Le mer 30/07/2003 à 06:09, shane stixrud org a écrit : > Even if you are correct and this is a marketing decision I don't see that > as a "bad thing" (tm). I think that's a "bad" marketing decision. AS is more expensive than WS but you get less and customers don't like this even if Redhat thinks it's stupid. I know that AS is for mission-critical, but nothing are forcing customers to use Ooo if they don't need it. Redhat have planned to create a paying "only in WS" channel for AS ? But what i am really worry is for RHE ES that is not a "mission-critical" OS. Often customers want an OS that can do everything but don't want RHL which have a weak support. Or they want an OS for AS/ES development and a developer NEED Ooo, xpdf, cdrecord. WS don't fit this needs. WS don't provide the "only in AS" part (another paying channel ?). > RedHat does not take away our freedom by not > packaging openoffice as part of AS. Maybe it is a marketing decision (I > have my doubts) but even if true, perhaps it is a _good_ marketing > decision which will benefit RedHat directly and it's users indirectly. > > RedHat is a business, their main goal in life is to make money. Unlike > most companies RedHat exhibits principles, morals and *gasp* appears to > even respects their users freedoms and rights. > > RedHat must maintain a careful balance between providing users with > value while insuring they can continue to do so in the future. > > Shane. > -- Féliciano Matias <feliciano matias free fr>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=