This research has been going on at UCLA for a while. Recently, one of the big grad students was hired by Microsoft research. You can get info on his work at http://www.marcsmith.com/.
As far as "fluff" goes, hey, it's Sociology. This is hard-core stuff for them.
Many of the ISPs in GTE area support multiple OSes. The ISP I just signed up with (the line hasn't arrived yet), said anything goes, and that they've connected a typewriter to the network.
My company has had a great experience with Above.Net. They've easily handled our growth from 2 computers/1Mb/s to 30 computers/15Mb/s easily. Search for an article on them in the PC Week archives.
As long as RedHat developed software is released under the GPL, I don't think there can be a problem. We'll always have distros like Mandrake that are just RedHat, with extra goodies added that their authors wanted.
Now, if they start releasing proprietary software, then we could be in trouble, but I suspect enough people would drop them like a hot potatoe that they would about lose their position in the Linux world.
I wonder if anybody is still reading this thread...
djb@redhat.com, Donnie Barnes. (sorry if I spelled that incorrectly).
The passage I refer to comes from his visit to the UCLA LUG, roughly this: Q (somebody from OCLUG): Why doesn't RedHat make a windows program which detects and sets up the hardware, then automatically installs Linux. A (djb): Because we don't want to hire a Windows developer, or pay MSDN subscription fee...
Note: a) This isn't the exact quote, but it's along these lines. b) I don't want to reflect negatively on djb, he is a great guy c) This is a damn good idea. ZipSlack is along these lines. It's how I got started with Linux many years ago.
RedHat doesn't seem at all willing to work with Redmond. At the UCLA LUG meeting last year, djb reject the idea that they write a Windows program that detects the hardware, sets up partitions, and automatically installs Linux, because they refuse to hire or pay a Windows developer. If they're unwilling to work with MS when it clearly only benefits RH, I doubt they'd work with MS in some mutually-beneficial agreement.
As long as RedHat continues to release their software under the GPL, other distros will be able to attain comatibility easily, and, like Mandrake-BeroLinux, be able to stay ahead of RedHat in terms of kernel, egcs, glibc, and other packages.
I seem to recall a similar deal being offered by some company (SCO?) for anybody who reverse-engineers the protocol used by Windows Terminal Server. Does anybody else remember the details on that?
Slashdot Mirror
As far as "fluff" goes, hey, it's Sociology. This is hard-core stuff for them.
Many of the ISPs in GTE area support multiple OSes. The ISP I just signed up with (the line hasn't arrived yet), said anything goes, and that they've connected a typewriter to the network.
Oh, and I can run as many servers as I want.
My company has had a great experience with Above.Net. They've easily handled our growth from 2 computers/1Mb/s to 30 computers/15Mb/s easily. Search for an article on them in the PC Week archives.
As long as RedHat developed software is released under the GPL, I don't think there can be a problem. We'll always have distros like Mandrake that are just RedHat, with extra goodies added that their authors wanted.
Now, if they start releasing proprietary software, then we could be in trouble, but I suspect enough people would drop them like a hot potatoe that they would about lose their position in the Linux world.
I wonder if anybody is still reading this thread...
djb@redhat.com, Donnie Barnes. (sorry if I spelled that incorrectly).
The passage I refer to comes from his visit to the UCLA LUG, roughly this:
Q (somebody from OCLUG): Why doesn't RedHat make a windows program which detects and sets up the hardware, then automatically installs Linux.
A (djb): Because we don't want to hire a Windows developer, or pay MSDN subscription fee...
Note:
a) This isn't the exact quote, but it's along these lines.
b) I don't want to reflect negatively on djb, he is a great guy
c) This is a damn good idea. ZipSlack is along these lines. It's how I got started with Linux many years ago.
Vince
RedHat doesn't seem at all willing to work with Redmond. At the UCLA LUG meeting last year, djb reject the idea that they write a Windows program that detects the hardware, sets up partitions, and automatically installs Linux, because they refuse to hire or pay a Windows developer. If they're unwilling to work with MS when it clearly only benefits RH, I doubt they'd work with MS in some mutually-beneficial agreement.
As long as RedHat continues to release their software under the GPL, other distros will be able to attain comatibility easily, and, like Mandrake-BeroLinux, be able to stay ahead of RedHat in terms of kernel, egcs, glibc, and other packages.
I've got a few Linux boxes here getting 3M hits per day EACH!!! No problems...
I seem to recall a similar deal being offered by some company (SCO?) for anybody who reverse-engineers the protocol used by Windows Terminal Server. Does anybody else remember the details on that?