than just a well thought response.
You might even use a computerized grammar/spell checker.
By comparison, Amazon.com, the poster child for the high-flying net.stock, has lost money every year since its inception. In 1999, according to their most recent 10-K, they had net sales of about $610M and a net loss of about $125M. Every year before that, their losses-to-sales ratio has been even higher.
Asides: (1) You can look up this kind of data at www.freedgar.com; they get their information from the electronic filings at the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the government agency that regulates the stock market. (2) Since the Bryar column now has a link to Slashdot, and since people are claiming that the author's mail server is slashdotted, I'll just respond here. (3) High-tech stocks in general seem too overvalued for my taste, so I'm not planning to buy any Red Hat stock.
send all spam to theotherwhitemeat@ropine.com
To the idiot moderator who marked this offtopic:
READ the original article before you moderate. If you had done this, you would have noticed that Jack Bryar misquoted this quote and misattributed it to Oliver Wendall Holmes.
Therefore this posting is not offtopic, as it is a response to the original article being discussed.
It was RALPH WALDO EMERSON who said:
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of LITTLE minds, adored by little statesmen, philosophers and divines.
With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do..."
I don't know who this guy is? Nor do I care. He obviously knows nothing about Linux or RedHat or anything related to computer OS's. He is most likely some old fart stuck in his ways that is trying desperatly to keep hold of his old-fashioned way of doing business. There are a lot of people that don't want a company like RedHat to succeed because that means that the way they have been doing business for the last 20 years is not the way anymore, for software companies. People don't want change. Businesses don't want to have to change the way they do business. You have seen it in the past when companies don't change with the times, they die. And the reporters that report on them only adapt with the new way of doing things or they find themselves standing all by themselves wondering, "What happened, yesterday I was writing articles about how great Microsoft is. Now I am writing my own obituary."
Well I may be going off the deep end but what the hell it's Thursday.
LoRider
My own take:
1. a) First, AT&T opened UNIX because if they tried to make money off of it, the feds would have raised anti-trust issues. b) I believe SCO has been profitable. Their entire business is UNIX. c) A lot of hardware companies have made money off of UNIX because UNIX has helped them move lots of boxes.
2. Hard to comment, the guy knows so little about OS architecture that his thoughts have melted into mush. I really don't want to try to educate him. Clearly, he is confusing APIs with userinterfaces, that much is easy to say.
3. VA Linux, loosing $130mill, can we substitute some facts here? Beyond that, RedHat is very deliberate about contributing back to the core. I am not sure what he means by "breaking UNIX" but RedHat is doing a lot more than other commercial distributors to avoid forking of the collective codebase.
4. Redhat isn't like AOL or Microsoft. They may be benifitting from volunteerism, but they also give back free stuff that other people, volunteers or not, can use without paying RedHat a dime, ever. Microsoft & AOL take volunteer effort and sell it back to the volunteers and the rest of their customers. RedHat is clearly engendering some ill will, but there is less justification for it than that which led to lawsuits against AOL.
5. Oracle & IBM, at least, make a lot of their money off of services & support. Sun makes it off of hardware. Service, support & hardware is nothing like software. The incremental cost of software is vanishingly small, which means the price can be set just about anywhere, including free. These other things have large incremental costs. Know what else, none of these companies make much, if any, money off of selling OS licenses. Linux makes little or no difference to their bottom line, while creating the opportunity to sell more of the things that do.
I'm not more English than you (I'm French and i can't speak a word of Dutch) but i can say you didn't speak oxford English...or Oxford English have new words like ";^]"
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
If I had a nickel for everytime I've heard the arguments "Linux might splinter" and "Linux has no roadmap", my pants would fall off because of all the change in my pockets. These cliches are so tired and worthless, I'm not even going to bother arguing about them. Now I'm going to create my own personal version of Linux and doom you all to hideous consequences. All Linux users will bow before me! Muhahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
(Warning: The Surgeon General has determined that this message contains sarcasm.)
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
Hi Jack,
I think that although your article was pretty unthoughfull you did something great.
You or your company linked to the slashdot postings in a disclaimer above the article and thereby made a little history. I never saw a mainstream media outlet connecting so fast with it's own critics. There could be a future where we didn't have to post on Slashdot to give you public feedback. Maybe one day an open discussion forum would exist under every (digital) article.
You brought that day a little closer, thanks allot.
Sytse Sijbrandij
...I got a nice email from an editor over at Andover. Go back to the site and see the semi-disclaimer that is now posted at the top of the article. A link to this thread is also there. Not too shabby.
:)"
/. readers over there and they are around 80% *nix.
I also got an e-mail for an editor over there that expressed some of the sentiment of people over there. Here's a snippet:
"When you offer columnists total editorial freedom, sometimes they say things with which you don't agree. I happen to like Jack a lot. I wouldn't want to *be* him right now, but he's a big grown-up writer and long-time industry consultant who can take his lumps the same as you and I take ours.
That kinda makes sense. Be interesting to see of old Jack-o has anything to say for himself, tho.
Apparently there a few
Sure, there have been differences among us since we learned we were all using different flavors of Linux.
And sure, we should expect -- and acknowledge, perhaps even welcome -- the dissenters of one distribution (in this case RedHat) when the words appear in an oft-reputable form (in this case, LinuxToday).
But our little wars are PRECISELY what Bill Gates has been waiting for. Given the opportunity to borrow a tactic from our current U.S. president (that is, focus on the diversion and make an example out of it), Gates will take and run with that opportunity.
Perhaps we can criticize RedHat for their decision to go public. Personally, I was not against RH for doing this, and I still am not.
I just wish journalists could be more responsible.
"He who questions training trains himself at asking questions." - The Sphinx, Mystery Men (1999)
Okay, so I tend to look on the bright side.
--
And this is different from the rest of the $500M 'Our buisness idea is to sell get-them-yourself tuna sandwiches, but over the I-n-t-e-r-n-e-t' tech stocks on Nasdaq in what way?
Tech stocks have long since gone from serious investment to pyramid scheme anyway, and no serious investor would recommend any tech stocks. In the even of a crash, there isnt any solidity in the companies, most is just overhyped expectations of a rosy future, 'value' that will just disappear without any assets to sell off. They'll even lose most of their human capital since being paid in stock options useful for wallpaper isnt what keeps people around.
Compared to most, Redhat would actually be a good choice. They dont make a huge loss, they have employees who may be motivated by other than stock options, they're fairly knowledgable about their market and they've thought through the buisness model.
But either way, if you're into tech stocks you're into gambling and pyramid schemes. And in that context, Redhat's a good choice.
Hey folks,
I'm the original author of the grammatical riddle which got posted to /.
It's the content, not the container which counts in this case. As some readers have noticed, the English language is not my native tongue. I'm from the Netherlands, so Dutch is my native tongue. I also speak German and a bit of French, as well as a few lines of Russian. Now I know I make mistakes, and I know my spelling checker does not catch them, but I can live with that. If this were a book or a serious dissertation, I'd have someone else read it before publication. Since it is `just' a email to a misguided soul, getting the last remaining nits out of it was not my most important goal.
Oh and by the way, I did send this message yo Jack. It is only afterwards that I sent it to /., one of my stated reasons for that being that I'd let some others have a go at finding fault in my reasoning. Since most of you only found some spelling and grammatical problems, I think I passed my own test :-)
And I was a journalist, but I wrote in the Dutch language. How's your Dutch today, folks? Not so good? Well, then maybe you'll excuse me for not speaking Oxford English by the book... A lot of native English speakers who post to these fora (since forum is a latin word, the plural should be fora, right?) mistreat their own language in a much worse way than I do, so there...
Cheers//Frank
[Oh, and there may be errors in this piece as well. Sorry 'bout that... ;^]
--frank[at]unternet.org
that had to hurt... is hard when you are kicked with the shoe of knowledge.. hehehe
Seeing as you're the sysadmin, and out of curiosity, and to respond to Jack's 'damn few' comment, would it be possible to get a breakdown of what OSes have read the article at andover?
ttyl
srw
You know, one thing the inaccuracies in the column demonstrate is how hard it is for people to grasp what Linux is and what OSS is about. They read some things, or hear some things, and they try to fit it into their model of the world. It doesn't fit, so they think it's crazy, or it's a guaranteed money loser, or whatever. But they don't grasp it. Jack's a good example of this.
It's easy to forget that Linux and OSS just don't fit into most people's view of how things work.
Your correct in citing his technical errors, but I think he's fairly spot on in determining the quality of an investment in Red Hat.
Only hold Red Hat as long as open source is fashionable. Those who go long on it will be burnt. Open source stocks are hot concept - as in hot potato. Hold it and sell it to the day traders when they see the article in Forbes.
If it was just the MS name, probably not. As another poster noted, under the GPL you can't "sell" Linux, except for duplication and manual costs.
We pay several thousand dollars a year to MS for what I feel is poor support for NT. Just to keep NT up to date with the latest revs, requires in our environment a few hundred dollars a year, in just patches.
In terms of the quality and knowledge of the personel providing support at MS, many times is most unimpressive, considering the per incident cost of NT support.
Windows of any flavor is expensive to support, and even more so when one counts the MCP or MCSE training costs.
We deploy several solutions. Windows has its problems, Macs have theirs, Linux has its problems. One has to look at the deployment of a specific OS for a specific task. Just because the solution has an MS tag on it, doesn't make it any better for the intended deployement.
Dave
You can't - the numbers aren't in.
I've contacted my broker, and I'll be doing the fundimentals on RedHat when they are available. It may be a great investment. Or maybe not. The information just isn't there yet.
I agree that tech stocks look over-valued at this point. And quite a few are pure hype. But RedHat has a good product, good developement, and good exposure. So unless the price is too high or the problems exposed when the stock goes public (there are always problems) are severe, this might be a good one.
Fear my wrath, please, fear my wrath?
Homer
We apologize for the inconvenience.
and where does he get the idea that most proponents of linux "don't even have the operating system installed on their desktops"?
Ok Ok.....
I guess it must be fairly obvious that what y'all read was a badly muffed attempt at a hose job. If you've ever read "A Modest Proposal" by Swift you'll know what I'm talking about.
Yeah mixing Linux and Unix together and calling them the equivalent of dog-poopie was intentionally inflammatory. But that's not really smart or professonal, or even grown-up. Nor was an airy dismissal of the whole convoluted history of the various forks of Unix in two incorrect sentences (which were supposed to be funny -- oops).
Same with the Microsoft comment (If anybody thought that was seriuous - heaven help us)
However, the grabbing of the erroneous wire service story that ran the word Million instead of the word thousand when mentioning RedHats losses was just plain stupid on my part. I've written straight articles warning people against doing that sort of thing, and subjecting wire service copy to common sense review, or at last waiting until the second rev of the story shows up before jumping in with both feet.
Do me a favor, call off the dogs (or penguins if you prefer) In any case this wasn't Andover's fault it was mine. Yeah, I was trying to stick a needle in everyone's eye, but I've also got an obligation to the facts.
Jack Bryar
(trying to be outrageous does not excuse not being accurate)
J. V. "Jack" Bryar
I would bet money that we won't see anything close to a correction from Jack regarding this in his column. Or if there is one, it won't be anywhere where mere mortals can find it -- I'm thinking of those errata links we see hiding in tiny print at the bottom of pages.
The damage is done, since what is printed is de facto truth. Big sigh.
DT
--
Free Pittsburgh!
Is this thing on? Hello?
From the bottom of the posting:
/* Former editor in chief, Unix Info magazine
* now full-time developer... mostly Unix, some Windows
* speaking for himself, not his employer
*/