Who is Alan Cox?

The number 2 kernel developer.

Looks like "sources familiar with the matter" are now saying this is not going to happen. Still no word from Red Hat though, which I find somewhat surprising. Since the press on this has turned bad you think they would deny the allegations if the was no truth to them.

--jeremy

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-819578...ed..ne_8551983

Here is an article I found on the GPL. I don't know how old it is and if is older than some of you may already know about this.

http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/2000/1/

donno about the deal being called off but after reading a few more articles on the rumours, word has it that AOL is trying to compete blow for blow with MS. in recent times, it has been ousted by MS much more often than not... now it's trying to eat some of the MS desktop pie.

well, if this is true, again some evidence is present to show that perhaps AOL is late and wrong.

firstly, about the wrong part : the thing to make people convert to linux on the office desktop is the Office Suite. while linux already has some office suites that can do all that MS Office can, people who are not and don't care to be even slightly computer geekish resist that change. check out http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/15571.html for more details. whether u agree with him or not, i believe he does have a point... so the point is: AOL buys redhat to compete on the desktop... but rh doesn't make office suites? in any case, rh's current strength is in the enterprise, not the desktop. i don't know about u, but it sure sounds like a misinformed business move.

secondly, much effort is already being put to make linux viable for the home user / desktop market by numerous linux companies. i think the competition AOL may face will not be from MS but more from these. much like how linux has replaced other unices rather than windows so far (excluding web servers that is). again misplaced business judgement?

unless AOL has some wildcard up their sleeves, i think it's just blundering through this.

and perhaps that's why the deal may be off... but heck news like this see-saws too much anyway.

To make Linux truly ubiquitous, but not in the way you might think. In my opinion, the acquisition of RH makes sense for AOL/TW as if fits with their existing business. And the way that it can best do that is by using Linux embedded in various devices. Want to buy a new cell phone, pager, pda, etc.? All of these devices will come with AO-Hell pre-installed. Linux will be everywhere, and everyone will be using it, but they won't know it, and they won't care.

AOL TW is trying to compete with Microsoft for control of the web. The problem from the perspective of AOL is that M$ controls the desktop. M$ can pressure OEMs not to preinstall AOL software, and it can break AOL software functionality at will.

AOL understands its position and is looking ways to compete. If Linux is a viable alternative to M$ on the desktop, then AOL will acquire one of the Linux companies. M$ will eventually surpass AOL in subscriber numbers. It is inevitable given that they control the point of access.

This guy farms weasels and we're listening to him? Surely if he farms weasels it is fairly obvious that he is, erm, not entirely compus.

AOL is the company that offers ultimate
handholding for newbies at the cost of
considerable freedom. Their offerings are not wonderful. Check out their
mail system. It defaults to html (bad move,
virus bait) and most users don't seem
able to turn it off. Attachments are truncated. Server glitches abound. And of course an aol.com return
address brands one a bit.

AOL is overpriced also, unless you really
want/need all that handholding.

OTOH the typical Linux user is independent minded and wants complete control and freedom to do anything they want. So AOL and Linux is a complete mismatch.

RedHat is a commercial firm that tries to
make Linux look like some other OS. They also came up with a proprietary distro format (RPM) and convinced some of their competitors to go along. RedHat is
successful and has mindshare, but after trying it I wonder why.

If AOL buys RedHat then all kinds of issues arise about open licensing and the
like. This won't affect me since I use Slack but I wonder about the significant
RH installed base.

It sounds like a bad deal to me.

John Culleton

Well, you can't just compare AOL dialup service against a company they might buy and say what they might do.

AOL dialup service is a newbie, handholding ISP and service.
Now on the other hand, just because AOL owns another company means they do the same thing. I just got a job at Timewarner working in their Roadrunner division. AOL owns this basically but never really interfere's. When someone calls up the tech support they have there about an AOL issue, the response is, Hey, were Roadrunner, you need to call AOL for that.

Just a thought.. I don't think its all bad if they did buy them, I use Slack as my main distro now too.. but its not going to happen. All rumors.

ahaha... yea mayhap. but regardless of whether he farms weasels or stoats, geezers or goats, i was saying he's got a point. not that he's sane or entirely correct.

cheers!

Oh no God it can't be true! Another OS made for morons? DO NOT TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S WORK, do what we told you to do and patch your bad operating system... Excuse me but Aol SU*K. I'm in Canada and AOL just start the invasion here... Stupid ads about "how easy aol made you surf on the web" and "how aol give you the world" (well in fact they didn't give anything,only sale...). It's not so hard to install a modem internet acces old daddy did you ever try it?

If AOL put it bad hand "in" red hat they will scrap up the system and do another windoze. AoLinux right... By morons for stupids nothing else. (like windoze) it's so easy to install AoLinux (you have hundred of security holes but we dont care we are just here for money stupid).

You know,a company do NOT care about users but ONLY about MONEY. If easy but bad system made them gain more money they will do it. And forget openSource it's not COMPETITIVE. God tell me it's not true.

Btw I *HOPE* all of you using Red Hat will stop use it (or at least upgrade it) if AOL start producing it. Anyways I think there are few people coding things for Red Hat that will stop do it if THIS happen.

eh?
...
another 'hate mail' look-a-like?
here's the counter-argument (please don't take it personally)...

1. it in the nature of business and enterprise to care mainly about profit. they were formed because their owners/founders WANTED to make profits from their venture right from the beginning. if you buy their product, you shouldn't grudge them that. even the recent fad of CRM hinge on this very fact and not prompt customer care in its altruistic form.

2. even linux and its apps needs money to develop.

3. redhat is a profit-making enterprise. so is mandy. and suse etc etc. one day, if they become huge and bureaucratic, they may turn oligopolistic... even monopolistic. and worse, impersonal and uncaring. like MS. and they don't even have to violate the GPL. AOL doesn't have to do ANYTHING about the current product or even buy over redhat to achieve that. rh can do that on its own. with free software. which brings me to the next point:

4. good quality software isn't enough. there must be enough support and genuineness in the people who bring you the product, no? isn't that one of the main grouses against *MS / AOL / insert your least favorite unwieldy organisation here that most people have? (besides the licensing of course ) for linux, there is no company running it per se. so u don't really have that kind of expectation. we are fortunate to have a community that knows their stuff and are willing to help. and reading tons of manuals on our own of course. therein lies our tech support. so commercial tech support / customer care in linux is quite a different ball game altogether and warrants a careful comparision, if any can be made at all.

5. even the good people at slack and deb need funds to run even if their noble goals do not include making profits per se.

6. if u were the CEO of AOL and u faced the pressures of its current competition, what would u do? can u do better? would u know what to do? and even if you knew what to do, could you do it? could you also convince others to adopt your brainwave?

finally, a member on this forum works for AOL.
work is hard. don't demoralise people further

i'm not an AOL or MS or some commercial insitution flag-waving fanatic. but i just thought i'd present the flip side of an often overlooked reality

what do you consider tech support? I think that we can all agree that to pay M$ $15.00 a call to be put on hold for 35 minutes to talk to a person who tells you to visit the web site and download a patch, which on a 56k connection takes 3 to 4 hours for to download an 11 meg patch, and install it and maybe it might fix your problem, is not tech support. It's a blow off. Which brings up another question 'Can closed source software really have tech support?' Lets say you actually talk to a person at M$ or AOL and the support person and you recreate the problem. What happens next, you don't get any information you just get one of to messages 1) We have a patch you need to down load 2) please hold......after 15 minutes 'Hello, umm yes we know of this problem and do not have a patch for it yet, but it will be fixed in our next version due to release in 6 mos. The cost will be the same as your present OS. Thank You for calling and Have a Nice day.... Dial Tone

Maybe that 2nd example is a little exagerrant but has the point of what was the support? How Do I prevent this from happening again? Where do I look to find the Problem? Is there a log for it?

But with Open Source grant it I can't call a tech support unless I buy the service (which I think all companies should do, would cause more people to read and learn more), but I can go on the internet to any linux forum, message board suuport site and get the support I need. Not only to I get the fix I get how to prevent, it where to look for it, where it is logged and updates to the problem if there are any. If there are no updates I know I can post the problem any in a few days maybe weeks there would be.

I guess what I am trying to say that with Linux there is a whole community of support willing to help and better the OS and with Windows there are patches and a new OS. But now knowledge.

So if AOL buys RH what Happens with Support? I would say it stay the Same for the Linux Community. I think Redhat would Dummy Down Linux even more so that the Newbie PC user could use it but the source code and community would still be there for the support and if you wanted to see or know how it works you would take the time to find the answers. But the main thing is That You get an Answer not a patch.