Posted by: Joe Klemmer
on December 16, 2003 11:06 PM
Give me a break. I read the white paper over and over. The bottom line is this...
Summary:
- Some Linux vendors are trying to create lock-in.
- Some Linux vendors are adding non-free stuff to their distros
- Some Linux vendors want per-seat licences for their distro
None of these is a problem nor a bad thing for the businesses that will want to run Linux. The first point is vague at best in that none of the mojor distros is creating any kind of lock-in in the way MS has with Windows. The second point is a positive thing for businesses. The third is a minor issue as businesses already are paying per-seat licenses for their systems.
Then look at "The Solution"
- Trust in a brand.
- Endorsement by application vendors.
- A development and service organization that users can be confident in.
- Certification by standards organizations.
- All without vendor lock-in or other "commercialization" issues.
The above neatly describes RHEL 3. It should also apply to Novell/SUSE within the next 6 to 12 months.
So again I ask WHY?
There already exists solutions that businesses are using now. By the time UL gets to it's goal it will be as relevent to businesses as SLS is now.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Still asking "Why?"
Posted by: Joe Klemmer on December 16, 2003 11:06 PMNone of these is a problem nor a bad thing for the businesses that will want to run Linux. The first point is vague at best in that none of the mojor distros is creating any kind of lock-in in the way MS has with Windows. The second point is a positive thing for businesses. The third is a minor issue as businesses already are paying per-seat licenses for their systems.
The above neatly describes RHEL 3. It should also apply to Novell/SUSE within the next 6 to 12 months.
So again I ask WHY?
There already exists solutions that businesses are using now. By the time UL gets to it's goal it will be as relevent to businesses as SLS is now.
#