Slashdot Mirror
The Upcoming LinuxOne IPO
AlphaBrav sent news that LinuxOne is planning to
up their IPO price range. For those who don't know who LinuxOne is, don't feel bad: read this amazing article that point by point shows that there are more problems with this company then I can list in this space, although my favorites include their CEOs questionable past, GPL violations, and a corporate web server that not only doesn't run their own distribution but offers to sell you a (binary only) CD if only you send your credit card unencrypted to them. Best of all, their ticker symbol is set to be LINX.
Sounds like a winner to me!
But of course, PT Barnum will still have his say at the IPO, and I certainly wouldn't turn down some shares...
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I dunno... To me, there is just something wrong with people making money off of a free operating system.
=======
There was never a genius without a tincture of madness.
Dont you think they could prevent them from using that ticker symbol... it seems too generic. After reading that list... it just makes me shiver.
So there.
It almost seems like this whole LinuxOne thing embodies the atmosphere of hype and ridiculous Wall Street clamoring for anything related to Linux. Here we have a company that, as far as we can tell, has nothing whatsoever to offer, and seems to be IPO'ing for the sole benefit of adding flame to the fire.
I will probably be ill if this IPO takes off. At least VA actually has products, and RedHat makes a pretty good distro. But who has heard of anything from LinuxOne?
I want to publicly speak out against companies adopting ticker symbols that make it look like they ARE Linux. It is a deceptive practice clearly intended to fool some investors into thinking they are buying stock in Linux. In fact, they are only buying stock in a company that either (1) sells hardware with Linux installed or (2) supports Linux.
Think about it. The average investors remembers seeing Linux mentioned as a hot thing in Time, Newsweek, or Fortune. They see ticker symbol LNUX or LINX and they think they're buying stock in "Linux".
There's no reason for this. VA could have done something like "VALX". LinuxOne could maybe use "LNXO". What if Dell's ticker symbol was "WNNT"?
hmm...The article says that LinuxOne has reserved shares for "fellow" open-source developers. Two questions:
/. knows that linuxone sucks. Does anyone in the "real world" know? Like, do bankers, and mutual fund managers, and people like that know how bad this company is going to fail? If not, does Slashdot (or Andover) have enough clout to talk to the folks at cnn.com, abcnews.com, or some other mass-media place to get the word out?
1. Did anyone get "the letter"? If you did, are you going to buy shares?
2. What open-source development have they done? Did they GPL the big scam that they're putting on here?
Now, it's great that everyone here on
Juiced? Or Not?
Up from $6-$8 per share to... *gasp* $8.25! These guys just OOZE confidence!
l w-11-linuxone.html) is a great place to start.
Hrm. The only thing that makes me feel better is that a quick check of techstocks.com, fool.com, and ragingbull.com shows that nobody has even started any message boards for LINX yet. For those of you that frequent these boards, do your best to educate. The link above (http://www.linuxworld.com/linuxworld/lw-1999-11/
People whine about Red Hat going corporate, and Corel GPL violations, which is fine. Let's keep them honest. But if you really want to defend Linux's integrity as it enters the corporate world, debunking LinuxOne is probably a great place to start.
----
It's true, I read it on their web site!
Their 'Lite' version runs under windows!
Argh.
Feh.
Boo.
*BOOM*
Couldn't he sue these carpetbaggers to get them to drop the name?
I realize that might set what some see as a dangerous precendent for other Linux-related software, but I think in this case everyone would understand. This company is so obviously just trying to make a fast buck.. And if nobody stops them, they probably will (a fast $100 million bucks, probably)!
Although it seems that any Linux company will make a killing with their IPO (Look at VA Linux), I'm a little concerned with placing my money with this company. It appears even they have no faith in their product, they have RedHat 6.0 running on their webserver! They have all sorts of hokey features that come bundled with their disto, one of which is called LinuxMac(TM) - software that makes reading and writing Macintosh format files viable, whether on disk or CD. Easy to install and use, this industry-leading software should be invaluable to Apple computer users that need to access their files on a Linux system. Jeez, last time I check I was able to do this with ANY disto!
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
Not really suprising that there would eventually be a company that comes up trying to get in on the cash feeding frenzy that seems to go hand in hand with Linux IPOs.
:)
IMHO, any linux company that wants to survive several years past the date of their IPO probably will need to have at least a reasonable amount of goodwill from the community. As I see it, companies like VA and RedHat have that. LinuxOne probably doesn't. (And if they do, they probably won't for long)
There are enough daytraders out there that lost their asses on both redhat and VA (buying at the very peak and then watching it slide down to something more reasonable) and those were good companies. I think that LinuxOne in the IPO market has the real potential to make a few suicidal drunk wifebeating daytraders.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
To quote the cliche... it's free as in freedom, not free as in beer.
ESR is right: "Open Source" is a way, way better term than "free software".
---
Based on his previous record, i don't think this Chiou guy's company is too promising.. His last IPO, NetUSA, went from $7 to 63 cents a share?
It is really too bad that people like this can try to cash in on something as wholesome as Linux. Also, it is very regretable that they got such a great ticker symbol, which could fool unaware people into thinking they are buying 'Linux', becasue there are a lot of heathens out there who think this Linux thing is a company they can buy into.
I can't say for sure. He could have some great software in the making, he really could be developing those great 'propietary device drivers' and Chinese and Japanese versions, or this could be what it seems like it is : a scam to take advantage of the interest in IPOs like Red Hat's and VA's. I don't think someone should be filing for an IPO before they even have a product - what is it that we would be investing in? A plan to someday make a Distro? Their website does seem like they are serious, I suppose.
But a Linux distro that runs under Windows misses the point entirely!!
Juln
Gamers' Linux, the Linux distribution devoted to games (specifically, RedHat Linux 6.1 with Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament installed), has filed a S-1 and will be offering shares at the end of Q1/2000.
The Distribution will be available any time now, and you can also get the source code for only $45 (sorry we have no FTP site yet).
We expect to open up at $.25/share and rocket up to about $.75/share before either K-Mart buys us up or Linus Torvalds sues the bejeezus out of us for GPL violations...
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
You may have heard the saying "all publicity is good publicity." What is going to happen if LinuxOne turns out to be a terrible company and a ton of investors get burned on a shoddy distribution? LinuxOne is going to get bad publicity. Most of it will be from the traditional media, many of whom still think all Linux is the same thing, and therefore the bigger a flop LinuxOne becomes, the bigger a black mark against "Linux/OpenSource."
This blanketing attitude is changing, though; even CBS can tell the difference between a RedHat and a VA. And if LinuxOne burns some people, it will be our opportunity to turn bad news into good. We need to represent LinuxOne as the Yin to our Yang. We need to say, "This is what happens when you do it wrong," in addition to, "This over here is what happens when you do it right."
Over time, this will add news media credibility to our store. It will make it possible for people to tell the difference between a good Linux distribution and a bad one, and as a point of comparison it will clarify some issues in peoples' heads over why Open Source is a good idea, and why it is successful.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Anybody who falls for this bunk richly deserves it. Hopefully, they will learn a valuable lesson.
Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who
Everyone's gonna try and capitalize on this 'hype' thats going on. Many see it as JUST hype, though we all know that Linux is real, rock solid, and worthy of investment.
:)
If this IPO goes through and there's a fallout afterwards, this may suddenly undermine confidence in Linux, with Microsoft jumping on board and saying "SEE!? I TOLD YOU SO! IT WAS ALL HYPE!" and people who dont know any better, yet have their cash tied up in RedHat, will panic.
This could spell trouble.
I think there needs to be an overall 'consortium'
contributed to by all distributions (RedHat at the forefront) to provide information to potential investors and users about linux. There should be a united group promoting linux in general to the benefit of the whole community. It should do reviews of the liscences developped by distributions, and review their practices to ensure they're abiding by the liscences of the software contained therein (most of it under the GPL).
This will serve to keep the industry clean, and not undermine linux in general. Havintg a consortium responsible for this would avoid people claiming there's a redHat agenda or whatever. I think its time Linux invested to ensure the quality of ALL linux products -- at least until Microsoft files for BANKRUPTCY!
Math.
Ticker symbols are owned by the stock exchange and can be revoked or changed at will. There have been many cases of ticker symbols of penny stocks being re-assigned by nasdaq or nyse when a bigger stock (IE trades on the big boards) needs it.
Really, guys, THE TICKER SYMBOL IS NOT THE ISSUE.
You can keep the Redhat but I'll take the source code to Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament for $45. :-)
Connected to rinoa.LinuxOne.NET.
Escape character is '^]'.
Welcome to LinuxOne! This is rinoa.
Red Hat Linux release 6.0 (Hedwig)
Kernel 2.2.5-15 on an i686
login:
Riiiight.
There's nothing that you can do, really...
I don't understand why people think that having "close ties" to the Linux community will neccessarily help a company.
LinuxOne doesn't need anything from the community, thanks to the GPL. They can purchase a copy of redhat, get the source CD, rearrange the files a little and presto! a brand new distro. And there's nothing that anyone can do about it.
So long as Linux continues to be developed with under the GPL (meaning as long as Linux exists) we'll see more and more of these companies. There's no rule that says they need to contribute anything back to the community. There's no rule that states they need to give shares to anyone. And even when someone does give shares (Like Redhat and VA) they do it out of the kindness of their hearts, because the developers can't hold anything back from them.
So, as angering as this may be for some of you, there reallyt isn't anything you can do but grit your teeth and wait til the next outfit surfaces...You developed under the GPL... This is one of the consequences. Sorry!
Except you chose to be the slave.
Another company sees the opportunity to make money. You could do the same... roll your own distro, incorporate, get some VCs behind you and you too could be a Linux billionair.
How is LINX more generic than LNUX ?!
I think everyone has the right to do a distribution. Of course sending only the binary code is a break from the GPL model. After reading the article I can see that they have very great problems and apparently are hiding information about their company.
As we live in a capitalist society everyone has the right to open a business and go IPO. But everyone also have the right to know the economic health of a firm and his credentials. But we don't live in an ideal world. This year the stock exchanges got mad in stocks of high technology, computer, software and Internet comnpanies.
Companies who are betting in the open-source model are now the golden eggs of the investors. But investors and economists don't know well the
computer and software world(this is not a shame, not everyone in the world must be a geek like us!). Usually they put money in any company
wich has the word Linux attached to it.
The best thing that can be done is if some people who works with free software could warn the investors about the dangers of companies
who hides their operations and in the case of LinuxOne point them to the great article in LinuxWorld. Many may think that this is not of our concern, but if an hipothetical company who bases its products on GPL software eventually breaks, we will see a run of capitals from other companies like Red Hat and VA, because of the fall of trust that wil be created by this. And this event will trigger a vicious circle of bad public opinion to the open-source world.
We must be vigilant...
"Learning, learning, learning - that is the secret of jewish survival" -- Ahad A'Ham
SCAM!
This is clearly an attempt to rake in a fortune and run. There's no product there. If there was, and it was any good, they'd use it. They don't. If they knew enough to -make- a system, they'd have secure e-commerce. They don't. If they understood the licence, they wouldn't be doing binary-only distributions. They are.
IMHO, we'll see the board cut & run to some tax haven that has no extradition treaty with the US or Europe within a year, probably months, possibly even weeks, after the IPO.
This probably won't be fatal to Linux. In fact, the sooner they run, the better for Linux, as it'll be clearer that it was crooks and not simply computer geeks pretending to be business nerds. It -will- be damaging to Linux, though, if the pretense keeps going long enough for people to believe that the guys are genuine, because then that could provoke a backlash against the whole Open Source concept. ("Look at Bill Gates! Now -HE- knows how to run a company. These wannabe's, with their high ideals and no business sense are just wasters and loosers.")
The sooner LinuxOne explodes into a corruption scandal, the better it'll be for everyone. IMHO, it'll happen sooner or later, whether that's tomorrow or 50 years from now. I'd just rather it was early enough for it to not take down the entire Open Source movement with it.
IMHO, if these guys want money, will some rich twit give it to them, and tell them to go away? Far as I'm concerned, they're going to get the money anyway, but it needn't senselessly destroy everything that the Linux community has worked to build. The Linux community is incidental to LinuxOne's aims, so it doesn't harm or benefit them if it survives or vanishes. There's no reason for them to work for either end. I'd rather it survived, though, and hope Open Source isn't an innocent victim in this game.
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)
Anyone who compares open-source developers to slaves has either a severely twisted view of open-source software, or a delusionally romantic notion of what slavery is. Red Hat never locked Linus in chains, beat him, or sold his children to get the kernel made. There's a difference between giving and stealing.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" -Salvor Hardin
Why spend all that money on an underwriter, you ask? Look at all the OTC stocks that basically do nothing... The underwrite goes out and drums up interest in your stock prior to it's going public... But not with other investors, but rather the institutional folk, the ones that REALLY drive stock prices up and down...
Slashdot made it with OpenIPO because they're a well established site that many people had heard of... But if you're just starting out and plan on taking your company public, you'd be making a really bad decision to use a process like that unless you were POSITIVE that there would be significat interest in your company.
This is the fourth Slashdot article about LinuxOne, and the third posted by CmdrTaco. While the first Linux-based stock scam was interested the first time around, it's gotten a bit stale. I'm sure there are more interesting stories being submitted.
314-15-9265
"Linux distros need to collude & combat black sheep"
Uhm...no. You do realize that that sounds exactly like something Micros~1 would do.
"If this IPO goes through and there's a fallout afterwards, this may suddenly undermine confidence in Linux, with Microsoft jumping on board and saying "SEE!? I TOLD YOU SO! IT WAS ALL HYPE!" and people who dont know any better, yet have their cash tied up in RedHat, will panic. "
This is likely anyway. Eventually, the economy is going to get to a point where it's not swelling like a zit on a 14 year old's face, and people who are playing the stock market are going to realize that they were smoking crack when they paid $300.00 for VA stock. (Don't get me wrong - I think they're both great companies, VA and Redhat, I just don't think they're worth the money that they're at. The stock price should have something to do with earnings in my book)
When the market corrects itself, redhat and VA are going to fall a bit. They're not going to fall like NetUSA did, but they will fall somewhat until their stock price is a bit more in line with what the company is. All fads wear off.
I agree with you that LinuxOne could catalyze that, (the linux aspect anyway, not the whole economy aspect) but I think it will happen anyway.
"This could spell trouble"
Yeah, well, do like most other people do and don't bother looking at linux or using it as a financial tool. Just use it as a kick ass OS. Again, I like redhat and VA, but I won't buy any of their stock anytime soon because I'm a programmer, and for some reason I just can't understand the brains of investors. The best bet (for me anyway) is to ignore linux IPO happenings when it comes to my own personal finances and enjoy linux as an OS.
"I think there needs to be an overall 'consortium'
contributed to by all distributions (...)"
That sounds like a good idea IF you can find somebody who will play the benevolent dictator role. I'm not really worried about this distro though since I think that if a lot of the allegations in the article are true, the company will probably have a total of about 10 users (most of which is the board of the company) a year from now.
I also don't like the thought of a board like that, because it would be very easy for it to fall into an exclusionary game of who gets to play with linux and who doesn't.
MDA
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Does anyone know who owns www.linuxone.com? If you surt there you get the message:
:) )
This page is not here yet.
(with due credit to Transmeta in the source
Linuxone has www.linuxone.net, so who's got linux.com?
Another mysterious start-up? Another soon-to-be IPO?
Dana
You mean like all the dotcoms that were the craze the last two years?
Of course that's what's going to happen... Everyone's hopping from Amazon to Redhat to ride it's ups and downs...And then when the next buzzword comes along (probably B2B...) they'll scurry away from Linux and on the B2B bandwagon.
(B2B = Business to Business e-commerce, in case you were wondering...)
LinuxOne OS will support these new technologies with its sophisticated proprietary device drivers....
;)
I think I now know who that "open source, copyrighted, non-distributal Natalie Portman" guy really is
mcrandello@my-deja.com
rschaar{at}pegasus.cc.ucf.edu if it's important.
If they're actually in violation of the GPL, they can lose *all* of their rights with respects to the GPL'ed software.
Copyrighted works by default give people NO license to copy, redistribute or modify the work. The GPL explicitely grants this right so long as the user works within the bounds of the license. Once they violate the license, they lose all redistribution rights to the software, which would kinda put them out of business instantly.
I know this probably sounds crazy, but put a few pointers in here...
1. This guy started NetUSA, and the company went public.
2. NetUSA is failing in public, it's lost huge amounts of money and the stock price is falling drastically.
3. HE probably owned a majority share of NetUSA, right? So he gained quite a bit of money from those stocks... now, legally he could neither sell them nor use that money for six months. However...
4. Now he starts a NEW company, and tries to send it public within six months, a ridiculously short time for such things. Which, at ANY price, will bring in a nice chunk of pocket change...
5. Gee, sounds a little fishy - you think he might be using one to fund the other? Illegal, yes, impossible? No.
He's already shown disregard for people (laws?) by hosting spammail junk. Considering the (lack of) history for this company, I wouldn't be surprised if this is exactly what's happening. I hope he gets caught and jailed.
-Elthia
opinionated as ever
I am very very worried. I am worried about how this will hurt Linux and open source. It is very sad, but inevitable that sooner or later some fucking bastards will try to exploit us and this is a clear case. A lot of people today, who do not know much about the market or linux, !(me and you), are going to dump their money if Linuxone goes IPO. Now, what do you think will happen? After a short while, people will realize that this company is a hoax and will loose a lot of money! If a lot of people loose money in this, what will this say? Linux is not happening?! Linux is a hoax? I am not talking about what you will think, but what the average joe will. people will throw there money when this goes IPO if it ever does, they will do it, not to invest , but to make very quick money! THe outcome worries me.
------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
Michael Lerperger (LINUXONE-DOM)
Kutschkergasse 4/7
Vienna, Vienna A-1180
AUSTRIA
Domain Name: LINUXONE.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Lerperger, Michael (ML9820) mlerp@POBOX.COM
+43 (1) 402 8089 (FAX) +43 (1) 402 8089
Billing Contact:
Lerperger, Michael (ML9820) mlerp@POBOX.COM
+43 (1) 402 8089 (FAX) +43 (1) 402 8089
Record last updated on 14-Nov-1999.
Record created on 15-Nov-1998.
Database last updated on 23-Dec-1999 14:08:21 EST.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS3.MLERP.COM 208.231.31.21
NS4.MLERP.COM 208.231.31.22
I was able to telnet in to the SMTP port on Quistis and verify the users listed on their web site.
And yes, they are still being hosted on a DSL connection, as you can tell by doing a reverse lookup of their DNS. Not too impressive.
You'd think that, as "a leading-edge developer of Linux software, products and services" they'd at least be able to hire a decent server admin.
awfully bold to file for an IPO, without underwriters, with a tiny firm that's existed only for six months and that barely has a product. And to have the cheek to ask us to pay $29.95, sight unseen, for a distribution that the firm hasn't the conviction to run as its own Web server, and to expect us to not worry our pretty little heads over source code seems a bit much. Add to that LinuxOne's claims to be a world shaker poised, as the About page says, to "become the world's highest-rated supplier of Linux solutions based on innovation, packaging, support, and global capability."
Does this sound like some earlier M$ campains to anyone else??
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
clauses, leaving the majority intact. And surely a court of law would find reality to be other than black and white.
And by not abiding by the terms of the GPL they have no right to redistribute the software. The reality is that they could:
If you extend your argument, some parts of standard EULAs could be striken as unreasonable, that doesn't mean I can freely distribute it.
Something like this though, the requirement to redistribute or otherwise make available the source code to your GPL'ed-base work, is the very heart of the GPL license.
Are you saying that if they were to violate this provision and not cooperate by coming into compliance, that they should be continued to be allowed to re-distribute the software? Perhaps I misspoke when I said they can lose "all" of their rights. At a minimum, I would expect that I could be able to revoke a person's right to redistribute my copyrighted work if they fail to uphold their end of my license. THIS has got to be supported by legal precedent in some fashion. The authors of this software have collectively said, "OK, we're letting people redistribute our copyrighted software so long as they comply with the terms of the GPL license."
So the only thing left would be the possibility that a portion of the GPL would be striked out as unreasonable. Could this source code requirement be classified as 'unreasonable'? I don't think it can, and I don't really see how this can't be supported by law or precedent. Unless you are referring to the fact that the GPL has never been tried in court...?
When I asked what the difference between RedHat and LinuxOne is, he said that there is little difference, and when I asked why I should buy LinuxOne instead of RedHat, he was unable to answer my question.
If you've got any furthur questions, their toll free sales line is: 1-877-Linux12
Sosumi. just kidding. DONT!
Call me cynical, but with this kind of background, any investor who loses his shirt on this IPO (if it busts) due to lack of research deserves every cent he flushes down the drain. There is so much hype these days, and no real understanding of what makes a company worth investing in. It's not like this article was revealing anything a competent investor couldn't have found, and the article is published where anyone can find it if they care to look. I have little sympathy for investors who lose money on pure speculation and hype.
To whit: I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
BTW, I thought the author was... uh, to say the least... generous. Pretty amusing article, if it weren't for the fact that we're dealing with a serious issue here.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
...hopefully, is that LinuxOne *will* crash and burn, and anyone stupid enough to use it as an anti-linux datum will be quickly pointed to the denunciations on Slashdot and LinuxWorld, from Bruce Perens, and from basically anyone else who knows what they're talking about.
I mean, honestly, LinuxOne's name has been mud from the very day their existance became known! If someone invests in them because "it's got Linux in the name!" but doesn't bother to do so much as a web search to research the company, they deserve what they get.
This is going to make life not so good for any other legitimate distro who want to fund their company through an IPO.
This LinuxOne IPO will probably not do very well, which will drag down the image of "Linux IPOs" in the mind of the underwriters.
If the underwriters have a low opinion of Linux companies because of this, the next distro who wants funding through an IPO will probably get a lower opening price, which means less money in the bank for them, which means less development and such which affects us all.
Hopefully this will set the standard for other companies who wish to do the same thing. If these guys do terribly, then others probably wont follow suit, which is good for the community, both the open source community and the financial community.
2 cents from an ex manager of wrestlers
LinuxOne is positioned to quickly become a leading provider of Linux software.
Yeah right. Their going to out do RedHat or SuSE or Caldera? I think not.
The Company's extensions to the Linux software kernel will rapidly distinguish its products from all other available Linux software. LinuxOne intends to develop operating system and application software tailored to support a wide variety of platforms, business environments, and markets. LinuxOne has an exceptional management team that possesses the experience and proven skills necessary to quickly establish the company as one of the world's preferred providers of Linux software.
What are they going to make that Linux dosen't already do? What platform are they going to add? At the rate other companies are going, my left pinky toe will be able to run Linux :) Great management team? Try great BS team.
Robert E. Philips, B.S. Physics, BS Philosophy, MBA Marketing, and MBA Extended Edition in High Technology Management, has been a founding executive for numerous Silicon Valley startup firms. He has been responsible for business plans, proposals, collateral materials, advertising, and public relations. His technical background in hardware, software, and network technologies provides him with considerable insight into high-technology products.
And having a Bachelors in Physics and Philosophy is going to make him a good marketer? How? And whats this Extended Edition crap? Makes it sound like a car not a degree. He has been the founding executive for numerous Silicon Valley startup firms? What are they? Are they all bankrupt? Probably, thats why he went on to Linux, its a new field to try.
OK, enough of my rant, this company is a disgusting pile of bullshit and I am not going to waste any more of my time complaining about it!
Anonymous Hay goes in and I come out...
For CmdrTaco to essentially decry this company as a scam is entirely inappropriate. He, and this website, are owned by a close competitor, so comments like these not only have no objectivity, but should be viewed as highly suspicious and manipulative.
When it comes down to it, there really are only slight differences between the behavior of LinuxOne and that of VA systems, RedHat, and the others. None of them have, or will have, profits to justify their market valuations, and all are based on essentially the same platform: Making Money from Linux.
So what is so different about this company? That they don't have the alliance with a bunch of hip linux hackers, or the requisite early marketing hype. They certainly have comparable profits.
The Linux as IPO fantasy is playing out again and again, just as e-commerce did. But, as with e-commerce, the ones who make real profits will be few and far between.
But to hear scathing remarks posing as journalism about a competitor in their industry makes my stomach churn. I certainly didn't hear this kind of criticism regarding VA or the others. You've already cashed in.
Moderators: While I do expect this view to be unpopular, please evaluate its merits for discussion (and rational defense) before emotionally slamming it as 'flamebait'.
The law with respects to software makes little distinction. The only thing software has over text is that the owner of a copy may make another copy for archival purposes.
So, given that software is treated basically the same, here's what the law has to say about derivative works, among other things (title 17, chapter 1, 103b):Thus, he still owns the copyright on his work, but he cannot redistribute the whole work (the program) unless he licenses his own code under the GPL.
If he refuses to acknowledge or abide by the GPL, he has *no* rights to redistribute the rest of the work at all, as it remains copyrighted. He can certainly release his own code, under his own license, but he can't do so as part of the program.
No offense to you, but I'd really rather hear a professional legal opinion about all of this if there really is something contestable about the GPL, and not some rantings about the evil FSF with some occasional legal jargon from an anonymous poster.
I simply won't purchase, contribute, or have anything to do with this company. Neither will many others, I suspect. Do whatever they like. Unless they come out with something "special" (i.e something that sets them appart from the rest of the pack), then I simply won't waste my time on them.
So, they go public. They ride the Linux bandwagon and all become millionaires overnight. Big deal. Life goes on. I'd rather support and invest in companies that care about the community they are serving.
The Linux community is a (generally) close-knit group. We tend to really support those we like, and eat those we don't alive (whether the mis-feelings are founded or not, that's a different matter altogether).
In other words, I believe things will work out on their own, and unless LinuxOne has something to offer that Redhat, SuSE, Debian, Caldera, Mandrake, Slackware, yadda, yadda doesn't offer then they are doomed before they even start.
Funk dat. I run linux, i run BeOS AND i run Windows 2000 and Windows 98. Linux doesn my firewall/routing. BeOS is a play toy. Windows 2000 is my workstation and windows 98 is my girlfriends computer.
Gee!
Gosh!
Wow!
I think I speak for all of Slashdot when I point out that you are cool because you have the courage to "funk dat" and use multiple operating systems. You go, boy!
Psst.. you guys.. keep the rebel talking and I'll call the authorities.
I'm thinking that this would be a great stock to short the afternoon of the IPO.
It would be... if it were possible to short an IPO on the first day. It's not. You have to wait something like 30 (60?) days. By then, LinuxOne will have crashed and burned. If it hasn't, shorting is an intriguing idea...
To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
You are right. If LinuxOne makes improvements over Redhat, we win. If LinuxOne simply rips off Redhat without offering anything new then, just like in the "traditional" market, you simply will not have a customer base. You tank, crash, and fall over like a dead cockroach. Again, we (the community) win again.
:)
Gotta love it, man
It wasn't until linux came about that being a computer user/nerd became friend or foe for the choice of your operating system. I remember the good ol' days when it was how you could network, program, code, and be yourself..
...I don't want to loose functionality ...
hmmmmmmmmm....
you seemed to miss Amiga Vs. PC and Mac sentiments, the Mac vs. Ibm feelings, the whole UNIX vs. NT idea, DEC vs. IBM vs. Control Data, some people are Palm Pilot vs. CE fanatics. There are many other instances where people were and are fanatical about operating system choice. It is nothing new.
The "evil empire" doesn't tell me who i can or shouldn't buy from.
Oh yeah? How uneducated you are indeed. They sure have tried to tell IBM, Dell, Compaq, Gateway and everyone else who they can and can't buy from. Did you read the finding of fact against Microsoft? They sure were telling Apple who to buy from, and who do you think they were effectively dictating choice to? YOU, the consumer.
some SERIOUS loosers out there.
Loose? As in not tight? It's LOSE, by the way. One O. This post wasn't about being the grammar police, but come on. Also, "the head honcho's don't" Apostrophes do not show plurality. Oh well, this degenerated into a grammar check.
I don't even want to get into 'this great new operating system' Windows 2000 Professional. You deserve to use Microsoft products.
Juln
What do you mean that andover.net is a "close competitor" to LinuxOne? andover.net is a MEDIA company. LinuxOne pretends to distribute a version of Linux that "runs under Windows" (actually, it sounds like you execute it under Windows, it reboots into Linux, then if you want to "return" to Windows, you type "reboot" at the command-line prompt. Does that even SOUND like it's "running under Windows"?!?).
How, exactly, are they competing?
---------The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
I wish. You can't short sell IPOs for a while (I dunno how long).
Maybe I should just incorporate now and file an IPO to get the money, silly me, I thought I would have to have a product first.
Of course I guess I could just turn it into a scam of some sort so Slashdot would run the story and the VC firms would come to me. I wouldn't mind be called a scam so much if I could get the money I need. I've already had one person suggest I was trying to cash in on Linux's success. I would have thought anyone who had used Linux for a few years or so would know that anyone wanting to start a game company to produce Linux games isn't trying to cash in on anything except for maybe their own desire to actually play a computer game again. Besides if I was cashing in on Linux I wouldn't plan on supporting FreeBSD and BeOS. Oh well I am rambling again. Sorry
My rather long winded point is that the SEC really should set some stricter rules on who can go for an IPO. Of course I guess there should be more common sense involved as well. I mean who in their right mind would ask for money from the general public with no track record? The general public isn't like a big firm, I know lots of people that want to invest in companies but don't really have the money to spare. It isn't at all fair that the average shmuck who doesn't know jack about the Linux community except that every Linux IPO goes gold might waste his life savings on this.
won't be open sources for several years though... at least the 3d engine won't. id makes allot of money from licensing their 3d engine, and won't open source it until they've milked every last penny from it, which will probably be several years because of how advanced the engine in q3 is.
in short: don't hold your breath.
-----
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
MEEPT!!!!!
MEEPT!!!!! is overjoyed to see that his earlier advice given to graduating students has been expanded upon by the loveable LinuxOne. MEEPT!!!!! advised students to adopt a catchy series of initials, such as ESR or RMS, then wait for free shares of IPO-madness to start rolling in. MEEPT!!!!! is delighted to see that LinuxOne has expanded this concept, and will be offering their very own IPO!
MEEPT!!!!! strongly encourages slapdashers to support LinuxOne's product when it is made available. Wun C. Chiou Sr., Ph.D. - the esteemed CEO of LinuxOne - has personally assured MEEPT!!!!! that LinuxOne will make available the finest Linux Distribution in the world: Redhat. He encourages investors to get in on the ground floor of LinuxOne's IPO, because "hey, you all gave mad cash to Redhat. We sell the same thing, right down to the directory names and box logo! You should give us money too!"
MEEPT!!!!!
According to their Y2K statement
...
In July 1999, we formed a committee consisting of our President, Chief Financial Officer, and a systems administrator, as part of our effort to perform a coordinated audit of:
...
Geez - those poor corporations that hired programmers to check their work - what a waste of money. All you need to verify Y2K compliance is a President, CFO, and a sys admin and observe what happens when you turn the date ahead.... Its not like components interact over time or anything
Did this hurt the technology explosion? Not really. It was broad based and building off of NASA technology developed during the space race. ("Computers that can fit inside a single room....)
Will this hurt Linux? Most intelligent investors know there are such carpetbagging companies out there, and will either avoid the stock or get burned. Many idiots will associate LinuxOne with Linux as a whole, but these are the same twits who will be dropping all of their Linux stock when the next fad comes along.
We'll probably loose some PHB's in this mess, but most of them will have tech people who will use Linux anyway and use the $$$ allocated for NT licenses for Q3 and TNT cards..... ;)
Bottom line, unless there's a massive media blitz, this will only cost us the morons we'd loose in a year or two anyway.
On the flip side, we can all put in some calls. You buy the stock betting it will go down. Someone buys betting it will go up and you get the difference when it tanks! I'm not an investment advisor, I don't even own stock, but the rich guy who rents out space in the building told me this when I told him about LinuxOne.
Funny, I proof courseware about Securities investments, but I don't know squat about it! (The result of reading to find errors and poor readability)
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
This one from The Register (UK). No registration required.
No wonder they go nonlinear. The system is stacked against them from the start.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
actually a better thing to say is "this is like comparing yahoo to IBM".
yahoo and microsoft are in direct competition because of MSN.
-----
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I added a link on siliconInvestor.com Maybe we can help the poor smucks out there SiliconInvesto r
Help fight continental drift.
I wonder how long it'll take before they become a Microsoft Partner.
Blender And Linux Fan
Couldn't Linus Torvalds deny LinuxOne the right to use the name Linux in their corporate name?
Peace and love, y'all
This is so true for many recent IPO's, but I've never seen anyone actually admit it.
After linuxone tanks, you can pickup a truckload of stocks dirt cheap for novelty value...
I can't wait to tell the women at the bar "yeah, I own 10,000 shares of linux stock, wanna see my 'Rol3x'?"
A HOWTO that sums up the whole phenomenon.
LinuxOne is clearly a Situationist-inspired art project, like eToy. It's a hoax created by a Dutch and Japanese multimedia artists' collective. It has to be.
If you look at it that way, it's a good practical joke.
Hmm, these LinuxOne people seem to have something for the FF8 girls. Methinks that they need to get out more.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Wouldn't matter.
Under actual copyright law a derivitive work
falls under the copyright of THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.
So...if I modify the Linux kernel...LINUS holds
the copyright on my changes. (The licence gives
me the right to modify and redistribute...but my
modification is not copyright by me unless
the original work was only truly minor to the
end product)
Feel free to look up the US Copyright office
web page and look it up. ALL derivitive works
fall under the original works copyright.
(there ARE exceptions...parody being the only
one I can think of)
If the GPL is wholly invalid...then there is no
right to copy and distribute at all.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
On one hand I'm really angry about this, what happened to the "three years of profibility" clause that the SEC used to enforce? What kind of future are we looking at where every Tom, Dick, and Harry could package someone else's distro and say he's a Linux company about to go public?
On the other hand I'm delighted at the prospect of a Linux IPO bombing. Someone guy in my office made $42,000 on VA Linux and $35,000 on Red Hat's IPO. The guy doesn't know a thing about Linux, only how to push buttons on E-Trade. If the company has the word Linux in it, he buys. I can't wait to hear him scream from his office as LINX falls like a stone.
Common name? No. You mean generic. Currently, it would not pass the test of being a generic name, although maybe Unix would.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
LinuxOne is a problem :
- noone from the free software community will buy its stock
- if investors are clever enough to do an altavista search about linuxone they won't buy either
I think we should be prepared to see more and more companies like this
Unfortunately they'll probably manage to do well and make a pile of money before disappearing into the night....
-Brad :)
Not only are they not using thier own distribution, but they didnt even bother to compile their own Webserver. They are using the defualt Apache installation that comes with Redhat! Connected to www.mlerp.com. Escape character is '^]'. HEAD / HTTP/1.0 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 23:48:04 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) (Red Hat/Linux) Last-Modified: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 22:21:00 GMT ETag: "de002-10e-37f3e24c" Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length: 270 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html
I noticed the article mentioned that by some accounts Mandrake is outselling Red Hat significantly. Looking for the number of units each of the distributions is shipping, I went hunting around the Red Hat site looking for theirs. I can find their estimate of their percentage of the North American market (56%) as well as the revenue generated from the sales of software ($3,369,000), but I can't find the raw number of units. I'd like to know. Now to Red Hat's credit, they clearly indicated in the latest quarterly report that the decline in software sales as a percentage of income does not represent a decrease in sales of software. They have increased their sales of service. And from the look of it as I skimmed, they are selling quite a few books as well.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
One way to partake would be to short it just after its issue. Chances are it will open at more than 5 times its issue price, but then depreciate rather rapidly. If you short it, you can cash in big. However, unfortunately some brokerages might not allow to short stocks right after the IPO.
Does anybody know the date when it'll go to IPO? January 20th by any chance?
Ahem, you don't know what you're talking about. If I write something and copyright it, by default nobody can distribute it. If I write a license granting certain rights to distribute my work, and I give you a copy of the work with rights contingent on the license, you *MUST* abide by the restrictions outlined in the license or you must not distribute my work.
If the license contains some internal contradiction, portions of it may be re-interpreted by a judge. If it contains some hidden agenda deep within the fine print that is totally unreasonable (for a fine example, see paragraph eighty-six of the Microsoft Windows 2000 EULA saying you "...be required to act as Bill Gates' personal towel boy for a period not to exceed 18 months"), a judge may require that the offending portion be removed and the license stand.
There are no such unreasonable hidden clauses in the GPL. In fact, the summary at the top describes the license unambiguously and no judge would really believe that someone was misled by it.
Just looks like another smartass trying to make some fast money from others works. Nothing new.
Anyway, I'm not going to use Mandrake distribution. If they work, collaborate or whatever with LinuxOne, something stinks.
Unfortunately, shorting it would be impossible. At least my broker (Datek) does not let me short VA, Red Hat, etc. - "security is non-marginable" (and, therefore, can't be sold short). I think it is the same with other brokers, at least right after the IPO. This is one of the reasons why VA is still around $200 - people can not go short on it. Once they can, it will go down to more reasonable levels (although I've been saying that about Amazon all way long :)
That's not a bad idea!
If everyone who has a spare couple of $hundred (more is better of course) did this, it would send a pretty good message, too.
You should put a link to this up on a couple stock boards, too.. that would scare the DayTraders off.
probably means it took him longer to get than normal.
- LinuxOne's GPL violation status:
- They acknowledge the requirement to provide a written offer in the README on the CDROM
- They acknowledge the problem when contacted by phone
- They have failed to follow through on providing the source code on their FTP site
- Caldera has distributed OpenLinux Demo CDs without source code or a written offer of source code.
- The CDROM README file does no discuss the availablity of the source code at all
- Caldera refuses to respond to email on the subject
- Caldera refuses to address the problem when contacted by phone stating a policy of requiring software authors to contact the Caldera contact assigned to them at the time Caldera choose to redistribute their software (however, Caldera has not assigned contacts to GPL authors, only to companies authoring commerical licensed software). They have refused to acknowledge that there is any problem.
- Linux Systems Labs in their product titles implies that entire CDs are covered by the GPL when in actuality the CD conatins several packages that are not covered by the GPL (this act is described as a GPL violation by the Free Software Foundation)
- Linux Central when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
- Cheap Bytes when a binary only CD is ordered does not supply any written offer of source code availablity
- IBM has been in violation of the LGPL for over 400 days since the time they have distributed unsupported ADSM for Linux. To date, they still have not made the object files for ADSM available for accomplishing relinking against modified versions of the LGPL material. There is every reason to believe that IBM will remain in violation of the LGPL throughout the entire 1999 year.
If you where actually do a non-bias audit of the companies that are affilating themselves with the Linux name, I think you would find that if you put all the company names on a dart board and threw a dart at it that the majority of the time you will hit a company that has violated the GPL. You have to wonder why we continue to be dumb enough to publish under the GPL or LGPL at all! And considering that a large part of the computer industry works "by example" of other computer companies that have been successful, it isn't suprising that the number of GPL violations continue to rise. Imagine if LinuxOne choose to follow Caldera's example and not even provide an offer in their README file. But rather than set the Linux friendly companies as a whole straight so that they are all setting good examples for other companies that become interested in affilating themselves with Linux, what happens is that groups like Technocrat reserve doing an audit for GPL violation until they find something else they don't like about the company. If your extra shady then the "and you followed the bad example of the other Linux companies and violated the GPL" card will be thrown at you. But if your "friendly" enough to the Linux Community like being a Linux Internation Sponsoring Corporate Member just like Caldera does then: what the hay, go ahead and throw out as many demo CDs without source code or offer of source code as you want, enforcing the GPL only applies to those other questionable companies. Why should Caldera even have to acknowledge they have obligations under the GPL?I think that /. readers are getting their panties in a bunch needlessly over this. Most people who buy IPOs are not THAT stupid. Most IPOs need a top tier underwriter to do at all well. RedHat had Goldman Sachs, the toppest of the top. VA Linux and Andover had decent underwriters.
LinuxOne is trying to fly on their own, which to any investor who knows anything is an immediate red light and siren warning.
There are plenty of scam artists trying to attach their name to whatever is hot at the moment - from Black Light Power to LinuxOne. LinuxOne isn't the first company to try a fast one like this, nor are they the last. Will investors pay any attention to LinuxOne? Not any more than they will to the thousands of con artists that have tried to take advantage of other stock fads.
What is the most likely consequence of the LinuxOne IPO? A securities fraud case, and jail time for those involved.
Linux is not going to get a black eye over this.
Rafael Kaufmann's parents are proud to announce his IPO, to take place in early 2000. Kaufmann has already secured the Nasdaq ticker KMNN, and is in the process of preparing for the offering by fasting (sometimes for periods of over 6 hours!) and cleaning up his place.
Kaufmann is a small individual operating out of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, associated with the Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics. He operates mainly in the area of computational mathematics, as well as alternative software in general. He is affiliated with the Tunes project, but has yet to do anything important.
Kaufmann's mother Drorit had no comment, but his father was quoted as saying "that boy will never amount to anything!".
To the editors: your English is as bad as your Perl. Please go back to grade school.
Linux has nothing to do with the stock market. Linux will live on long after the last day trader is long dead in the cold ground. Linux will survive because I say it will and so do thousands of other people around the world. I'm getting kind of sick of all the talk about Linux INC. Linux is not a corproation it is a community.
I personally don't care if RedHat dies tomorrow and if LinuxOne carried the casket, it would not mean a thing to me. How many people that use Linux have shares of VA or RedHat? I would bet it's somewhere around 3% or less.
Ask yourself why you use Linux. If you use it because RedHat and/or VA and/or LinuxOne and/or LinuxTwo and/or LinuxEtc is listed on the stock exchange then you are a short sighted fool and should switch back to NT.
When you are serious about wanting stable software systems you get Open Source, and when you get serious about Open Source you get Linux. Why? Becuase Linux delivers on the promises it makes. It is fast and stable despite what Microsoft says, It is free despite what TurboLinux says, and it is a full desktop ready operating environment despite what every newspaper hack in the world says.
Linux changes everything. The media doesn't see it, the Wall Street wolves don't see it, but I do. If an under-educated carpenter from nowhere USA can see it then surely all you college grads must have some clue.
What does Linux mean to me? It means I will never have to pay for software again! Is this gready? YES. Is it short sighted? PROBABLY. Is it true? YES.
The truth is that right now anything that carries the Linux stamp onto Wall Street will be devoured with disgusting lust. Soon that will change and if all it costs me is a couple of day traders, that's a price I am willing to pay.
This is not the last of the Linux crooks! Get over the shock! If you have web space, use it to speak out against the crooks and praise the honest man. If you have a penny, send it to the honest man. If you have a voice speak, out for the honest man. If you are an honest man, thank you.
I am debating whether to 1) Get in on the LinuxOne IPO, or 2) make money by placing thousands of tiny, classified ads in newspapers across America (a la Don LaPree). The only trouble is, I'm having difficulty deciding which is the bigger scam... I pity the fool who takes advantage of the Linux community. I'm with Bruce Perens... run these guys out of town on a rail. I'd do it myself, since I'm a helluva tough guy, but I'm awfully busy these days with Pac-Man commercials and such.
"LinuxOneTM, Inc., provides world-class UNIX (Linux) software for server,workstation, and home environments." So in addition to everything else, Linuxone is ignoring the Opengroup's trademark for Unix(TM). BTY the rest of the page reads like an ad for the IPO.
Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
Does this mean that /. is no longer a couple of guys with a cool site. I sure hope not, even if there happen to be a couple thousand readers daily. Who says the media is never biased. Lets see, I know ABC isn't. That little commercial stating "tell me something good about guns in 10 seconds" sure isn't biased. Lets see, how about protection from people who got them illegaly and, oh yeah, that second ammendment thingy also. Sorry, I got a little off topic, but nobodies perfect, include CmdrTaco.
The best way to accelerate a windows box is at 9.8 meters per second square.
If you check out LinuxOne's order form you will notice that the source codes are available upon request. The fact that the default choice for receiving source codes is "no" is another story...
Also notice that although they have changed their name from "LinuxOpen" to "LinuxOne" (as stated in the article above) linuxopen.com is still registered and their orderforms are located on a computer called gabriel.linuxopen.com
Funny stuff...
I quote some choice lines from their S-1 filing. These folks really need to be whipped!
We are an emerging developer and provider of open source software and services, including the LinuxOne Operating System, which we call "LinuxOne OS". Unlike proprietary software, open source software has publicly available source code and can be copied, modified and distributed with minimal restrictions.
No mention of GPL!
Since it was only introduced in September, 1999, we do not have a history of operations, but we believe it will become one of the more popular Linux-based operating systems in the world.
Yeah right! Hello! How do they plan on doing this? Mailing it to the 2 billion armpits in China?
We seek to establish a position as a leading provider of open source software and services by: - continuing to enhance our web site to create one of the definitive online destinations for the open source community;
And what an awesome begining they've had so far. One of the stalwart figures of the community Bruce Perens has been openly critical about them and has shown no signs of withdrawing his criticism, since LinuxOne has obviously made no effort to involve him or the other leaders in the community.
They then go ahead and list the following risks.
Few open source software products have gained widespread commercial acceptance partly due to the lack of viable open source industry participants to offer adequate service and support on a long-term basis.
Huh???? Apache and Linux have not gained commercial acceptance?
OUR RELIANCE ON THE SUPPORT OF LINUX TORVALDS AND OTHER PROMINENT LINUX DEVELOPERS COULD IMPAIR OUR ABILITY TO RELEASE MAJOR PRODUCT UPGRADES AND ESTABLISH MARKET SHARE.
Enough saidCorrect me if I'm wrong, but hasn't LinuxOne changed a whole lot since then? I believe that when the LinuxWorld article was written, they had all kinds of problems, but since then they have fixed many of them. I remember reading that their distro is sort of respectable now, and they have a better web site etc. Let's not blindly LinuxOne bash, although I wouldn't buy their stock.
Sheepdot: Open Source good, Closed Source baaaaaaad!
Something that I don't think anyone has mentioned (my fault if they did...) A quick search of the US PTO online database shows no registered or pending trademarks for LinuxOne. I don't think it's illegal, but I think it's pretty poor for someone to claim a trademark on something they haven't even bothered to file with the US gov't. Unless of course it's a foreign trademark. But that's murky waters. Anyway.. I'm not one to cry wolf about stuff I don't know 100% about, but I'm just a bit apprehensive about this company... we'll see what happens when and if it ever does IPO.
somebody finally reporting something on here
truthful about a hyped linux company which has
problems !!!
be honest about all this stuff
we all lose when people arent
Here's the latest I've found:
Hmm, it's not RedHat anymore (it was RedHat 6.0 in early Nov.), but that sure as hell doesn't look like a LinuxOne distro either. I also seriously worry about how the Linux name could be affected by such shoddiness. They apparently haven't even locked the box down. Bad news.They also claim to have downloadable source at 140.174.127.97, but I've had no luck getting in, with the message:
Hmm. Wonder if they have max users set to something like 1 or 2 to give the appearance that their server is busy. Mainly, I wanted to see for myself how "different" their distro was. So far, no luck and I'm not optimistic.Hopefully, there is enough noise in the community to keep any innocent users from getting snakebitten by what, to us, are obviously useless and unneccessary products (LinuxMac on the top of the list).
--Humpty Dumpty was pushed!
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
If Redhat gives up you better believe it's going to have a negative impact on linux, its ability to get new software as well as marketshare. So like it or not, the future of linux depends on one company-Redhat. Fortunately, Redhat isn't linuxzero.
---
LinuxOne will probably do well because their focus is on China and Japan. Do you think they care what slashdot says? Slashdot is in English. LinuxWorld is in English. They'll let Redhat dominate the English speaking world while they try to 'own' China. Having said that I think these guys are con artists trying to sell stuff anyone can legally get for free.
---
redhat: losing money and also losing marketshare to mandrake which is basically repackaged redhat.
---
All IPOs I've heard of have floated less than 50% of the total stock. FIY, some of the astronomical early rises have been due to a very low supply of specific stocks and a very big buzz/hype. I agree that it'd be great if someone bought the company from the owners after it has bombed and turn it into a more serious operation. It just can't be done in the stock market before some of the owners decide to sell a hefty chunk of stock. That in turn won't happen before the SEC allows them to, which is 6 months after the IPO.
No, I am a Finaly Fantasy freak, plus I'm playing the game as we speak.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...