| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Red Hat as the "next Redmond"Red Hat as the "next Redmond"Posted Aug 27, 2002 17:12 UTC (Tue) by ctg (subscriber, #3459)Parent article: Red Hat as the "next Redmond" Well said. The one point that I don't think you've addressed - which is perhaps the most annoying one, is when a third party says "Requires Red Hat Linux" for their software to run. However,
Now that Red Hat is LSB compliant (and one of the first) this is a criticism that should be leveled at the the ISV, not Red Hat. Secondly, it encourages you to find an Open Source/Free Software solution to the problem. Which isn't a bad thing. So, Red Hat isn't the problem - but their success and the way third party vendors of closed source software solutions have reacted to their success is the real problem.
(Log in to post comments)
Red Hat as the "next Redmond" Posted Aug 27, 2002 18:42 UTC (Tue) by dbhost (guest, #3461) [Link] The only issue that appears to make Red Hat similar to Redmond's beast is that many vendors that do support Linux, only support "Red Hat Linux" and it is usually two or so versions back. However with distributions such as Red Hat and Mandrake obtaining LSB certification, I would hope they support and disclaimers will read something more akin to "Requires LSB compliant Linux distribution".I like Red Hat. It is a good OS. But as much as I like Red Hat, I love my Mandrake system. Funny thing. Most of the Linux users I personally know use the following distros.
Market per centage Posted Aug 29, 2002 21:19 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] >Funny thing. Most of the Linux users I personally know use ...>Not a Red Hat user in the bunch. I know they have a lot of really sweet The market is measured in dollars, not persons, and I suspect your friends are virtually invisible to people selling products that interoperate with Linux. I bet the Red Hat-based share of the market for Linux-compatible stuff is comparable to the Microsoft-based share of the market for computer-compatible stuff.
LSB won't change anything Posted Aug 29, 2002 21:14 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] I rather doubt that LSB will make a difference here. In most the cases where only Red Hat Linux is supported, the product in theory works on plenty of other systems that call themselves "linux," and the vendor could easily list specific things in the environment it requires.But a vendor likes to test with something as close as possible to anything he is supporting. He wants to write instructions and train technical support people specific to all the details of the system, not just the ones in LSB. Since even with LSB, the vendor knows that if he further restricts the product to Red Hat Linux he will still cover the vast majority of his market, that's what he will do. Besides, "LSB" systems will deviate from LSB, even if by mistake. In those cases, a vendor wants his product to be bug compatible with Red Hat.
|
|
||||||||||||