“Over at the Novell public relations blog, they’re wondering if Red Hat’s Matthew Szulik’s conversation with Geoffrey Moore at Vortex on avoiding lock-in has anything to do with BusinessWeek’s recent article about Novell. The gist of the discussion is the eternal battle between those who see Red Hat as being on its way to the new Microsoft. I have to say that I get as sick and tired of these arguments as I did of eating macaroni and cheese when I was kid.”
Well, the link is broken, so don’t accuse me of not RTFA, but I will still comment.
Red Hat is certainly not becoming a new Microsoft. It is Red Hat whom is buying other companies, and then open sourcing their products, not Novell. It is Red Hat who’s entire Enterprise Product Line is GPL/OSS (minus things like Acroread and Real Player), not Novell’s. Red Hat is pushing an entire GPL/OSS stack, knowing full-well that it can be redistributed freely (sans the trademarks, ala CentOS or WhiteBox). Novell is still pushing suedo-proprietary offerings like Open Enterprise Server. Red Hat was the first to sue SCO and try to get that whole mess sorted out (although it kind of failed on them, with their case being stayed).
I am quite content personally with Red Hat ruling the Enterprise Linux space. They’ve been doing Linux for over a decade and have always been there for the community. Novell is still just dipping their toes in. They are getting better though, open sourcing things like YaST and Ximian Connecter.
(I have nothing against Novell, I am just saying I think these fears of Red Hat are unfounded).
One thing to consider is Novell was an established company when it became an Open Source company. There has been a strong movement to releasing much of their technology as free software. iFolder, Yast, Open Suse are all examples of this. Red Hat has had the luxery of building free software into the organizational structure, where Novell is still figuring out how everything should work.
I realize that you are not picking on Novell. I am trying to shed a little light on why things are as they are currently.
Get Over It OS News, You’ll Never Be A Reuters.
Don’t like the line? Don’t dish it out.
Hae you forgotten to take your medication today?
It seems to be fashionable to say that Red Hat will become like Microsoft, but it simply isn’t possible. They can certainly try, but as their market share gets greater there will be more and more demand for non-Red Hat systems that are compatible with all the software Red Hat uses. With Red Hat you can do that 100%, but with Windows of course, you can’t.
Strangely, this actually makes things better for Red Hat because there are a lot of systems out in the world that aren’t Red Hat, and aren’t contributing to their revenue, but it means that Red Hat software and systems can slot straight in with them. That’s a problem Microsoft has had as people hit a brick wall with their incompatibility with everything else.
It is simply impossible for Red Hat to use technology to lock people in. Yer, I don’t doubt that there legal people try and lock people into long-term contracts (as all types of companies do), and they may even eventually have contracts that say “Though shalt not use non-Red Hat software”. However, that means that their customers have recourse to challenge anything like that, change their software and get people back to reality. In the Windows world it gets as far as people talking about changing until they find out that the technology simply won’t let them – brick wall.
However, if Novell wants to be a counterweight to Red Hat they’re going to have to stop being completely rudderless.
Redhat can’t be like Microsoft because they have a free product!
FREE!!! If it’s not free is bad! Microsoft sucks anyway look at their quality of the software, fisher price could be better and free software is better anyway.
The fact that its free means that its going to be better quality than someone who worked 80 hours a week on it!
Free is better! Freedom of speech is better! Must have free like a milkbone!
So Free, you think you are high with every download!
All Microsoft wants is money and they are just after control. You shouldn’t have a job because then it’s not free and you don’t have any control over anything.
Free is best!!! Free is all there is! Open source is free and free is open source! Support the Freedom and open source religion.
Hmmn, the article strikes me as the usual Linux propaganda from this website. Red Hat will certainly become similar to Micosoft in the sense of having a huge market share in the enterprise if Novell, Red Hat’s sole credible competitor at the moment, catches a cold. And where there is no competition, Microsoft-like practices will creep in.
In the second place, it is entirely possible that large software houses who at present have nothing on Linux will introduce their wares on the basis of certification on only one or two distros. So, for example, if you want to run Adobe products natively on Linux, you may find that they are only supported when run on Red Hat (or another distro). It’s just a scenario but it could easily happen. Already does happen, of course, with some security stuff and Oracle. The article’s claim that you can just walk away if you are tied to this is farcical.
In any case, Red Hat and Novell both run a support sytem that is very like Microsoft. You pay for support contracts which means you pay for a lot of men in suits and behind them you pay for the corporate ecosystem (in the case of Novell, this means the whole corporate BS right up to the private jets). Only one distro allows you to dump that entirely, roll-your-own and choose your own support company, and it’s Debian. Could catch on. Plenty of government outfits clearly think so.
Hmmn, the article strikes me as the usual Linux propaganda from this website. Red Hat will certainly become similar to Micosoft in the sense of having a huge market share in the enterprise if Novell, Red Hat’s sole credible competitor at the moment, catches a cold. And where there is no competition, Microsoft-like practices will creep in.
Ok, now picture your world, where Red Hat is market leader. Now, switch to CentOS or WhiteBox (both of which use the Red Hat source and re-package it without trademarks or copyrighted logos). Or, do it yourself, and download RHEL right from Red Hat’s servers. You have a Red Hat compatible system.
What do you mean no competition? There are scores upon scores of alternatives.
Enterprises don’t run operating systems they run
applications. They also want support and certification/
indemnification for those applications. Do you know if
software vendors (i.e. Oracle) would support a deployment
on a non-RedHat system? (I don’t know the answer to
this)
If the answer to this is no then you are just as locked
in as if you used what you consider to be a proprietary
OS.
The answer must be that if the application vendor has a list of minimum OS and hardware requirements, and X-dristro of Linux plus the hardware meet those requirements, then they shouldn’t give a rat’s ass which distro their customer runs their app on. (I tried looking up the specs and requirments for Oracle DB, but couldn’t find it). I suspect I’m right, and therefore there’s no OS lock-in.
As for your first assertion, it’s partially correct. Business are indeed dependant upon their applications, but if those apps run in an inferior environment, the apps won’t be of much use. So the decision to chose an operating system on which to build a library of apps is a valid one, given today’s hostile environment of spyware and web pop-ups.
Enterprises don’t run operating systems they run
applications. They also want support and certification/
indemnification for those applications. Do you know if
software vendors (i.e. Oracle) would support a deployment
on a non-RedHat system? (I don’t know the answer to
this)
That, in my opinion, is a good example of Application lock-in.
There is nothing stopping CentOS, Ubuntu, or even Linspire from getting an Oracle certification.
Enterprises don’t run operating systems they run
applications. They also want support and certification/
indemnification for those applications. Do you know if
software vendors (i.e. Oracle) would support a deployment
on a non-RedHat system? (I don’t know the answer to
this)
If the answer to this is no then you are just as locked
in as if you used what you consider to be a proprietary
OS.
Oracle supports Red Hat, Asianux, Red Flag, Turbolinux (I believe) and SUSE. Most other ISVs support at least a few distros. Almost all applications supported on Red Hat are at least supported also on SUSE.
Ok, now picture your world, where Red Hat is market leader. Now, switch to CentOS or WhiteBox (both of which use the Red Hat source and re-package it without trademarks or copyrighted logos). Or, do it yourself, and download RHEL right from Red Hat’s servers.
Where on Red Hat’s site can I download RHEL? I can find links for Fedora, but none for RHEL.
Where on Red Hat’s site can I download RHEL? I can find links for Fedora, but none for RHEL.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/4/en/
Not in .iso format (they don’t pre-package it, but there it all is. Feel free to explore)
you can download from here :
http://www.redhat.com/en_us/USA/rhel/details/eval/
and once your redhat network expires you can build the SRPMS from ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/4ES/en/os/SRPMS
and keep your sistem updated
I believe he ment source RPMs.
Nothing stops you from rolling your own, 100% compatible RHEL distro. (Ala CentOS/WhiteBox/etc).
RedHat is not obligated to distribute binaries, only source.
Gilboa
Yes, monopolies lead to Microsoft-like practices. However, Red Hat couldn’t do that if they wanted to for two reasons: If Red Hat did start to get that big, another major player would enter the market (think IBM or even HP). Big profits bring with it more compitition, which brings me to my second point. The barriers of porting RH supported software to another linux-distro are far smaller than porting Windows software to another OS. It is these low barriers that will prevent RH from becoming a Microsoft-like monopoly.
There is too much hatred of Microsoft.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=hate+Microsoft&b…
Thank god… who needs another evil corporation who puts out shitty products, and single handedly destroys the computing market by making everything stand still for the last 10 years and stop moving forward because of their stranglehold on their monopoly.
i never got sick of it. yum.
>There is too much hatred of Microsoft.
i disagree.. theres far too little.. a far too great percentage of computer users are unaware of the ramifications of what microsoft is doing.. it has to stop and it has to stop.. the sooner the better.. for everyone.. yes, i have a choice.. everyone has a choice.. but microsoft has a stranglehold on the industry and has severely limited those choices.. so unless you’re as geeky as i am, you won’t find a computer in any computer store anywhere without windows.. noone besides us (geeks) knows of the fact that a computer can run an alternate operating system.. (but windows is fine for their needs, i hear you say) ..i’d have to disagree once more.. windows is not fine.. it has NEVER been fine.. it’s a piece of.. well, i’ll stop here, before i get too carried away.. i’ve seen good products.. great products.. and their respective creators crumble under microsofts stranglehold (Be Inc. anyone?).. and it sickens me.. enough is enough.. i want to stab deep into the heart of that beast in redmond, who dares to call itself innovative.. HAH! says I! copying a feature, implementing it poorly 10 years later.. that’s microsofts definition of the word innovation.. pathetic..
and to comment on the article
i think the topic says it all.. and i agree with segedunum.. it’s simply impossible for RedHat to ever be like microsoft..
Macaroni?
MACCHERONI is the right word
Anyways I could not get sick and tired of maccheroni.. Wonderful food.
Yea… this guy must be sick. He must hate chocolate and beer too…. crazy people.
Mac N’ Cheez rocks! GUI does not equal better although it usually means prettier but I’m not seeing that either so the point is completely lost here.
By consistently showing itself to be more concerned about doing the right thing as opposed to doing the thing which is best for it, RedHat has shown itself to be a real scummy company.
Who would ever want a company who respects the GPL more than its own investors to be successful? Let’s instead hope that a company which sold junk (Netware) for years makes it big!
Silly Novell, you can’t suddenly turn into a “FOSS rocks” company and then start bashing one of the most successful FOSS companies out there…
This argument has been going on for what seems like forever and RedHat basically has two black eyes, gcc 2.96 and changing to fedora. Both many think were the right moves I’m just saying these are basically the only two things someone can complain about. While on the flip side myself or others can list 100 good things about the company’s good nature.
This argument of RedHat being MS i think is basically ppl mad that RedHat is more successful than anyone else.
Say it with me:
Microsoft Red Hat Linux
How much do you want to bet that’s what’s coming?
Because MS:Solaris doesn’t sound as catchy.
MicroSuse Linux…gives me the chills.
Novell is going to die if it doesn’t change it’s ways soon. Ya, it has a bit with Suse, but Novell tries to hold on to group ware. Why, beyond me! Who knows how to use it? Very few! Is it a superior product? – possible! Who can get their hands on it — no one!
Linux has become successful, because it can be easily downloaded, and is well document (support).
Novell, needs to make their entire line of products readily available for those to try at home (to learn at home). I’m not saying necessarily make it free, but make an “Educational” version, that is limited in the number of nodes that it can support, and make it available FREE on line. If no one knows how to use your product then no one is going to tell their company or recommend to their company to deploy it.
Until Novell changes it’s ways Novell will die… Hopefully critics are right that Suse will live on even if Novell fades away – and that another company will buy it up. Linux is great, and the community is also great, but distros don’t get developed solely by volunteers – companies develop destros.
Red Hat still uses RPMs, for Pete’s sake! They’ll never gain enough market share to become like MS.
Microsoft gained the first place by illegal tactics , and then started to control the market , Red Hat is not the #1 GNU/Linux distribution at all , or even a real Market leader in Server or Desktop or Cluster or anything at all yet they have people believe that they are the #1 because of the size of there exagerated worth.
When someone who as a budget of 100 000 and make 5 millions thats a real success , when someone as 3.5 billion and only make 150 million thats a very big failure.
In any market you have to recoup everything you invest in to call yourself a success , this means R&D , marketing , sales and after all that is done and calculated you have to show at least 15% profit. Red Hat I am sorry to say is the one that ship less product and cover the less numerous market. Off course they will get the big name and big offer , they do it without any profit.
They use there IPO money to buy other failing company and open there technology , when what they should be doing is going after the market leader and take them on.
Red Hat is also blocking other by saying the technology is not ready , when the fact is ther enot ready themself. Red Hat is to blame for the no dekstop offer and for the no real laptop offer the big brand name are waiting for Red Hat to deliver and Red Hat cant deliver at all.
Anyone who say that Red Hat as no market influence dont know what he is talking about , Red Hat is a well oiled machine who control the mindset of the market , but there not the one making the most innovation or the one showing any strenght in GNU/Linux. There just using there current size to block the others.
For those who think Red hat is the best why do they need to make fedora ? Becaus ethey cant cope with bleeding edge and the desktop , Why arent they shipping PPC version like Apple does ? they certainly have the money to be 50% in that market , why arent they offering live-cd ? why arent they even making a full Commercial enterprise solution ? Why arent they making the #1 cluster solution ?
Easy Because Red Hat is not the current leader. There not driving GNU/Linux , they not behind the most promising technology and there not even the #1 in any market , not even in the US.
There is more to the GNU/Linux market then the two noisy Red Hat and Novell. Leader dont loose there current client they make new one and keep the old one , both are loosing those who tried them for a time for better competiting solutions or even for the spin off , Fedora is giving Red hat a run or its money and for the mistake of making that kind of a spin off.
Althought I respect your opinion, I would have to disagree on some them because you seem to forget that since 2003, Red Hat is primarly an enterprise distro.
They use there IPO money to buy other failing company and open there technology , when what they should be doing is going after the market leader and take them on.
They did so anyone can access these source code. You seems to forgot that is always Red Hat philosophy.
Red Hat is also blocking other by saying the technology is not ready , when the fact is ther enot ready themself. Red Hat is to blame for the no dekstop offer and for the no real laptop offer the big brand name are waiting for Red Hat to deliver and Red Hat cant deliver at all.
Where did you get that information?
For those who think Red hat is the best why do they need to make fedora ?
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/
Becaus ethey cant cope with bleeding edge and the desktop , Why arent they shipping PPC version like Apple does ?
Is Red Hat ever be a hardware manufacturer? Read the link above and you will realise Red Hat is aiming at large enterprise, government environment. Again, home desktop is NOT Red Hat target.
Go read either Novell and Red Hat websites, you will realise you ask the wrong questions to them as home desktop was never their targets. If you want a good paid support for distros that are aiming home users, ask Linspire, Mandriva, Suse, Mepis.
Altought you cant do your reasearch properly or that you dont know the subject you discuss at all , and that you cant make the difference between the fact I offer and the stupid opinion you whant to discuss and offer as an excuse for the Red Hat and Novell marketing bulshit you consome as if it where the reality and absolute truth , also that I have no respect for you at all as you cant use your real name because your ashame of who you are and of your familly and ancestry :
Matthew Szulik :
Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers :
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/linuxunix/0,39020390,39117575,00.h…
Red Hat: Linux desktop should take on MS :
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-938700.html
Red Hat to launch Linux desktops in 8 languages
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=13955908
Bob Young :
“‘m a Linux enthusiast and contributor but I still don’t see where it’s “ready for the desktop” as I would understand that phrase.”
http://slashdot.org/interviews/01/04/11/1555216.shtml
“Bob Young argues that Linux will never take over the desktop”
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,5105563…
Now on to directly answering your bulshit :
” you seem to forget that since 2003, Red Hat is primarly an enterprise distro. ”
Red Hat as always been an Enterprise company who dont care about its community at all , they just needed them to push there IPO and make them look good.
“They did so anyone can access these source code.”
No , they did so they could acquire technology cheaply instead of doing what they got money to do , go after the big software not the failures.
“You seems to forgot that is always Red Hat philosophy.”
Red Hat as more then one philosophy , thats what you dont know at all.
“Where did you get that information?”
Dell worldwide , HP global , Gateway Global , etc … what can I say I aint an incredibly cluelless amateur like you.
“http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/“
Thats the Red Hat marketing crap if you take that as the reality your really lost any sense of what is what at all.
“Is Red Hat ever be a hardware manufacturer?”
With 3.5 billion Red Hat can be pretty much anything they whant to be. Well unless your clueless of the fund are already gone and spent.
“Read the link above”
I dont nead to read Bulshit 10 times …
“and you will realise Red Hat is aiming at large enterprise, government environment.”
I realise you dont know what your talking about at all probably why you hide your true name too.
“Again, home desktop is NOT Red Hat target.”
If I need a false perception and excuse for a company who cant deliver I know who to seek.
“Go read either Novell and Red Hat websites”
As I already said once , I dont nead to read Bulshit 10 times …
” you will realise you ask the wrong questions to them as home desktop was never their targets. ”
No , I ask the right questions , I also know the answers , I also know the subject perfectly , Novell is not even in the same class at all BTW.
” If you want a good paid support for distros that are aiming home users, ask Linspire, Mandriva, Suse, Mepis.”
I dont take advice from people who dont know there subject at all and are not expert.
“In 2002, SUSE accounted for 25 percent of all Linux revenue, according to Credit Suisse First Boston; last year, under Novell’s ownership, SUSE garnered just 19.9 percent. During the same period, total Linux revenue jumped to $198 million from $83 million, most of which went to Red Hat.”
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/11/01/novel…
Its not RedHats fault that Novell is incompetent.
lock in is eg:
suse and redhat getting eal4+ certified.
Its cost more than 50 000 eurs.
Find another distro to afford it. Most are run freely.
That shorten the number a lot.
Which distro do you think the govt will use ? They(ve the choice between a secure certified OS and “others run by smaller companies”
debian is often a second choice but cannot go against this thinking.
neither most of any distro out there.
Other distros that can afford 50,000 Euros?
Ubuntu and Linspire come to mind. Mark Shuttleworth is very wealthy, as is Michael Robertson. Both are Debian-based distros.
Let teh governments and large corporations use those distros with the certs where they need them. The rest of the world that doesn’t need the certs has a lot of choice.