Slashdot Mirror
Feature: After the Red Hat IPO Ball is Over
Nothing Succeeds Like Success
by Jay Roseman and Frederick Berenstein
New York, NY - Five years ago, if you asked a Linux hacker if he thought a Linux company would have a market valuation of $5.6 billion by 1999, he probably would have said, "Yeah, right". His pessimistic outlook would not have been because he didn't think Linux had what it took, because everyone within the community knew of Linux's potential value, but because with Linux making money was not the great motivator - lack of money was.
And so, what five years ago might have seemed like an absurdity - here we are. Wall Street, meet the Linux Community - Linux Community, meet Wall Street.
Bob Young and his team have done something that many in the Linux community thought impossible several years ago. And we're not just talking about Red Hat's IPO. There is much more to this story than an IPO.
When any company goes public at $14 and trades within three days over $90 per share, it isn't just Wall Street that notices - everyone does!
IPOs occur every day, so what's so special about Red Hat? Answer: this is a Linux IPO, and it's the only play of its type in the financial markets. So naturally, all arrows point one way. The Linux phenomenon has just begun, and we can expect it to continue.
We should all thank Red Hat for pioneering Wall Street. There was a time when being a pioneer often meant being scalped. On Wall Street being scalped is not taken literarily, although scalpings of a different sort occur daily. Not so with Red Hat, Wall Streets newest sweetheart. As individuals and institutions clamored to own a piece of the first Linux software company to go public, hackers and computer enthusiasts in San Jose acknowledged Red Hat's meteoric rise with a sense of satisfaction. Wall Street has finally discovered what every nerd has known for the past five years: that Linux not only works - it works better!
The fact that Red Hat has shot out of the box quicker than Seattle Slew has been a boon to the Linux community (especially if you are lucky enough to own it), but the real benefit of Red Hat's success is that the entire investment world is saying, "Wow!" What's good about "wow"? Well, on Wall Street "wow' translates to "Holy Cow!" and we all know that "Holy Cow!" means, "Linux is now the worlds domain".
No longer is Linux destined to be the operating system of the knowledgeable few that appear to have this uncanny ability to decipher the secrets of the universe. Or at least it appears that way to middle Americans who only recently unraveled the secrets of programming their VCR. Whether the community likes it or not, Linux has been catapulted into Middle America, and the rest of us will just have to hold our ears as well-meaning Wall Street types pronounce Linux as "linex" and saunter around their offices smirking if it was they who just discovered this "extraordinary new operating system."
The Linux community may not know it, but Linux is now caught in a turbulence that is pulling it into the stratosphere. Whether or not this is a good thing depends on who you talk to. There are those within the community who feel anything that Linux has to do with Wall Street is a parasitic relationship. But it doesn't have to be that way. If we honor the GPL and don't all turn into pigs, it is possible and even advantageous to engage in a symbiotic relationship.
What we have to do is make sure that Linux companies don't take to the skies while the hackers who set the groundwork are left sitting on the sidelines with binoculars in their hands.
When Wall Street grants its blessing, as it has with Red Hat, the entire world notices. In normal business circles Red Hat's performance is cause for celebratory cocktail parties, but somehow cocktail parties and Linux don't seem to mix. Surprisingly, most hackers we have met seem to look at Red Hat and its success with an internal sense of satisfaction, thinking, "I am part of that even if I don't get any monetary benefit from it."
That is what drew us to Linux. It wasn't the prospect of money. When we walked into the San Jose Convention Center last March, which was the first time we attended a Linux conference, it felt like we were meeting an Underdog team that had just won the high-school championship. Missing were the smirks of "I told you so". What we found instead was a community, in the truest sense of the word.
Besides the excitement of the San Jose celebration, we were mesmerized by the $150,000 IBM Beowulf cluster that trounced the performance of a $5.5 million dollar Cray supercomputer using an "off the shelf" Linux distribution. When the challenge was over, and Linux was the victor, the cheers shook the San Jose Convention Center and we got goose bumps watching. At the time, we weren't quite sure what we were watching, but we were swept up in the enthusiasm and found ourselves cheering along with everyone else. What we did know was that this was the cumulation of thousands of programmers making a difference, and proud of it.
We remember the first time we listened to Bob Young saying how he would speak to venture capitalists and explain to them his idea of packaging an operating system that would challenge UNIX and Microsoft and be free to anyone that wanted to download it off the web. We assure you, the venture capitalists may not have laughed in Bob's presence, but that was only out of pity for a man that they thought had gone sorely astray. Who would have thought at that time that Linux would have such an impact?
Some analysts still aren't convinced about Linux's ability to challenge Microsoft. But Red Hat doesn't have to challenge Microsoft; they just have to continue doing what they're doing. (Microsoft, pay attention here!) The Linux community discovered a long time ago that the challenge is with themselves, not Microsoft. Linux doesn't have to knock Microsoft out of the market. It just has to take a larger position in the market. And it has.
This is Linux's honeymoon period with Wall Street. In time, there will be analysts writing Linux's epitaph in their research reports. Linux will be compared to Microsoft in P/E ratios and every other ratio and multiple out there and the truth is that Linux just won't measure up. But analysts haven't yet realized the importance of the "Synergy Ratio." (i.e. one Linux programmer = 50 Microsoft programmers.) They don't realize that there's a community here unlike any they have ever experienced. Imagine the Chairman of Ford putting his arm around the shoulder of the Chairman of General Motors and saying, "great job!" This just doesn't happen in normal business, but it does happen in the Linux community every day.
Wall Street has learned a lot from Red Hat, and it isn't just that Linux may very well be the best operating system going. They've learned that a group of determined hackers could get the world's attention just by doing the right thing. Wake up, Wall Street. Linux has only just begun!
And to the nay-sayers, well, the Linux Community has made it a habit of forcing nay-sayers to eat their hats. Only this time what's getting eaten is Linux's own Red Hat.
--------------------
IPOs: More Than Meets the Eye
by an anonymous insider
After the dust has settled and Red Hat emerges from their quiet period they should offer a new training course in Durham: "Linux IPO 101 - A case study."
From what I know of Red Hat and the folks calling the shots, the various blunders and snafus related to the affinity offer and E*Trade were just that, blunders and snafus. These folks have been around the community far too long to allow something like this to transpire if they had any control over matters.
I have a feeling there were a lot of late-night calls trying to make sure that deserving people got a fair shot at shares. I'm also sure that no matter how hard they worked, some folks slipped through the cracks, and that is unfortunate. Let's not lose sight of the fact that they were sincerely trying to do the right thing.
Bob Young collaberated on the first few issues of Linux Journal with Phil Hughes (which partially explains the difficulty in scoring back-issues for #1,2 and 3). Then Marc Ewing hooked up with Bob and they hired a couple of guys fresh out of NC State and started working full-time on a Linux distribution before almost anyone else. There were others at the time (WGS was around, Caldera was coming on the scene, and Pat Volkerding was working on Slackware) but these guys were out there on the bleeding edge. They've always released everything under the GPL or a similar license and provided support to a variety of community projects.
When no one else thought enough to have a Linux-centric conference or show these were the people making sure Linux Expo came together. Donnie Barnes started Linux Expo when he was a student at NC State and Red Hat kept it alive when the NCSU LUG couldn't. Erik Troan was a SunSite maintainer on top of his regular work. These are people who are true believers in the community.
Hopefully other companies who go public can learn from what Red Hat has suffered through. I doubt anyone can get it perfect, there are just too many variables involved. But we can always hope.
For better or worse Linux has made it to Wall Street. Here's hoping it's for the better.
--------------------
The Wider Implications
by Robin "roblimo" Miller
I believe we are watching the beginning of a Linux-induced revolution in corporate finance that may be more important than recent Linux-induced changes in the way software is developed and distributed. Why more important? Because this revolution has the potential power to change all business activity, not just businesses directly involved with computers.
Suddenly the phrase "World Domination" takes on a whole new meaning, doesn't it?
Why should I not expect Red Hat shareholders to eventually do the same? (most of whom will end up NOT being Open Source folk once grubby investment firms get a hold of most of the shares)
The GPL doesn't require that Red Hat run an ftp server for free downloads. There's also nothing saying that Red Hat has to make their installation routines GPL, in which case it'd be illegal to copy the CD.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
He said "as much as possible." Red Hat could shut down their FTP server, make their installation routines closed-source, and none of this would violate the GPL. The only thing they can't do is make the Linux kernel proprietary.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
They can make the next version of RPM closed-source, as long as it doesn't use any non-RedHat GPL'd code.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Not if they were trying to encourage people to buy the CDs at the store. The GPL allows them to charge for the cost of media plus distribution, so Red Hat could fulfill their obligations by offering RH CDs (minus an installer and anything else they chose to make non-GPL) for mail-order for $4 or something.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
No it doesn't, it says it must be available for a nominal fee covering the cost of media and distribution. This means that Red Hat could offer the source on a separate $4 CD that you could mail-order from them.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Most likely the latter option. This isn't a one-day fluke either, it's the second straight day that RHAT is down over 10%. It's currently at around $67/share, around 25% below its peak value. So if you short-sold Red Hat two days ago, you made money =)
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Well, 50x is generally considered a high Price/Earnings ratio. Anything above 100x is grossly overvalued. Since Red Hat is actually *losing* money ($130k in the last quarter) it doesn't even have a P/E ratio, since there are no earnings.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Yes, it's based on his name, which is why you are wrong.
If you're an American, Linus is pronounced lie-nus, so Linux should be pronounced Lie-nucks.
If you're a Finn, Linus is pronounced lee-noose, so Linux should be pronounced lee-nooks.
NOBODY should pronounce it linn-ucks. That's just ludicrous.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Red Hat and its shareholders can limit the distribution as well, not just the courts. All Red Hat has to do is put one proprietary app on the CD, and it becomes illegal for you to copy the CD, pass it along to your friends and colleagues, etc. Sure, you can copy the GPL'd contents of the CD and burn them onto another CD, but that'd be more work than most people are willing to do (not to mention the additional work of replacing the proprietary program if it's something important like a package manager or installation program).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Eh. "linn-ucks" is just a natural compression of "lee-nooks" in American. They're close enough that most people won't even notice the difference.
;-)
I suppose that's an explanation, it makes sense to me now. Americans tend to do the same thing with words like football (which should be f-ooh-t-ball, not fut-ball).
Or the Greek "gyros" -- do you say "YOU-rohss", "GHEE-rohss", or "JY-rose"? Most of the people who sell them are just happy you're buying.
Well, since I speak Greek, I say "YEE-rohss" (the "y" is really something between a "gh" and a "y" that you Americans can't pronounce), and I really dislike it when people pronounce it "jie-rose". "ghee-rose" (with a hard gh as in "ghetto") is not difficult to pronounce, and at least better than "jie-rose" is.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Well, sure, it'd always be possible to use the GPL'd portions freely, and pass them around. I was just mentioning that Red Hat could easily cut down on 99% of that. If, for example, they made their installation program proprietary, you could pass around your CD to your friends, but they'd have to install the distro without the installation program, since the installation program would probably come with a one-computer license. You'd probably also have to do without things like RPM.
Yes, as long as the GPL holds up in court, the base Linux kernel and the GNU OS is still freely available, but Red Hat could do their best to make it very difficult to obtain it freely through them.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Just a guess, but I'll bet at some point during their existence, Red Hat offered Linus a job. If he had taken it, he'd be worth many millions today. That's a much better deal than being handed a paltry 400 IPO shares. (But he's given his reasons for not wanting to be beholden to one particular Linux-oriented company. So his entry in the startup lottery is with a non-Linux company instead.)
'less we forget, Red Hat invited open source people in on the ground floor of their IPO as a gift -- a token of appreciation, if you will. Sure E*Trade botched it up, or perhaps several newbie investors were stung by the harsh realitys of IPO trading, but nonetheless Red Hat was not obligated to set aside any shares for anyone and here we see several people whining about the whole IPO process not being user-friendly and now there's even a Red Hat Wealth Meter suggesting that the shares set aside for open source people were unfairly proportioned to shares for Red Hat employees. Gimme a break!
At least Red Hat made the effort of sharing the wealth with OSS developers -- show me another company that would have done the same.
If you want/need printed documentation, or want/need telephone support, you're going to pay for it, even if you can download over the net.
Besides, you forget something important. As net speeds go up, so do the number of packages for Linux and therefore the dist size. Also, the more people downloading it, the slower the transfer. So, the average download time might not change by that much.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
While the Redhat Wealth Monitor seems a reasonable idea, their calculations are not at all reasonable.
They equate the fraction of megabytes of the Redhat distribution created by The Community with the fraction of their market cap created by
The Community, which is outright ludicrous.
While Redhat has clearly derived a lot of value
from the contributions of the community (and
correspondingly, they have contributed back),
using the 87% number that the RHWM uses is baseless. This number assigns no value to their
marketing efforts, branding, service work, packaging, sales, etc, which have a much larger
impact on their valuation.
And then who do you call for support? Head on over to linuxjournal.com and find the Bob Young interview - as I recall, he specifically states that the $80 pays for the level of support that they feel customers will need and expect.
Here's the link.
--Kit
Former Inmate, VA Linux Sanitarium
I already gave my basic analysis in another discussion. (Which saw little play because of technical problems with /..)
Basically unless RedHat can get into other lines of business or significantly change the market dynamics upon which their business is based, I don't see them as a long-term investment being worth anything close to what they are currently priced at.
Sincerely,
Ben Tilly
My usual seat in the cluetrain is at A HREF="http://pub4.ezboard.com/biwethey.ht
Well, Marc Ewing is the co-founder of Redhat. He wrote rpm. Dunno who the guy with the boatload of shares is though.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
The IPO itself may be over, but the ball is still rolling full steam ahead. I anticipate that this week's is going to be when NASD and SEC get flooded with all the complaints, and E*TRADE's Legal and Compliance gets a bunch of certified mail. At least one very well respected Wall Street daily is going to do a major story on E*TRADE's fiasco, according to their reporter who extensively interviewed me last week.
The fireworks haven't even started. E*TRADE may have screwed me out of some major cash, but I'll get it back in form of priceless entertainment, watching them SQUIRM.
--
First of all, if E*TRADE's problem really was that there wasn't enough shares to go around, you wouldn't see so many people bitching about it. A few would be barking at Red Hat, for not allocating enough shares, but that's pretty much it.
If E*TRADE simply told me: Sorry, can't give you X shares, we only can give you X/2, or even X/4, because of demand, I wouldn't have any problem with this whatsoever.
But that's not what happened, was it? At first, while I believed that E*TRADE did have valid and reasonable reasons why they blew me off, I wasn't really upset that much. It was only after I started reading what everyone else was saying, and after I obtained more information, did I start to get pissed off, when it became more and more obvious to me that this whole affinity program, as managed by E*TRADE, was a complete and utter sham.
First, they started declaring pretty much everyone to be ineligible for the program. Then, when called to task for it, E*TRADE backpedaled, and with a "wink wink nudge nudge" attitude started telling people to claim that their net worth exceeds Donald Trump's.
Then, after some people were actually accepted into the affinity program, E*TRADE suddenly decided to throw them, and everyone else, out of it, unless they receive a telepathic message that they must "reconfirm" their application within a fifteen second time slot, and in the middle of the night for people in some time zones. And after they figured out that the instructions E*TRADE E-mailed for reconfirmation were actually wrong.
Only after someone (probably Young) ripped them a couple of new assholes, did they backpedal again, and sheepishly agreed to extend the alleged "reconfirmation" period for one more today, FINALLY giving people enough time to jump through the hoops that E*TRADE erected for them.
And then, after all that, E*TRADE still claimed that there weren't enough shares to go around?
Puhleeeze...
Look, how many people, REALLY, are bitching about this on Slashdot? I'd say less than a hundred. Even if that's only 5% of everyone who was left in the affinity program, after E*TRADE finished throwing as many people out as they could, and there were about two thousand people left, you're telling me that the average number of shares in an application was 400?
There was certainly individuals who applied for a thousand or more shares, but, there weren't many of them. Most people, as you said, sent in just enough money for 100 or 200 shares.
This doesn't add up. Red Hat should demand a full accounting from E*TRADE as to where every one of those 800,000 shares went. E*TRADE better be able to document that there were at least 800,000 shares distributed through the affinity program. If they can't, and if they did not give everyone the amount of shares they requested, that's food for NASD and SEC's lawyers.
--
Eh. "linn-ucks" is just a natural compression of "lee-nooks" in American. They're close enough that most people won't even notice the difference.
;-)
... till then, we should all just be happy people are using it!
For myself, I choose to pronounce it "linn-ucks" rather than "line-ucks" just because it sounds nicer, but also because it's closer in sound to both "unix" and "minix".
There isn't a "should" here, since there aren't any real rules for when a word jumps languages, especially an invented word. I'm more of a usage-descriptive dictionary type, myself, anyway. Most words that come to us start out being pronounced like the original word, then gradually come to be pronounced according to local rules. Example: French "forte", which is one syllable. But it came to be pronounced "for-tay", which is wrong, but makes more sense to English-speakers, because the "e" at the end is superfluous. Or the Greek "gyros" -- do you say "YOU-rohss", "GHEE-rohss", or "JY-rose"? Most of the people who sell them are just happy you're buying.
(On the other hand, I speak French well enough that I absolutely refuse to say "lingerie" lahn-zha-RAY. It's LANN-zhay-ree, dammit!)
I think the LEE-nucks and LINN-ucks pronunciations will eventually be supplanted by LINE-ucks, just because American English works that way
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
Sure you are, flamebait.
Don't you know you can't short a stock for 30 days after its IPO?
I know that some people see OSS, Linux, GNU, whatever as a sort of religion. And these people get squirrely when things start moving into the mainstream and getting "corporate-ized". But this is what it will take to get Linux and OSS into position to replace (or at least augment) NT and the like. In a way, it legitimizes Linux in a lot of people's eyes. Like it or not, that's the way it is.
IT managers need to see things like an IPO and articles in the Wall Street Journal about Red Hat -- it gets Linux and OSS on their radar. And they start wondering what this whole Linux thing is about. And they read InfoWorld or Wired and start getting a clue. They start feeling a little better about Linux because they've "heard about it". So when a tech decides to download(!) a freely available OS which comes with zero support (and zero culpability should something go wrong) and use it in mission critical applications, the PHBs won't get the screaming willies. To them, Linux can be taken seriously now because of things like the Red Hat IPO. Red Hat and Linux have now become "real" to the PHBs.
Anyway, I could go on about how Linux was the red-headed stepchild of the corporate OS world, but you get the point. The bottom line is that the IPO goes a long way toward guaranteeing that Linux will become a success. And that means Linux will not just live, but grow. And that means we all get a better Linux.
If the IPO gets just a handful of developers off the MFC tit, then we all come out ahead in the long run -- no matter what philosophical issues we might have about Red Hat making money off OSS. Let them make all the money they can, I say.
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
Before the flamethrowers come out, let me state that I:
1. like linux
2. wish RHAT all the best
3. am happy to see the linux community enjoying success
Now on to some critical commentary.
It's a safe assumption that Linux is good. It brings a lot of value to those who use it, and is definitely benefiting from a lot of investments and attention these days. I still have yet to see, however, how a dedicated linux company (eg. Red Hat) can become the "next Microsoft/Dell/Cisco."
Let's define "next Microsoft/Dell/Cisco." I'm talking about a very succesful public company, with rapid sales growth, a extremely bright current and future prospects.
For a company to be a successful, it must grow its sales, and figure out a way to make decent profits. How does a company grow sales? Sell something. What does Red Hat plan to sell? $99-200 Linux distros, and Linux services. It's difficult for me to see massive year-to-year revenue growth selling something that I can dowload for free, or buy from another vendor for $5.00. That leaves services/consulting.
I work for a consulting firm, so believe me when I say that selling services is hard. There are reasons why public companies that sell consulting services aren't valued as richly as companies that sell software or hardware, for example:
1. Selling consulting services often depends on personal relationships with your client(s).
2. The growth and viability of your consulting practice is directly tied to your employees. If someone from Dell or Microsoft quits, the company is affected in an indirect way. If one of my coworkers quits, that creates an immediate revenue hole of $200,000 (2000 hours*$100/hour). I've seen small consulting/services companies literally die over the course of a few months, as their revenue streams literally disappear in the form of massive employee turnover.
Despite the difficulties of running a consulting/services business, many companies do try, and succeed at it. The whole "ecommerce" thing is creating massive opportunities for the industry, that is only going to get bigger as this whole Y2K thing passes away. It's a good time for a small company to be in the consulting gig; there's not a whole lot of recognized expertise in ecommerce consulting, and a small practice can slip under the radar of the big guys, and grow fairly quickly.
Red Hat, however, is not going to slip under anybody's radar; they have too public of a profile. This assists them with recruiting, but will hurt them if they start making inroads against larger competitors. IBM, for example, is kicking all kinds of booty with its Global Services outfit. I personally don't like competing against them. I have little doubt that the companies that are supporting Red Hat in various ways today will not hesitate to start pulling plugs should Red Hat successes start affecting their meal tickets.
The popularization of Linux can hurt Microsoft, but hurting Microsoft does not automatically create an investment opportunity.
I believe we are watching the beginning of a Linux-induced revolution in corporate finance
Err.. excuse me? Either I am going blind, or you are seeing something that I am not seeing. What revolution in corporate finance? This was a standard plain-vanilla IPO. By Wall Street standards nothing interesting happened. Other stocks, notably so-called "dot-com" stocks had huge run-ups in their stock prices on the IPO day and after that. Netscape already brandished a sky-high market cap while giving away its principal product for free.
So a sexy software company goes public, the float is very small, nobody can short because there is nobody to borrow share certificates from, and the stock price goes through the roof. So what else is new? Again, what revolution we are talking about??
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
The $70 is the price that you pay for a printed manual, official support, and physical distribution of the media. If you want the software for less, then don't buy this version.
Redhat made a smart move by raising their prices. I used to buy official redhat CD's because I liked the distribution and wanted to help support the company. But by raising the prices, they are indicating that they don't want or need this type of help anymore. So just buy it from cheapbytes or download it for free. Support redhat by continuing the development of linux and other free/open source software. Or support them more directly by buying stock.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code,
fix one bug, compile it again...
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
I'm no legal expert, and from what I have seen of the American legal system so far, I'm probably wrong about this, but the best interest of shareholders can onyl go so far.
All the investors invested in Redhat full knowing that they give away their distribution and hope to make money off services and support. That's their bussiness. Whether or not this bussiness has a future or not, is a different matter.
I mean, I can't buy stocks in a company that sells Apples and then sue them because the Orange bussiness is more profitable, can I?
I have been watching the "Linux Explosion" for about 3.5 years now (strange as that is how long I have been using Linux...) and I can see why there is a fear of Wall Street.
.02$
Consider you are Joe C. Coder in 1997. You are gladly hacking away on xyz program. The community is solid (at least it seemed so from my point of view) and most people look at you with raised eyebrows if you mention Linux outside of a CSc lab.
Now fast forward a couple of years.
IBM, Oracle, Corel, etc, etc, etc are all pitching their hats (so to speak) into the bin. Great, they are adding to the code/community and it continues to improve. And ever so slowly the media start to latch onto this "Linux" thing.
Actually, the media caught on and THEN the corps came a-circling. small point there.
Now look at our happy little OS / community.
Ego, the type derived from 'net respect and not peer respect,is starting to appear; money is starting to drive. Remember the flames (yeah, like they are a thing of the past) in any discussion of GNOME vs. KDE?
The OS lives on, better than ever, HOWEVER the community aspect is starting to slip in the morales department. I have occasion to hang out on IRC and you see lots of "the newly christened" Linux newbiew happily singing the praises of the OS but if you so much as mention the "evil empire" of MS you will be on the hot end of some rather poorly constructed flame. These new folks just take as the gospel the mainstream media articles that support linux.
They dont bother to do any research to the reasons behind the comparisons. They just want to appear knowledgeable for the "street cred".
In essence these new "Linapostles" do more damage than good. It is great that they use Linux, it is foul that they just pick up the old school line of World Domination without actually knowing why. To defend Linux with kneejerk precision and flame any pundit that would dare condescend on their "holy" OS. The MS Windows evangelists are moving...to Linux. They have found a new podium to bang upon and the unclean (and loud!) masses are coming!! .
The reason I started using Linux was the great atmosphere; there were lots of intelligent discussions to read, never once did I have to trudge through ascii haxor text. I think the atmosphere is starting to cloud and this community that we all cherish, and I have enjoyed being part of, is slowly mutating...
to a gang.
I hope that I am wrong.
my
Za's Vid
E/.
ps. for what it is worth MS got a total monopoly because Word 6 was (and still is when I have the need to be a wordsmith) simply the best of the wordprocessors. If Word worked (natively) in Linux I would buy it.
********************************************
You may fire when ready.
************************
What, me worry?
LOL
I really hate when people take someone's or some company's net worth, divide it by some arbitrary # of people (usually the population), and say "Your share: $#"
Whatever. The Bill Gates Wealth Clock claims that he took over 350k$ from my pocket. The Red Hat Wealth Clock implies the same. Like a dollar in my pocket means a dollar out of someone elses.
/rant
> Wall Street has finally discovered what every nerd has known for the past five years: that Linux not only works - it works better!
... but thanks to consumers, VHS became the dominant brand.
... it doesn't. It just says alot of people think they can make money off buying Red Hat stock. And alot of people would be right - sound the alarms, its time for Linux to become the newest technical pin-up babe.
What a load of balony. The success of the RedHat IPO says not a single thing about the value of Linux as a good OS. People buy stock cause other people are buying stock cause other big companies are pushing it as the New Thing (tm). It looks like Linux is poised to become the next big thing in the IT world, but since we've seen it happen with Windows 95, we can't draw a line between the stock value and the power of the OS; only the stock value and the percieved market placement and possible success of the OS. Beta was better than VHS
I'm not bashing Linux, obviously; I use it myself. I'm trying to discredit the notion that success on Wall Street confirms the technical superiority of Linux
This is approaching dangerous levels of bandwagoning.
"Old man yells at systemd"
So Red Hat is worth 5.6 billion. Anyone have an idea how this money will be spent? Obviously RH now has to walk the line between making it's investors in Wall Street happy and not angering off the (easily annoyed) linux community. According to the article it seems RH has been great towards the community, so can we assume that this means that a lot of money start flowing in to linux development? If that is so this IPO is A Good Thing indeed. Thumb
My first exposure to Linux came in the form of a bundled shareware CD I purchased for $5US. The Linux release wasn't even 1.0. I bought a book on how to install and run Linux 5 years ago for $20US that came with 1.2.13. Two years ago, I bought a RedHat dist so that I could get glibc installed without spending countless hours with the mini-HOWTO.
In short, people have been making money off Linux for at least 7 years (by my own experience). The fact that RedHat has hit the jackpot shouldn't make a bit of difference to the developers (I know, wishful thinking). I am anxious, however, that the folks who have contributed the most to RedHat's windfall might be discouraged by the sudden rush of the public to own a piece of Linux. I fear that the "gold fever" that has ensued may spoil their enthusiasm and, eventually, their desire to contribute.
If there is any way I can convince those folks not to lose focus, let me at least try by making a few points.
1) Linux has given me the opportunity to use UN*X on a computer I could afford (i.e., an x86 PC). The unforseen benefit of my migration to Linux has been that I have been a participant in the explosive growth of an exceptional OS.
2) The fact that I can install Linux on as many machines as I can afford has given me the tools to build my own network.
3) I can scan across the globe and interact with people who have installed a world-class OS on scrap PCs. These folks have been able to enter the information age without having to mortgage their home in the process.
4) Distributions are available to fit user ability and NATIVE LANGUAGE without having to wait for Redmond.
For these reasons, and many more (so many they would hog bandwidth from their enumeration), Linux is a phenomenon that must succeed. Words alone cannot express the gratitude I feel for everyone who has ever posted a patch, beta tested a module, or has in any way been associated with Linux's success.
I can only hope that the individuals who have contributed to this success can see past the dollar signs. I am not a proficient programmer, so the only contribution I can make is to buy Linux-oriented products. I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.
I don't want to go back to the dark days.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"