what about the people that do work and don't have medical coverage anyway?
what about people that are merely looking for work but have no medical coverage?
If they even dare pay for their own medical care they might find themselves inelligible under pre-existing condition rules even when they do get work and insurance again.
And if you have ever had a medical problem, try to get insurance as an individual, it's insane.
You've got to admire a "far left" candidate with an "A" grade from the NRA, don't you?
Far left my ass. Too bad people vote based on no information. Dean may not be for you, but to just believe five second analysis by idiots on the TV is not really to have any understanding at all.
Far left? Because he opposed the war on Iraq... wake up... moderates and even conservatives can find a lot to object to.
For one, it's nation building! hello, remember nation building? 87 billion dollars and counting? For another, where the hell is Osama?
I remember back around 85 Apple had a contest for students to come up with a spec for the ideal machine of the future (2000! iirc), and the winner was basically a tablet computer.
For those of your that don't have time to read the article, it's an essay on why it won't be funny.
I liked Bloom County the first few years, it go really bad and then to make it official they called it Outland, and every silly over the top idea was cast as precious, every joke an inside joke.
I think Breathed is a great talent, but maybe too full of himself? Or maybe I just don't get him.
On the bright side, newspaper comics are in such a sorry state he can't possibly hurt.
If you could buy RHN for Fedora, it would be the same, just a name change. Oh, except for the back-porting. Hmmm.
Anyway, it's not the same.
I have been a professional software engineer (programmer) for omg ~15 years now and I do not mind asking my client/employer/self to pay for an OS. Not at all. But it is nice to be able to install the OS anywhere. The freedom to experiment, to not do a PO and budget a research project is quite nice. And the way it's working around here is that soon, although we would no doubt install RH from just a few purchased CDs, every machine would end up buying RHN. We cannot do that now.
I think that's crazy. I mean, again RH is free to do as they like, I'm not harmed by this because of the nature of the GPL, but I think letting the OS get copied is a way to let the OS go everywhere. Once it's there people scratch their head and say, you know what, it's worth a hundred a year per machine to be able to run up2date (in a cron job?).
Now what do we do.... before we could try it and then decide if it's worth it. Now we have to decide if it's worth and then try it. This is a pain.
I actually benefit from the flexibility of free software much more than the low cost. I'm fine with high cost free software!
But someone else will likely step up and support us. I guess it's not going to be RH though because while our IT dept argued for RHN, they never argued to have RedHat in house in the first place!
The only linux I've ever used is RedHat. That is not likely to continue to be true. Mindshare is important, and this move is going to lose them some mind share.
Some cry, "oh, but you are a dirty hippy and they don't care about you, you never pay them anyway!" That's only 1/3 true. I'm sure I have sent enough money RH's way that they have not lost money on me as an individual. That there are not more individuals such that there is critical mass to profit from up2date is another matter, a timing thing, maybe one that RH is playing as well they can.
Anyway, I totally agree except that I like the meaning of fsck because things are fscked up at that point... it pops up on you (on Solaris at least) when you reboot and the disk has a problem.
And also, it's expressive, if you are really mad you can say, "why you file-system-integrity-checking moroon!!!" It's like Fuck 2.0.
The OED is also not the official English language. The official language is spoken. It evolves based on how it's used, not based on the scholars that STUDY that use and try to write it down. And then write it down next year and the next because whoooa, it's changing.
fsck is a word because it's used as a word. I knew what he meant, you did too. You can be in denial and pretend you don't understand because it's not English, or you can admit you understood and claim it's not English... but only years from now will we know if people think it's English, or geek creole, or whatever, but it's a word right now.
oddly enough the freeloading is set to continue with RH support (Fedora) and there just won't be any brand connection... a severe of the most affrontable source. I bet Fedora suits my needs... but why RedHat doesn't want to have it's name, RedHat Open Linux, or something, it sounds very MBAish. The idea would be that it's ok to seed the technology using open source, but don't compete with your own free product. If it's called RedHat anything, people will use it instead? But I don't think so... I think the word "Enterprise" is enough to bring in those sales. But I'm still admitting it's not my business and I don't understand it except as a computer user.
... it's the same thing. People could install the software and experience it before realizing they want to pay for the box. Etc.... a free RH is still where the dominance came from. They are betting they don't need that now with the brand recognition they have among corporations. It's fair to make bets in life.
Why do this? My company is ramping up linux and of course are buying the desktop. It's a critical mass thing. Redhat must think the critical mass for home, desktop, and workstation use is too far off... but where I sit is seems to be hitting big organizations right about now.
Right you are. But Fedora is spelled differently from RedHat. If you like the linkage described, why do you take the Brand off the free version. You can subbrand it. It can be RedHat Free. Or RedHat Fedora. They are moving their brand identity around because of the impact of doing so.
Don't be suprised there is an impact. People using "Fedora" (espc. new users) will not think "RedHat" automatically.
expecially important if one thinks that linux is going to take over any portion of the desktop, like say a steady 10-20% of the install base in a sustained way.
At that point it will not only get people to play with RedHat, but the update services will in fact be quite profitable. People HAVE to have such a service.
But it may be a few years until (1) the users are there and (2) they get hit by some linux exploit which makes it clear they need to pay a few bucks a year for updates.
So, maybe it's a good decision after all for RedHat... but it seems to lock them out of a big future. Microsoft has already proved where the real money is, and it's not in a server side company.
As you point out as well, this can only mean that people will play with other distros and not feel like buying RedHat Enterprise when they "grow up".
Now: the funny part is that RedHat looks like they are going to continue free RedHat via Fedora, and I BET the free update will be as good as currently. It's a branding issue. They want their brand to mean "server room enterprise stuff". Again, I think that's a mistake. Call it Open Redhat, or RedHat Free, or Trial or or or, and let it still be Redhat.
OTOH: I'm not worried because that's only a business issue. I suppose when the time comes I'll try Fedora before moving to a different distro all together.
it's all a gamble. They were making money off of him.
They just needed more subscriptions to make money over all on this practice. They've decided that's not going to happen. The market is not big enough.
It's business but it doesn't mean that RH's bet is correct.
We can all guess if it is or not. I think not. But I also think RH is a very savvy company that might know what's going on in their business better than me...:) Someone is going to make a bundle charging for a linux update service, some day.
I think there is money in desktop linux but I have NOT put my job on the line on that bet, so I support RedHat to make their own decision.
Still, it's a matter of critical mass. If Desktop Linux takes a chunk of the market, let's say 10%, it will in fact be profitable to sell update to those users... as the grandparent points out, it's a must have service.
Redhat is just placing their bets. But remember what made Microsoft rich was that bulk. Redhat seems to have come to the conclusion that that is not where the money is ever going to be in open source.
They know better than me. But that doesn't stop me from thinking they are wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
at all.
What stage at which the healthcare is paid makes a huge difference since it's a matter of insuring risk.
what about the people that do work and don't have medical coverage anyway?
what about people that are merely looking for work but have no medical coverage?
If they even dare pay for their own medical care they might find themselves inelligible under pre-existing condition rules even when they do get work and insurance again.
And if you have ever had a medical problem, try to get insurance as an individual, it's insane.
steal from the best baby.
:) Will Rogers is one great American.
I mean "plagerize".
You've got to admire a "far left" candidate with an "A" grade from the NRA, don't you?
Far left my ass. Too bad people vote based on no information. Dean may not be for you, but to just believe five second analysis by idiots on the TV is not really to have any understanding at all.
Far left? Because he opposed the war on Iraq... wake up... moderates and even conservatives can find a lot to object to.
For one, it's nation building! hello, remember nation building? 87 billion dollars and counting? For another, where the hell is Osama?
because of Netscape. It was the high profile IPO that started the craze. When they failed, the whole idea seemed to fail.
Andreesen is the most overrated guy in the techosphere.
I remember back around 85 Apple had a contest for students to come up with a spec for the ideal machine of the future (2000! iirc), and the winner was basically a tablet computer.
For those of your that don't have time to read the article, it's an essay on why it won't be funny.
I liked Bloom County the first few years, it go really bad and then to make it official they called it Outland, and every silly over the top idea was cast as precious, every joke an inside joke.
I think Breathed is a great talent, but maybe too full of himself? Or maybe I just don't get him.
On the bright side, newspaper comics are in such a sorry state he can't possibly hurt.
Ok, think asshole. No, bigger than that.
jump! wait, let me light the ring on fire, jump little doggie!!!
Why do you hate us now?
If you could buy RHN for Fedora, it would be the same, just a name change. Oh, except for the back-porting. Hmmm.
Anyway, it's not the same.
I have been a professional software engineer (programmer) for omg ~15 years now and I do not mind asking my client/employer/self to pay for an OS. Not at all. But it is nice to be able to install the OS anywhere. The freedom to experiment, to not do a PO and budget a research project is quite nice. And the way it's working around here is that soon, although we would no doubt install RH from just a few purchased CDs, every machine would end up buying RHN. We cannot do that now.
I think that's crazy. I mean, again RH is free to do as they like, I'm not harmed by this because of the nature of the GPL, but I think letting the OS get copied is a way to let the OS go everywhere. Once it's there people scratch their head and say, you know what, it's worth a hundred a year per machine to be able to run up2date (in a cron job?).
Now what do we do.... before we could try it and then decide if it's worth it. Now we have to decide if it's worth and then try it. This is a pain.
I actually benefit from the flexibility of free software much more than the low cost. I'm fine with high cost free software!
But someone else will likely step up and support us. I guess it's not going to be RH though because while our IT dept argued for RHN, they never argued to have RedHat in house in the first place!
The only linux I've ever used is RedHat. That is not likely to continue to be true. Mindshare is important, and this move is going to lose them some mind share.
Some cry, "oh, but you are a dirty hippy and they don't care about you, you never pay them anyway!" That's only 1/3 true. I'm sure I have sent enough money RH's way that they have not lost money on me as an individual. That there are not more individuals such that there is critical mass to profit from up2date is another matter, a timing thing, maybe one that RH is playing as well they can.
to me is like mud wrestling a pig. Somehow.
Anyway, I totally agree except that I like the meaning of fsck because things are fscked up at that point... it pops up on you (on Solaris at least) when you reboot and the disk has a problem.
And also, it's expressive, if you are really mad you can say, "why you file-system-integrity-checking moroon!!!" It's like Fuck 2.0.
no way! laughter is the best medicine. Well, it's the best you will find if you can't search site:.edu
Redhat has announced they will have no more versions of RedHat Linux.
He's severing his relationship because they are taking their ball and going into the glass room (of death).
The OED is also not the official English language. The official language is spoken. It evolves based on how it's used, not based on the scholars that STUDY that use and try to write it down. And then write it down next year and the next because whoooa, it's changing.
fsck is a word because it's used as a word. I knew what he meant, you did too. You can be in denial and pretend you don't understand because it's not English, or you can admit you understood and claim it's not English... but only years from now will we know if people think it's English, or geek creole, or whatever, but it's a word right now.
why do you think that RedHat is synonmous with Linux for corporations. Just luck?
Assuming this guy never bought redhat, he still wore their teeshirt and helped them be the default linux.
Now it'll be something else. Microsoft has proved where the money is and RedHat doesn't want to go there.
Disclaimer: yes, I know less about RedHat's business than they do and they can do what they like. Still sounds like MBAthink to me.
oddly enough the freeloading is set to continue with RH support (Fedora) and there just won't be any brand connection... a severe of the most affrontable source. I bet Fedora suits my needs... but why RedHat doesn't want to have it's name, RedHat Open Linux, or something, it sounds very MBAish. The idea would be that it's ok to seed the technology using open source, but don't compete with your own free product. If it's called RedHat anything, people will use it instead? But I don't think so... I think the word "Enterprise" is enough to bring in those sales. But I'm still admitting it's not my business and I don't understand it except as a computer user.
... it's the same thing. People could install the software and experience it before realizing they want to pay for the box. Etc.... a free RH is still where the dominance came from. They are betting they don't need that now with the brand recognition they have among corporations. It's fair to make bets in life.
Why do this? My company is ramping up linux and of course are buying the desktop. It's a critical mass thing. Redhat must think the critical mass for home, desktop, and workstation use is too far off... but where I sit is seems to be hitting big organizations right about now.
ah, you make a good point about mozilla, I've been too lazy to upgrade it and up2date keeps the old one.
Ok, I won't panic or do anything hasty like install Gentoo.
Right you are. But Fedora is spelled differently from RedHat. If you like the linkage described, why do you take the Brand off the free version. You can subbrand it. It can be RedHat Free. Or RedHat Fedora. They are moving their brand identity around because of the impact of doing so.
Don't be suprised there is an impact. People using "Fedora" (espc. new users) will not think "RedHat" automatically.
It would also seem to mean you cannot rely on up2date to keep your machine secure. Redhat was spending that $60 to, presumably, back port patches.
Will Fedora? Someone needs to start a patching service that does NO development, just backports patches, etc. My company would pay for that...
expecially important if one thinks that linux is going to take over any portion of the desktop, like say a steady 10-20% of the install base in a sustained way.
At that point it will not only get people to play with RedHat, but the update services will in fact be quite profitable. People HAVE to have such a service.
But it may be a few years until (1) the users are there and (2) they get hit by some linux exploit which makes it clear they need to pay a few bucks a year for updates.
So, maybe it's a good decision after all for RedHat... but it seems to lock them out of a big future. Microsoft has already proved where the real money is, and it's not in a server side company.
As you point out as well, this can only mean that people will play with other distros and not feel like buying RedHat Enterprise when they "grow up".
Now: the funny part is that RedHat looks like they are going to continue free RedHat via Fedora, and I BET the free update will be as good as currently. It's a branding issue. They want their brand to mean "server room enterprise stuff". Again, I think that's a mistake. Call it Open Redhat, or RedHat Free, or Trial or or or, and let it still be Redhat.
OTOH: I'm not worried because that's only a business issue. I suppose when the time comes I'll try Fedora before moving to a different distro all together.
it's all a gamble. They were making money off of him.
:) Someone is going to make a bundle charging for a linux update service, some day.
They just needed more subscriptions to make money over all on this practice. They've decided that's not going to happen. The market is not big enough.
It's business but it doesn't mean that RH's bet is correct.
We can all guess if it is or not. I think not. But I also think RH is a very savvy company that might know what's going on in their business better than me...
I think there is money in desktop linux but I have NOT put my job on the line on that bet, so I support RedHat to make their own decision.
Still, it's a matter of critical mass. If Desktop Linux takes a chunk of the market, let's say 10%, it will in fact be profitable to sell update to those users... as the grandparent points out, it's a must have service.
Redhat is just placing their bets. But remember what made Microsoft rich was that bulk. Redhat seems to have come to the conclusion that that is not where the money is ever going to be in open source.
They know better than me. But that doesn't stop me from thinking they are wrong.