Fate of RedHat

[John Nichel]

Dave Ihnat wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 11:33:10PM -0600, John Nichel wrote:
> 
>>I find it funny (and sad at the same time) that the same people who just 
>>a year ago would have been shouting Red Hat at the top of their lungs 
>>had someone mentioned Microsoft, are so willing to 'jump ship' now.  So 
>>Red Hat is going to charge now...they're a business!!!
> 
> 
> The complaint is not that they're charging, it's that their new model
> doesn't give us the options and features WE need to sell RedHat.
> This isn't a lovefest or religion; it's a business.  If you don't give
> me what I need to sell it, I'll have to leave.

It is a business.  Red Hat's business, not yours.  You're complaint is 
that their business model does not suit you.  It doesn't give YOU the 
options that YOU need to sell THEIR product?  So you want to continue 
reaping the benifits of a free Red Hat to make a buck for yourself?

>>I saw one email on here where someone complained that if you didn't
>>buy a version of WS which came with <insert app here> you couldn't
>>download the rpm from Red Hat, and that this wasn't right because RH
>>didn't make the software, just packaged it in a nice RPM.
> 
> 
> That was me, and you just did a nice <dirty> job of eliding my
> explanations and qualifications--especially the ones where I SAID that
> charging a *fair* amount for the RPMs _sans_ support would be OK--just
> to make your point.

Again, you want them to mold their business model to you.  Will their 
new model work for them?  Time will tell.  Will it work for all of their 
customers?  Most definately not.  As for *fair*, do you honestly think 
it's fair for you to turn your back ("I'll have to leave") on Red Hat, a 
company which has given your their product for free for years?

>>Guess some people don't realize how nasty compiling from source
>>(not source RPM's mind you) can be.
> 
> 
> I know EXACTLY how nasty compiling from source can be; I was teaching
> Unix internals in 1981.  (Where were you?)  I'm still building from
> source; personally, I prefer the Apache Toolbox to separate RPMs.
> But that doesn't mean it's OK for me to force that on clients.

In 81?  I was writing Dungeons and Dragons' programs in BASIC for Atari 
systems.  Want to compare the size of our pocket protectors next? 
Nobody is making you force anything on your clients.  You and your 
clients just have to make a choice now; Pay a bit for Red Hat's services 
and software, compile from source for free, or go to another vendor.  I 
don't see anyone forcing you or your clients to do anything.

-- 
By-Tor.com
It's all about the Rush
http://www.by-tor.com