“Media and Internet titan AOL-Time Warner is in negotiations to acquire Linux distributor Red Hat, the Washington Post reported Saturday, citing unidentified sources familiar with the matter. The talks were fluid and it was unclear how much AOL, which runs the biggest U.S. Internet service provider and the second-largest U.S. cable television system, would pay for Red Hat, the newspaper said. Red Hat is the leading distributor of Linux, which unlike software such as rival Microsoft’s Windows operating system, is an “open source” platform that anyone can change to suit their needs.” Read the rest of the story at C|Net News.
AOL-Time Warner in Negotiations to Buy Red Hat
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Wow,Linux would rule!
There would finaly Be some kind of balance in the PC industry.
ciao
yc
Yeah, baby! Bought my RHAT stock at 7.10 a share!
Whoo-hoo! Free money!
If anybody could fuck up Linux, it’s AOL 🙂
Or something else? For a company so obsesed with usability (AOL 5.0 – TOO user friendly!) why pick Linx rather than, say, Be? It’s still got a way to go with its usability despite recent attempts to improve that, and to an extent, due to its open source nature it always will be harder to use/upgrade etc. than Windows Mac OS X or Be. IMO anyway.
Hmmm, this could Be AOL’s payback to Microsoft for trying so hard to screw up the AT&T broadband deal for AOL.
What goes around, comes around!
ciao
yc
Well, AOL bought Netscape, but what did they actually DO with it? It is not part of the AOL client.
If they buy Red Hat, will they actually use Linux? Might they just use it for servers, or just keep it as a part of their product line to compete with MS? It is too early to assume anything.
WHAT ARE YOU THINKING???? BE DIED FOR A REASON! LET IT GO!
And I don’t know what you’re talking about (flat_rate), fuck up Linux? Linux is a kernel. They’re not going to touch the kernel, just probably make a pretty UI and integrate AOL into the entire system, therefore giving consumers a viable competitor to Microsoft Windows and an excellent user environment!
Why is it that everyone is either a Linux-zealot or a Be-zealot?
I was waiting for all the comments of “They should have bought Be instead…”
Hehe…
Seriously though… imo Be would have been a *much* better investment. Red Had’s only advantage is hype and a larger community, but that community doesn’t really matter to AOL anyway.
No doubt they will have to pay *much* more than 11 million for RH, when they could have got Be and its engineers for this much…
1. An OpenSource OS is a much better fit for AOL. (a la Mozilla)
2. Linux is a better servers (Be is geared towards the desktop for now.)
3. Linux already runs on many more platforms from handhelds to supercomputers!
4. Linux has lots of heavy hitting companies supporting/promoting it!
5. Linux supports 64 bit computing.
ciao
yc
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PLEASE NO! ANTHING BUT AN AOL OPERATING SYSTEM!
THE TERROR!!!
ack!!!
Take a look at the people AOL has working on Mozilla! Best of breed!
They would get some great people from Red Hat, put some serious support behind the OS and give Microsoft a run for it’s money!
ciao
yc
I want to see it, i want to see AOLOS
Hmmm, Palm may get clobbered as well.
If AOL chooses to invest in the HandHeld version of Linux, Palm is gonna have to get with the program.
ciao
yc
yc take it easy man.. .you have posted 5 comments already!
AOL and Redhat … what an unholy merger
lol
Thing is, if AOL wanted to tap into the Linux market and release their own distro, why would they have to purchase Redhat to do it. The Linux kernel is itself free, yes ?
This is good news for RedHat. When AOL adquired netscape we all thought they´d f up. But all they did is put more money into it and let them work. Mozilla is great in fact im using it right now. They´ll probably give redhat more money and make a more commercial OS out of it. Redhat has some experience in OS programming and that´s what AOL needed.
Who else can face microsoft?
I like and use Debian, well Libranet which is a derivative of debian linux.
Sometimes I’m stuck win win2000.
Any way lets let the 800 pound gorillas body slam each other.
If microsoft and AOL beat each other senseless we all win. This will give more breathing room to Palm, Amiga, QNX, Other versions of Linux, BSD, you name it.
This will also help Linux in general because if AOL really makes a desktop version of Redhat and gives it away then everybody will take notice and we will start getting more drivers, and more software like games.
This will really be good if AOL backs off of all of their MPAA, RIAA shit and just gives Redhat tons of money and says go grab the desktop from his billness.
In my opinion, it’s obvious for multiple reasons why AOL would opt for Linux as opposed to, say, Be. First off, hype, as mentioned above. More importantly, however, is the fact that there is infinitely superior support for varied hardware under Linux, and vendors are finally beginning to write drivers for it, so that takes most of the headache of (un|poorly-)supported out of the picture.
I’ve still yet to formulate an opinion as to what AOL could end up doing to Linux. They could likely suck up the gruntwork from the open source community (hardware support, kernel maintenance), spin it all into a system full of hooks to proprietary libraries, and ultimately make it into something almost as closed-doored as Windows, all the while claming it to be a brilliant success of the open source paradigm. Regardless, I agree with Fake Bill Gates in that it would be good for both Microsoft and AOL to spend most of their effort battling eachother, losing sight of consumer’s desires (as though they haven’t already), and eventually crumbling, making way for the “little guys”. How great that would be.
ehhh your comments don’t make sense.. first dismiss all “be” comments becuase be is aimed at the desktop and linux at servers… and at the same time try to give microsoft “a run for thier money”. *rotfaol* microsoft owns the desktop market, not the server.. (well partly maybe) but won’t matter to them because they already shift to other markets as well.
I don’t know what AOL’s abilities are in the programming department but i’m curious, if they by RH and intend to make it into a AOL-OS and have people use it instead of windows. Could/Would they maybe work on a X-windows replacement? I don’t think that your standard windows user is going to like the look of X at all. and the current desktops like KDE look horrible, though the new Gnome 2 screen shots look good, real good really. But I think it would be interesting if they brought in a new GUI to linux. Maybe if they do go forward with this and Lindows shows up they would suck them up to. Well sounds like a good thing for linux. Wonder if we will start to get bombarded with RH 9.0 CD’s in the mail in a year or so?
I give very credence to the rumour. Since the big merger, AOL Time Warner had been headed by a CEO from Time Warner’s side. When that CEO retired a couple of months ago, its replacement is again from the Time Warner side of the business.
Read the CNET article about the identity crisis at AOL Time Warner — AOL is the basketcase of their entire coporate empire. Quote from the CNET article: “In a sense, AOL has gone from jewel to stone in AOL Time Warner’s crown.”
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-804070.html
If there is someone mad enough to buy AOL or Netscape, Time Warner would have sold that side of the business happily.
Hmmm…
The words AOLOS suggest a logo to me, with the ‘L’ being
a nose and ‘O’ being two eyes. Heh..just thought that was
interesting! Seriously speaking tho’ I say let’em fight
each other and knock each other out of the ring by forgeting
just what they’re in business for in the first place! I think
that any attempts at an AOLOS will be a closed door hardware
system, based off of the Open Sourced packages that we already
have but intergraded with the Mozzila Browser simuliar to what
eOne is already doing: http://www.oeone.com/ Strangely enough
they’re using the Mozzila Browser to make their desktop work.
Anyone wanna bet that this isn’t all because AOL-Time Warner
smell cash in the air and want to get a piece of what is
already ‘theirs by right?’
everyone thinks that if an Aol os came out it would be entirely open source. why do that? the kernel? yes, open. the proprietary software/gui? why? just like lindows is doin, lindows uses open stuff, but there home brew software and wine replacement stuff are closed. otherwise lindows couldn’t make a buck and everyone would have free use of it.(i know, it would be nice, but aol is for-profit and whenever lindows releases 1.0 they will try to be for-profit).
… in your favorite computer mag. An easy way to spread Linux all over the world … 😉
Why would AOL want the flack from being closed source?
They make their money from the monthly subscriptions. If they were to really do this then they would just send out free cds just like now. The directions would be to put cd into drive, set computer to boot from cd then re-boot. The Linux AOL system would boot and run from the cd.
If people liked this then AOL would sell them a whole PC system with AOLOS pre-loaded all ready to go. Sorta like a BEIA only using a real PC.
Thus AOL cuts microsoft totaly out of the loop.
Speaking of the desktop you can right now use the frame buffer in the linux kernel. This eliminates the need for X-windows. All you need is a AOLOS window manager running on top of the frame buffer using a tool kit like Qt.
You could also just use a version of the embedded version of Qt.
This would make the AOL PC sorta like a really big Palm pilot with a hard drive.
tj: “Why is it that everyone is either a Linux-zealot or a Be-zealot?”
Well, tj seems to be hell-bent on being a Linux zealot, he should ask that exact question from himself:
tj: “stfu most of u use beos so just don’t talk”
tj: “Yeah, baby! Bought my RHAT stock at 7.10 a share!”
tj: “it’s dead. stfu.”
tj: “oh, yeah, and BeOS is dead.”
Interestingly, most of tj’s comments appear in BeOS-related threads, NOT in Linux related ones. It seems he is more interested in vilifying BeOS, than in praising Linux.
Who would want to become a Linux user after the PR work of Mr. tj?
I don’t think it will be open source. But if you want to run linux and want a nice working system this could be the way for someone. It’s good for linux since its a way linux could be taken to the masses. Most people haven’t heard of linux, but if it starts coming in free cds or even just the 40million (or how ever many) users AOL has sees “try AOLOS ” on there logon people will notice it.
Você está todo furioso.
Bem-vindo ao pátio de recreio de meninos grande, crianças.
AOL vão rasgar a Microsoft um buraco novo.
>>>Why would AOL want the flack from being closed source?
What flack? Slashdot, yeah I’m sure AOL will work around the voices on Slashdot. Most people don’t understand what opensource means and even once explaining they probly wouldn’t care. The big open source freaks probly wouldn’t care to use it anyways due to some not liking of AOL since there a big company or something. If this whole thing happens I highly doubt AOL would market or even give any hype to it having any connection to the opensource world.
The “RedHat Linux” brand is very important and must not Be changed.
AOL can make plenty of money selling support, consulting and services.
ciao
yc
droned out idiots buying into this being good for RedHat are beyond stupid.
I wont go there though, lets just pray RedHat has the power to JUST SAY NO!
Just so that Linux Zealots have another topic to whine about. Imagine all that free PR if it did get bought – I guess publicity is the last thing the zealots want for linux…
Besides I use win2k, BeOS and Mandrake so not too worried what happens to Red Hat.
PS: I live in a country that is AOL free 😉 Oh the joy!
If you remember during the antitrust trial, Microsoft developed IE because they feared that Netscape could be developed into an OS. If AOL does jump into this market, just look at what Steve Jobs has been saying about OSX “it’s UNIX, it’s stable, blah, blah, blah.” AOL can parrot the same message with it’s version of Linux. The free Linux coasters in all the PC mags ought to ratchet up the paranoia level in Redmond. This could be an entertaining year.
Oh screw slashcrap, that has to be the worst web site in history. 12 year olds being labled insiteful +5.
Remember Linux lives or dies based on the opensource programmers. I am talking about the real programmers that fought off stuff like hardrives having content control. If AOL pisses off the people that are doing the real work on projects like Mozilla, the kernel, XFS, reiserFS, JFS, real time kernels,GCC, G++, Qt,GTK, Gnat(Ada95 compiler), etc then AOL will get nothing but bad press. These same programmers could just walk away from those projects.
As for most people, everyone I explain OSS to has understood the idea. Most respond with thats alot of work, they must be very dedicated.
Would you Be monkeys just let the thing die already. AOL knows microsoft at least respects that Linux is a contender and will continue to be so as long as open source software lives. Essentially for AOL it’s something to hold over microsofts head, if they buy redhat dont expect any monumental changes in the direction of redhat they’ll wait for it to mature even moreso and make their move on their own time.
I wonder if this would make the Open Source community flock to AOL or steer away from RedHat.
Hey, I hate your politics, but I gotta hand it to you: I love that post.
tj: “Why is it that everyone is either a Linux-zealot or a Be-zealot?”
Well, tj seems to be hell-bent on being a Linux zealot, he should ask that exact question from himself:
tj: “stfu most of u use beos so just don’t talk”
tj: “Yeah, baby! Bought my RHAT stock at 7.10 a share!”
I think ANYONE would be happy if they bought RHAT at 7.10 and then this happened to them!
tj: “it’s dead. stfu.”
I have a profanity issue.
tj: “oh, yeah, and BeOS is dead.”
It is a firm belief of mine that things die for a reason. I also was trying to point out that a closed-source OS that has development halted is totally dead. It can’t possibly live for another year and be useful.
Interestingly, most of tj’s comments appear in BeOS-related threads, NOT in Linux related ones. It seems he is more interested in vilifying BeOS, than in praising Linux.
I do post as “tj” only for trolling though. t = troll, ya know?
Who would want to become a Linux user after the PR work of Mr. tj?
Good point. I think a lot of zealots should realize that.
tj – why bother trolling? Is your life really that sad?
No, I don’t troll to troll. I troll to make a point. There’s a difference. I don’t just bitch about BeOS being dead because I have nothing better to do, I do it for the same reason you say BeOS is good: to help in my own little way to steer technology into the right direction.
Ah – a noble troll…but then, aren’t they all on some level?
This bit of irony is brought to you by a BeOS computer, not dead yet.
*Don’t ruin a good thing*
AOL has a good thing — that is, a direct billing relationship with it’s millions of customers. Each month it’s customers pony up with their monthly subscription, and next month they will be back again. They provide a service and it is consumed by the customers, who have to come back for more next month. This is a classic business model, just like Coca-Cola — buy it, consume it, buy more.
Microsoft doesn’t have this sort of relationship with their customers. It has to try very hard to convince consumers that they produce good products, but at the same time those products should be replaced with something better every few years. If Windows95 was so good, why do I have to replace it? Why do have pay $200 for an upgrade when my current OS already does what I need it to? While Windows XP (for example) may be better than Windows95, but that doesn’t make it essential. Besides, I got Windows95 free with my computer. I’ll come back to this later, but first let’s look at some history.
AOL bought Netscape, and didn’t use Netscape’s browser for it’s own AOL client, choosing Microsoft’s Internet Explorer (IE) instead. Why? Don’t ruin a good thing.
Microsoft was threatening to cut AOL out of the loop with it’s MSN subscription service. Microsoft had a monopoly with Windows95 and by bundling IE it could, if not stopped, directed all user’s to it’s own MSN service to AOL’s demise. AOL decided give Microsoft notice that they would not go down without a costly fight.
How could AOL protect it’s revenue stream? Firstly, it cooperated with Netscape to lobby the Department of Justice to prevent, or limit Microsoft’s ability to bundle Internet Explorer. Secondly they purchased Netscape, and thus had a credible threat that they could throw their significant resources behind the browser. They won the DOJ case on Windows95 but by the time the case was settled Microsoft was shipping Windows98 without bundling restrictions. The combined with of DOJ scrutiny and a credible threat of a drawn out browser war bought AOL concessions from Microsoft. That is, they were permitted to customize the browser for their clients, and were among the list of service providers bundled with Windows, giving user’s a visible choice between MSN and AOL. In return, AOL did not actively promote the Netscape browser, allowing Microsoft to avoid a time consuming browser war, and proceed with other conquests (the issue was not whether MS could win the browser war, but what they could be doing instead).
This of course did not remove all tensions between AOL and MS. They were still competitors, only now, Microsoft had to compete with AOL by producing a better service (instead of just pushing AOL out). MS believed the key to a better service was to offer exclusive content, and hence it began to buy up media rights and properties. AOL’s management began to believe this notion too and again felt threatened and needed a counter move. It had convinced Time-Warner that MS could gain a monopoly on content delivery via the internet, and hence the AOL Time-Warner merger was born. As it turned out, content was not King, and people would only pay for the basic internet services that AOL was already offering. So, AOL and MSN were still in stale-mate.
Microsoft still has the same disadvantage of not having a direct billing relationship with it’s customers. The problem was Windows95 and other older products just wouldn’t go away fast enough. The resistance to upgrades erodes future revenue. The solution comes in two parts. Part one, is turn the operating system from a product to a service. To do this they simply had to make the software expire automatically if the user does not continually pay a subscription fee. This is the thinking behind Product Activation, although it is being marketed as an anti-piracy measure, it is in fact a digital tap, one that Microsoft can turn off if customers don’t pay their bills.
The second part of the solution is to make all previous versions of Windows obsolete. This is where .NET comes in. By developing an e-commerce infrastructure that can only be used on subscription based versions of Windows, Microsoft achieves both a direct billing relationship with it’s customers and makes Windows subscription a necessity.
Where does this leave AOL? While in theory AOL could continue to operate, with consumers paying Microsoft on one side, and paying AOL on the other, it would not look like a good thing when Microsoft offers a single bill with a smaller grand total. Microsoft could quite easily provide internet access at cost, with the OS subscription keeping the company profitable. AOL would face shrinking margins and go out of business.
Does AOL have a counter move? Yes, but they’ll have to go into the OS business. Short of a merger or sell-out, this is one conflict that will not end in compromise. AOL is in a corner but it has a secret move. Of course if they’re not sure what it is, they better hire people who do.
—–
PS. I decided not reveal all in a PhD yet. So, I’m wondering what I should do with this idea. Now, if only someone would give me the resources…
What a way to kick in 2002 for AOL. I guess it’s time to play hardball with Microsoft, and what better way to play hardball than buy the worlds most popular version of Linux. Now AOL has to do is join forces with IBM to further develop Linux into, not only a stable system (which that goal has already been accomplished) but a very intuitive one at that. My Linux wielding friends say RedHat 7.2 is pretty cool!
Now if GNOME and KDE could just get along and take the best of both worlds and merge them into one, then Linux will explode into the mainstream!
At the end of the day, AOL should have bought BeOS and turned it into a super multimedia OS, that Microsoft nor Apple could compete with. And being that 80% of the computer users worldwide doesn’t know BeOS exists or ever existed. I think that BeOS would have been a good buy, but I also do see some advantages in this deal where AOL could work big business providing web solutions and such, not only just an OS for running AOL software!
Oh well it’s too late now!!
“Or something else? For a company so obsesed with usability (AOL 5.0 – TOO user friendly!) why pick Linx rather than, say, Be?”
Be is already bought….
Redhat is the most successful linux company so far, with some big backers like IBM. So let’s say AOL buys redhat. Nobody knows for sure what they will do with it, or how things will turn out. If they fuck it up, we loose a major linux dist. If they do well, maybe they do well with the desktop.
It would be better if AOL bought, say, Mandrake or suse, or if they made their own dist. If they fuck it up, not much lost. If they are successful, we get another strong dist and, for that matter, a stronger competition in the linux dist market.
QUESTION
Where would an AOL acquisition leave IBM? Where would AOL take Redhat’s server business?? That’s very important
…except more intense. With AOL backing, more killer apps can Be developed for everything from handhelds to supercomputers. Larger corporations can Be supported globally with better service and support.
ciao
yc
has a good point, this take over, buy out or whatever it becomes will be beneficial to both AOL and RedHat! This will keep the open source revolution strong and Microsoft from trying to kill it!!!
Except Microsoft.
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/01/19/1848219&mode=threa…
ciao
yc
… in your favorite computer mag. An easy way to spread Linux all over the world … 😉
Could you just see tens of thousands of typical home Windoze users trying to install and run any version of linux with no manual and no other help of any kind? A deep darkness would fall of the faces of the people as they wonder what they have gotten themselves into.
If Time/Warner can do for Red Hat what they did for Atari.
FakeBillGates
The Linux AOL system would boot and run from the cd.
If people liked this then AOL would sell them a whole PC system with AOLOS pre-loaded all ready to go. Sorta like a BEIA only using a real PC.
Thus AOL cuts microsoft totaly out of the loop.
I’m afraid you don’t know what you’re talking about. Do you REALLY think your home PC would even run if it wasn’t for Microsoft? Have you ever seen a piece of beta quality PC hardware? Just who do you think debugs that hardware? That’s right, Microsoft. Hardware makers send their prototype material to Microsoft, where it is tested against compliancy for IEEE specifications. AOL simply does not have the engineering clout to pull off platform ownership. Have no illusions; Microsoft is the PC.
Now if AOL wants to come out with a proprietary device which can run Red Hat (a’la XBOX) then they’ve got a chance at selling/maintaining a product.
TD
If you remember during the antitrust trial, Microsoft developed IE because they feared that Netscape could be developed into an OS.
What? How exactly do ‘develop’ a browser into an OS? This makes no sense. Microsoft wanted to create a product to compete in what was at that time the hottest software market, so they did. What’s more, they dominated. Anyone who has done professional web development will tell you that IE works much more closely to W3C HTML specification than Netscape. Ever try to use a <div> or <span> tag in Netscape? What about DHTML? Nav 6? Yeah, it just doesn’t work, does it? I’ve written a lot of code targeted at a lot of different browser environments, and I can tell you that IE 5+ in Windows has the best language (HTML/XML/JavaScript/VBscript) support of any browser.
CattBeMac
Now if GNOME and KDE could just get along and take the best of both worlds and merge them into one, then Linux will explode into the mainstream!
Cummon Catt, you really believe that? You think the desktop UI is what is holding Linux back? If it was all about the desktop UI, we’d all be using OSX machines right now!
Now I have a suggestion. Could it be that AOL senses the demise of the dial-up-connection? Could it be that broadband is finally becoming so widespread that AOL has decided they need to focus their new offerings in that direction? In a matter of a few years, almost no one will dial up to the Internet, just like almost no one uses 14.4K modems anymore. I don’t have any idea how the purchase of RedHat would affect the AOL offerings of the future, but I sense some kind of paradigm shift on the horizon.
Be careful what you wish for….
What? How exactly do ‘develop’ a browser into an OS? This makes no sense.
I think the poster meant to develop an UI based on Netscape/Mozilla. Not only is it possible, it’s been done: <a href=”http://www.oeone.com“>http://www.oeone.com (check the Flash “Product Demo”)… I personally think AOL would be better to buy an upstart like OEone or even make up its own Internet Computer/Appliance, rather than buy an established distribution. However, it is interesting to see that such a big player in the Home Computing market is interested in Linux. The cool thing with Linux is that, since it’s Open Source, it can be tailored to a variety of users, from “push-here-dummy” home users to experienced gurus, as well as for specific organizations or governments (Red Flag Linux is a good example). That’s its real strength, one that Microsoft can’t take away for as long as they cling to their proprietary model.