I don't mean to rain on your parade, but less than a month ago, a roothole had been discovered in the Linux kernel that goes back to 2.2.0. This is just as bad or worse than any bug that MS produces, most of which DON'T require affecting uptimes (though some may say the NT kernel takes care of that on its own).:P
And with kernel bugs, you have two choices: a) recompile on your own, which is a pain in the arse for many machines if they're slightly different (woe is the sysadmin who tries to copy kernels from machine to machine) or b) use the questionable binary kernel downloads (even more woe). Sometimes i wish OSS people wouldn't take such a high road.
Many many many many many enterprises demand exactly this. It's the way of the world. GM will never buy something they have to support out of mailing lists and FAQs. They sign huge corporate deals where the amount they pay in support dwarfs the amount they pay for the licenses over time. The fact that VA Software didn't make it doing this is not indicative of anything, other than the fact that it may have taken longer to get Linux into the support mix than originally planned.
If there is one thing that could be written on the eventual tombstone, it will be "longer than expected sales cycle".
Though there are thousands of companies out there, and I cede that point to you without argument, very few of them have the ability or cash to execute a huge marketing campaign, a branding effort, or to walk into a CIO of a Fortune 1000 company and make a difference. This is not a small point. The process to selling into a large company is so much different than selling to a 50 person company... it's six months long, you have to have a hundred demos, you have to get sign off from 5 different BDMs and THEN you get the chance to insert your software. The reason that small companies generally don't sell to large ones isn't that they aren't technically capable, it's that they don't have the realistic bandwidth to handle a number of these accounts and wait to get paid for a year.
Linux may become a decent choice for the PHB in certain arenas, but that's only because of an overwhelming majority (60%) of people use for that purpose (i.e. web serving). It is not possible to overvalue the handholding relationship in the sales process. Novell still has 18% of the market for server OSes, largely due to their sales force. When someone comes along to oust a Linux solution (MS for example) who is the PHB going to call on Linux's end and say "How does your product compare to these new whiz-bang features?" Unfortunately, no one will be available.
Seriously though, what does this say about two crucial things:
A) What's going to happen to slashdot [if|when] VA Software Corp. goes under? It'll be incredibly hard to maintain the servers/routers/etc. with volunteers only.
B) Is there anyone left from a commercial standpoint other than IBM and Redhat who are willing to stand behind Linux?
1) Users who enter are given a certain amount of mojo.
2) There is an exchange for mojo in every transaction (i.e. no mojo is created)
Since there is no way to create mojo, except for the new users, old users must only focus on getting new users to give them their mojo. Old users will be able to build up mojo over time, but ultimately they can only increase their stash by taking something from new users. Am I missing something here?
First, this would be a massive SEC violation. When you own 100 shares you can do a lot of things you can't do when you own 24 million (which is over 5%) Here's a chart
Second, Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they don't just throw away $135 million dollars without raising some eyebrows in the DOJ/SEC/etc.
Third, investments this large are normally done with limits on sales. The Apple shares that MS bought years ago was with a lock for 3 years (IIRC) when they converted into voting shares. Though I see no details in the news articles to this end, I'm sure they're in there.
The problem here is much more with the medium than the information. In fact, Roblimo's comment on the front page is inaccurate. Direct mail and print advertisers spend 5-10x more for targeted subjects. You can buy direct mail names for US$5 CPM, but it'll cost you US$80 CPM for a list of mothers who recently gave birth.
When your single revenue stream comes from advertising, you depend completely on the quality of your medium for delivering the advertisers' images. Banners are questioned because unlike TV and Magazine ads, they're not interstitial... essentially you don't HAVE to look at them to get to what you're reading. (Yes you could say that about TV ads too, but chances are people will just watch them so they don't miss any of their show. Magazine interstitials (the full and half pages in the midst of your articles) must always be at least glanced at so you can discern whether or not it is part of the article) This is why the email firms (yesmail and MyPoints jump to mind) are going for so much. It costs US$60-80 CPM for emails to MyPoints members (volume discounts), a factor of 100x over banners, and I believe they just had price hikes. The fact is, if you belong to those lists, those are ads you must read. This just points to the medium is what makes the difference, not the targeting/data.
<DISCLAIMER>I work for a Direct Marketing Company on the web, and so I'm certainly biased. Yes, we have a method to monetize our database, and, no, it's not banner ads.</DISCLAIMER>
As you can tell, I do love talking about this stuff, so if anyone would like to continue this further, email me at aronchick(at)sampleville.com
I believe that in ancient times the noblemen got the right of Prima Fraga, the right to frag the bride on her wedding night. One can only hope times have changed.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't mean to rain on your parade, but less than a month ago, a root hole had been discovered in the Linux kernel that goes back to 2.2.0. This is just as bad or worse than any bug that MS produces, most of which DON'T require affecting uptimes (though some may say the NT kernel takes care of that on its own). :P
And with kernel bugs, you have two choices: a) recompile on your own, which is a pain in the arse for many machines if they're slightly different (woe is the sysadmin who tries to copy kernels from machine to machine) or b) use the questionable binary kernel downloads (even more woe). Sometimes i wish OSS people wouldn't take such a high road.
Many many many many many enterprises demand exactly this. It's the way of the world. GM will never buy something they have to support out of mailing lists and FAQs. They sign huge corporate deals where the amount they pay in support dwarfs the amount they pay for the licenses over time. The fact that VA Software didn't make it doing this is not indicative of anything, other than the fact that it may have taken longer to get Linux into the support mix than originally planned.
If there is one thing that could be written on the eventual tombstone, it will be "longer than expected sales cycle".
Linux may become a decent choice for the PHB in certain arenas, but that's only because of an overwhelming majority (60%) of people use for that purpose (i.e. web serving). It is not possible to overvalue the handholding relationship in the sales process. Novell still has 18% of the market for server OSes, largely due to their sales force. When someone comes along to oust a Linux solution (MS for example) who is the PHB going to call on Linux's end and say "How does your product compare to these new whiz-bang features?" Unfortunately, no one will be available.
Seriously though, what does this say about two crucial things:
A) What's going to happen to slashdot [if|when] VA Software Corp. goes under? It'll be incredibly hard to maintain the servers/routers/etc. with volunteers only.
B) Is there anyone left from a commercial standpoint other than IBM and Redhat who are willing to stand behind Linux?
But nobody has a hobby that sucks most of the time. At least to them anyway.
You've obviously never played golf...
This is wrong. Though the PC may not come from Walmart, Oracle does $1B a year on x86 hardware. Before services and various other costs...
How is this not a huge pyramid scheme?
1) Users who enter are given a certain amount of mojo.
2) There is an exchange for mojo in every transaction (i.e. no mojo is created)
Since there is no way to create mojo, except for the new users, old users must only focus on getting new users to give them their mojo. Old users will be able to build up mojo over time, but ultimately they can only increase their stash by taking something from new users. Am I missing something here?
First, this would be a massive SEC violation. When you own 100 shares you can do a lot of things you can't do when you own 24 million (which is over 5%) Here's a chart
Second, Microsoft may have a lot of money, but they don't just throw away $135 million dollars without raising some eyebrows in the DOJ/SEC/etc.
Third, investments this large are normally done with limits on sales. The Apple shares that MS bought years ago was with a lock for 3 years (IIRC) when they converted into voting shares. Though I see no details in the news articles to this end, I'm sure they're in there.
The problem here is much more with the medium than the information. In fact, Roblimo's comment on the front page is inaccurate. Direct mail and print advertisers spend 5-10x more for targeted subjects. You can buy direct mail names for US$5 CPM, but it'll cost you US$80 CPM for a list of mothers who recently gave birth.
When your single revenue stream comes from advertising, you depend completely on the quality of your medium for delivering the advertisers' images. Banners are questioned because unlike TV and Magazine ads, they're not interstitial... essentially you don't HAVE to look at them to get to what you're reading. (Yes you could say that about TV ads too, but chances are people will just watch them so they don't miss any of their show. Magazine interstitials (the full and half pages in the midst of your articles) must always be at least glanced at so you can discern whether or not it is part of the article) This is why the email firms (yesmail and MyPoints jump to mind) are going for so much. It costs US$60-80 CPM for emails to MyPoints members (volume discounts), a factor of 100x over banners, and I believe they just had price hikes. The fact is, if you belong to those lists, those are ads you must read. This just points to the medium is what makes the difference, not the targeting/data.
<DISCLAIMER>I work for a Direct Marketing Company on the web, and so I'm certainly biased. Yes, we have a method to monetize our database, and, no, it's not banner ads.</DISCLAIMER>
As you can tell, I do love talking about this stuff, so if anyone would like to continue this further, email me at aronchick(at)sampleville.com
I believe that in ancient times the noblemen got the right of Prima Fraga, the right to frag the bride on her wedding night. One can only hope times have changed.