Perhaps my point has been unclear, so I'll try to make it crystal here: the free redistribution of Red Hat is:
1) Completely legal and ethical;
No, your points have been clear, just wrong. Again, read the Red Hat EULA for their enterprise editions, I already provided a link as well as reprinted a pertinent portion in bold.
See for yourself, if you want to subscribe for their support you have to pay Red Hat for each copy installed. Go to redhat.com, select software, select any of the enterprise editions, get your credit card out (they start at $179.00 per), then be sure to actually read the agreement you are signing (you only have to click a box that you have read it before you can download).
I'll hyperlink to it again for you, so you hopefully don't get lost along the way this time:
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_2-1.html
Actually, this link was from the WS version, the one I provided earlier was for the AS version, but the Red Hat EULA applies to all Enterprise versions that are under support subscription.
No one was talking about RH Advanced Server, the product under discussion was the Red Hat boxed set that can be found on retail shelves. I've never seen RHAS there, have you? Your line of thinking seems to be that discontinuing boxed sets of plain old, freely copyable Red Hat Linux will somehow increase piracy of the not-freely-copyable RHAS. If that is in fact what you are stating, would you please explain exactly how that is supposed to happen? There seems to be no logical connection at all between dropping boxed sets and people pirating RHAS. If that's not what you're saying, then just what are you trying to say?
Simple. Some of us shop other places than Best Buy for our software:
www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=391888
When these retail channels close, isos for software like this will be finding their way to kazaa a lot faster than they already are. Which a lot of linux guys will really like. Just not going to help Red Hat (who it looks like it might need some help) very much.
That would be taking the code and using it in a proprietary product, but you seem to be saying (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that people would be illegally copying Red Hat. It is, of course, completely legal to copy Red Hat.
There are many instances where it is *NOT* legal to make unlimited copies of RH media, such as when you or your organization are attempting to subscribe to the enterprise editions like Advanced Server, at which point you are subject to the Red Hat EULA instead (whether you agree with it's legality or not):
4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server...During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhlas_us.html
Also, even in cases where it may be legal, such as "Red Hat Linux", it is still unregulated duplication of the product that generates zero return revenue, meaning it's not a good plan for any for-profit business to expect to be able survive on.
What Red Hat is saying is that Linux does not get onto the desktop via the boxed set, at least not in sufficient quantities for them to make money at it...Most people who need CDs either buy them for a small charge from someone who will burn them a set cheaply, or from outfits like Cheap Bytes, who sell low-cost CDs for various distros.
Yes, that is what Red Hat is saying, but the alternate distribution methods you mentioned don't get any money back to Red Hat Inc. either. Therefore with this upcoming change by market leader Red Hat the business model of companies marketing to the "Linux desktop" is going to be put under question until they find a profitable way that does.
Repeating alarmist but catchy phrases about the demise of the Linux desktop reveals the speaker's ignorance to those who use said desktops, without adding anything of consequence to the discussion.
I was simply responding to the phrase as presented by an earlier poster. If you want it in my terms, then how about this: "The long term commercial viability of Linux desktop operating systems could be in grave peril after the market's leading vendor announced it is withdrawing from all currently available distribution channels other than direct online."
Possibly, there are ways to install IIS on XP Home, but that seems to be quite complicated...I found that so crazy that I decided never to buy any Microsoft product again.
You can run 'personal web server' on xp home, whether m$ wants you to or not:
This isn't Red Hat saying that the Linux desktop doesn't exist...
Actually, that's exactly what it's saying.
I actually bought Red Hat off the shelf years ago but that's only because the $30 or whatever beat the hell out of trying to download something that massive on a dial up...not to mention a book that sucked ass and I ended up dropping another $30 on O'Reilly's "Running Linux."
Many others won't even have that option now. Going online 100% will hurt their overall $$$ sales, not only because it is effectively sacrificing the retail market, but also simply because so much piracy exists in their future (online) environment.
Slashdot Mirror
Unbelievable. And I'm supposed to trust their methods and products with my enterprise?
Perhaps my point has been unclear, so I'll try to make it crystal here: the free redistribution of Red Hat is:
1) Completely legal and ethical;
No, your points have been clear, just wrong. Again, read the Red Hat EULA for their enterprise editions, I already provided a link as well as reprinted a pertinent portion in bold.
See for yourself, if you want to subscribe for their support you have to pay Red Hat for each copy installed. Go to redhat.com, select software, select any of the enterprise editions, get your credit card out (they start at $179.00 per), then be sure to actually read the agreement you are signing (you only have to click a box that you have read it before you can download).
I'll hyperlink to it again for you, so you hopefully don't get lost along the way this time:
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_2-1.html
Actually, this link was from the WS version, the one I provided earlier was for the AS version, but the Red Hat EULA applies to all Enterprise versions that are under support subscription.
Simple. Some of us shop other places than Best Buy for our software:
www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=391888
When these retail channels close, isos for software like this will be finding their way to kazaa a lot faster than they already are. Which a lot of linux guys will really like. Just not going to help Red Hat (who it looks like it might need some help) very much.
That would be taking the code and using it in a proprietary product, but you seem to be saying (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that people would be illegally copying Red Hat. It is, of course, completely legal to copy Red Hat.
There are many instances where it is *NOT* legal to make unlimited copies of RH media, such as when you or your organization are attempting to subscribe to the enterprise editions like Advanced Server, at which point you are subject to the Red Hat EULA instead (whether you agree with it's legality or not):
4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server...During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhlas_us.html
Also, even in cases where it may be legal, such as "Red Hat Linux", it is still unregulated duplication of the product that generates zero return revenue, meaning it's not a good plan for any for-profit business to expect to be able survive on.
What Red Hat is saying is that Linux does not get onto the desktop via the boxed set, at least not in sufficient quantities for them to make money at it...Most people who need CDs either buy them for a small charge from someone who will burn them a set cheaply, or from outfits like Cheap Bytes, who sell low-cost CDs for various distros.
Yes, that is what Red Hat is saying, but the alternate distribution methods you mentioned don't get any money back to Red Hat Inc. either. Therefore with this upcoming change by market leader Red Hat the business model of companies marketing to the "Linux desktop" is going to be put under question until they find a profitable way that does.
Repeating alarmist but catchy phrases about the demise of the Linux desktop reveals the speaker's ignorance to those who use said desktops, without adding anything of consequence to the discussion.
I was simply responding to the phrase as presented by an earlier poster. If you want it in my terms, then how about this: "The long term commercial viability of Linux desktop operating systems could be in grave peril after the market's leading vendor announced it is withdrawing from all currently available distribution channels other than direct online."
You can run 'personal web server' on xp home, whether m$ wants you to or not:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/03/02/how_to _set_up_a_personal_web_server.html
Or, you could just run Apache:
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/binaries/win32/
I'd wager they're actually losing money on the shelftop sales. I mean, if it was making them money what would be the point of pulling it?
Exactly why the Linux desktop is dead. If Red Hat is withdrawing, it must be awfully tough going, for ANYONE.
This isn't Red Hat saying that the Linux desktop doesn't exist...
Actually, that's exactly what it's saying.
I actually bought Red Hat off the shelf years ago but that's only because the $30 or whatever beat the hell out of trying to download something that massive on a dial up...not to mention a book that sucked ass and I ended up dropping another $30 on O'Reilly's "Running Linux."
Many others won't even have that option now. Going online 100% will hurt their overall $$$ sales, not only because it is effectively sacrificing the retail market, but also simply because so much piracy exists in their future (online) environment.