Difference is that the few patents that Red Hat holds are all implemented as GPL code. Remember that if you GPL your patented code, you automatically give a patent license with it.
Actually they bought not the software, but the whole company:) But else you are completly right,
sometimes you can't open source something because of NDAs or patents.
I for one rather have red hat release this software as proprietary code than not at all.
It's sad, but sometimes open source don't work.
We should be grateful that Red Hat takes Open Source seriously and even has the bug tracking software available for everybody.
So I am doing a little statistics on this open software
Bugs (excluding enhancements) 157
Bugs (excluding "low severity") 143
Crucial Bugs 20
Security Bugs 3
(none of these is actually exploitable.)
Still I believe that it is entirely possible that RH7 has 2500 bugs. But please be honest, what large software doesn't have bugs.
If the bug tracking system is however closed to the public ( SuSE's e.g is only open to paying business partners) I'd be scared.
Last point: Red Hat does a lot of "base research" pushing Linux to new areas (like making applications ready for gcc 3.0.0) as opposed to others that only melt the newest packages into a distro without doing to much engineering themselves.
So please be little more fair to Red Hat. And save your anger to companies like Corel that only exploit open source without giving back much.
It seems to me that Caldera is trying to get more into the services area. Red Hat has a very big marketshare in the server area and is very popular due to its stability in the open source community. SCO is very popular in the business for its long commercial support. Caldera does not have a major share of this commercial support area, which can produce tons of money. So by buying parts of SCO they get into the billion dollar game. Makes perfect sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Difference is that the few patents that Red Hat holds are all implemented as GPL code.
Remember that if you GPL your patented code, you automatically give a patent license with it.
Evolution looks nice indeed, but who thought of this stupid buttons below the mailfolders?
Being able to access contacts and so on is nice, but it wastes a lot of space in an area where you'll need space most.
So the obvious question is:
How to disable this new component buttons and/or revert to the old GUI style?
Last time I checked the Oracle License alone was 36000 $ per CPU. So do the 2500 $ for _support_ really matter?
Look at the Red Hat Naming Mystery
I for one rather have red hat release this software as proprietary code than not at all. It's sad, but sometimes open source don't work.
1) Red Hat offers 0800 suppoort in germany also in german language.
2) There is no KDE2 yet. Betas proved to be unstable thats why KDE1 is used. You can install KDE 1.96 from CD2
3) Red Hat Linux 7 comes in two versions:
Deluxe (89 DM) on 10 CDs ( including RailroadTycoon II and Parsec)
Professional (399 DM) on 15 CDs with lots of extra stuff and even more free support.
4) SuSE is also an "inc" its just not publically traded. But true being "public" complicates things.
5) True, but Red Hat also sponsor many things.
And now some baits back: *eg*
6) SuSEs Bugzilla is only open for business partners
7)SuSE is not entirely GPL
8)SuSE does not follow release early/often on "their" projects like Xfree.
9)4 Distries a year do not allow proper bug testing. (Red Hat hat over 2 month of code freeze to allow proper beta testing)
Disclaimer: This is not meant to beat SuSE, just to point out the nonsense of the original post.
USE THE DISTRO YOU LIKE!!!!
So I am doing a little statistics on this open software
(none of these is actually exploitable.)
Still I believe that it is entirely possible that RH7 has 2500 bugs. But please be honest, what large software doesn't have bugs.
If the bug tracking system is however closed to the public ( SuSE's e.g is only open to paying business partners) I'd be scared.
Last point: Red Hat does a lot of "base research" pushing Linux to new areas (like making applications ready for gcc 3.0.0) as opposed to others that only melt the newest packages into a distro without doing to much engineering themselves.
So please be little more fair to Red Hat. And save your anger to companies like Corel that only exploit open source without giving back much.
It seems to me that Caldera is trying to get more
into the services area. Red Hat has a very big marketshare in the server area and is very popular
due to its stability in the open source community.
SCO is very popular in the business for its long
commercial support.
Caldera does not have a major share of this commercial support area, which can produce tons
of money. So by buying parts of SCO they get into
the billion dollar game.
Makes perfect sense to me.