Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mandriva Businesses

Mandrake Clarifies its Future 383

Posted by CmdrTaco from the isn't-that-geoffs-distro? dept.
fabiolrs writes "Mandrake Linux has an article in response to the message they sent on march 11th. They claim that because of user help they are "cash-flow positive"! That is great news since Linux community is now sure it will continue using one of the nicest distros available!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mandrake Clarifies its Future More

Mandrake Clarifies its Future

Comments Filter:

  • Awesome (Score:2, Informative)

    by mckeowbc ( 513776 )
    I love Mandrake. It's ease of use, and painless install are the only reasons that I have been able to convert my girlfriend, her roomate, and one of her college suitemates to Linux. It's config tools are nice and easy to understand. And it comes bundled with software that people actually want. It was also my first distro. But now I'm on to Debian. Ahh...memories. Long live Drake!

  • Cash flow positive... (Score:3, Informative)

    by fruey ( 563914 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:36PM (#3303936) Homepage Journal
    ...does not mean profitable.

    Great news anyway though, true Linux hackers may never install Mandrake, they'll have their own build. But a friendly install, etc (Mandrake is good on this point) has to cost time and effort from hackers who would perhaps rather be doing something else.

    Still, I won't be in Mandrake club :)

    • Still, I won't be in Mandrake club :)

      Also how long will people remain club members?
      What happens when the novelty wears off?
      • As someone who is "subscribed" to another "club"(www.transgaming.com [transgaming.com]) of the same sort - I can say that as long as positive
        things are happening and progress is being made people will continue to pay.

        Over at Transgaming over the past month there has been a lot of grumbling (read as people saying they are going to unsubscribe) because everyone wants release 2.0 - So the developers had to put a little more time into quieting the masses by giving regular reports about what is being worked on (I use the term "regular" loosely as TG still doesn't have this totally under control). And because of this almost all of the original subscribers are still there - because there is a feeling of progress.

        If Mandrake ever ceases to progress - that is the point where people will begin jumping ship. Up until that point I am sure that the club members will feel as if their money is well spent.

        Derek

    • Re:Cash flow positive... (Score:2, Informative)

      by blab ( 214849 )
      I believe that Mandrake's financial forcasts [mandrakesoft.com] show them reaching profitability this fall...

      This was a short-term cash crunch which is not the same as losing money.

  • Right Here [slashdot.org] I was wondering why that didn't make the Front Page

  • Cashflow (Score:3, Insightful)

    by iceT ( 68610 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:39PM (#3303957)
    So, I wonder what they will do to make sure that they are 'cash-flow positive' from now on? Or will the always be relying on 'user contributions'?

    Personally, I'd rather give money to RedHat (or maybe SuSe). They seem to be working hard to get Linux accepted in business. Mandrake is very desktop focused, and that is probably the weakest area to forge a business model.. (IMHO)

    • Re:Cashflow (Score:5, Interesting)

      by joestar ( 225875 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:45PM (#3304007) Homepage
      I totally disagree with you! :-) In my IT environment I can see more and more companies using Mandrake. You know, Windows 2000 is very focused on the desktop, but companies use it as a server ;-) This is the advantage of Mandrake: it's solid and reliable, which is needed for servers use, and it's very friendly as well, which is needed for a large adoption. I think you should have a look at Mandrake Business Cases [mandrakebizcases.com] to see how much Mandrake is used in the industry.
    • Personally, I'd rather give money to RedHat (or maybe SuSe). They seem to be working hard to get Linux accepted in business. Mandrake is very desktop focused, and that is probably the weakest area to forge a business model.. (IMHO)

      I think it's EXTREMELY import for the future of desktop computing to have a strong desktop/workstation Linux distro. If for nothing else, this should provide the average desktop user with an actual choice over Windows. I haven't tried SuSE, but Mandrake seems to be the most user-friendly Linux distro that actually has a chance of gaining converts from Windows who are just normal desktop users. Without Mandrake, I think the rate of new Linux Windows converts would drop by almost a half.

      Also, there are many businesses that need a good client-side development platform. For instance, Microcell, a Montreal-based cellular service provider, has Mandrake installed on all its development machines, especially for its Java developers. Any business that wants to develop software in a cross-platform environment would find such a distro to be extremely useful.

      I, for one, prefer to develop in Linux, because of the rich command-line tools and environment, as well as the greater control over configuration files and settings. Windows is a poor platform for doing any command-line processing, even with cygwin. However, I also need a rich, user-friendly desktop environment with GUI configuration tools, should I require them. Mandrake, despite being somewhat bloated, comes with all these tools pre-configured and ready-to-use right out of the box. AFAIK, RedHat and other distros require quite a bit of initial configuration to get everything running just right.

      I actually use Slackware at home, but that's because I can afford to play around with it. When I'm developing at work, I need something that will pretty much run out of the box, without being Windows. Mandrake is the distro I would use at work, were I not in a M$ environment (SourceSafe, Exchange Email Server, MCSE Network Admin) like I am now.

      • Dristros for everyone. (Score:2, Insightful)

        by josech ( 98417 )
        Thats exactly the potential of the open-source movement, you can have distros for very specifical users. My favorite distro is Slackware, but I woludnt use it if I needed an out-of-the-box server; Id rather use Caldera. The freedom to choose is the big deal of the Linux distros.
    • But I dont, so why should i give my money to Suse? or Redhat?

      Mandrake is for people who dont run a business, the working class OS.
  • While I think the whole business about the 'Star Office-for-silver-members' was a complete FUBAR on MandrakeSoft's part, it looks like raising revenue by offering membership in the Mandrake Club could actually work for them. Many OSS companies have gone down the tubes by basing their business model on selling services and tech support. If Mandrake doesn't make it, another user-friendly GNU/Linux distro will take up the slack.

  • Its somewhat depressing... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Qwerpafw ( 315600 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:41PM (#3303969) Homepage
    I am glad for mandrake, and quite amazed at the amount of kindness shown by people online... (i.e. sending in money)

    However, it is somewhat disheartening that their software has to be supported by donations. Sympathetic users just don't make a good substitute for a sound business plan.

    Anyways, I hope they keep up the good work. (and maybe develop a better way to make $$) They're not my distro of choice, but they are quite good.
    • Why don't they just become a nonprofit, public benefit corporation? I presume there is an equivalent to 501(c)3 over there in France, and then users could contribute in good conscience (why give money to a for-profit company?!).

      • I do not think they have that option. In any case the rules are different in France, it is much harder for a non-profit to be able to receive before-tax donations. You really have to be out to cure cancer or something similar (as this is /. maybe I should specify that some-unnamed-monopolistic-company-from-redmont is not considered cancer here ;--). So it makes sense for them to be a corporation, at least companies can expense the club membership/donation.


    • Re:Its somewhat depressing... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MCZapf ( 218870 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @03:03PM (#3304518)
      ... sound business plan.

      A lot of people keep saying this, but what on Earth does that mean? It seems to me that people just want Mandrake to conjure up something (boxed sets, support, etc.) and slap a price tag on it. I don't think this is necessarily any better than getting "donations" from users, other than the fact that businesses prefer fixed payments up front.

      The word "donations" is misleading anyway. I'll bet most people who send money to Mandrake are themselves Mandrake users, who consider the money not a donation, but a form of belated payment. I myself use Mandrake Linux, and am considering joining the Mandrake Club (whatever it's called). I certainly don't mind paying. I was never under the illusion that Linux distributions are truely free (in that they require money and manpower to produce).

      In conclusion, I think getting donations (aka belated payments) from users is a perfectly fine survival plan. As for business plans, well, I don't know.

    • It's absolutely not a donation system. It's a service that allows a commercial company to make business with Free Software, which makes a lot of sense. You know, I seriously doubt that StarOffice 6.0 [mandrakelinux.com] (final) which is available for download at MandrakeClub hasn't been charged by Sun to MandrakeSoft!!

    • I think you persist in willfully misunderstanding their business plan in the service of the "You can't make money selling Libre Software" meme.

      I use RedHat, and religiously buy a new box with every release so they get money and it stays on retail shelves. I know I don't _have_ to, but in my own cost/benefit analysis, the money I spend on their boxes is well worth it. I'm not making a 'donation', I'm consciously investing in my own future. I'm investing in the security updates I know I'll recieve. I'm investing in the next version that I know they are working on. RedHat has earned my trust in this regard, and I know that to continue to produce the things I need and/or treasure, they need my support.

      It's not free software, it's Libre software. It takes time, and effort to produce. The people who put in that time and effort need to eat as much as the rest of us. When people like you spread the 'donation' meme, you devalue their work and falsely give the impression that it's voluntary and a 'gift' when what it really is is an investment in the future of a product you use daily.

      • MOD PARENT UP!

        I agree with this completely - if only more people understood this point of view.
      • I use RedHat, and religiously buy a new box with every release so they get money and it stays on retail shelves. I know I don't _have_ to...

        This is called "donation". It's an act of charity. Charity as a business model is silly.

        There's nothing wrong with donating to Redhat. I donate regularly to Slackware and FreeBSD through subscriptions. I even donated through PayPal after Windriver kicked Slackware out. But that doesn't mean that I harbor any beliefs that charity is a valid business model.

        • When an investment house floats an IPO and gives the IPOing company millions of dollars, it's not called charity because they expect a direct return on their investment greater than the invested money. The same when I buy copies of RedHat or sign up for subscriptions. I'm investing in the future of the software I use. I expect greater returns in terms of usable software than the money I put in. If I didn't put this money in, I would not get the software I wanted because it would stop being made.

          It's not charity. Charity is an investment in the world around you that you expect no direct repayment for. You expect some sort of vague repayment in that if you make your society a better one somehow, you will reap those benefits too, but there's no way to determine an ROI in any reasonable sense.

          The money I give to RedHat has a direct ROI. I'm getting something measurable for my money. Sure, I _may_ get some of that value if I don't invest, but if nobody invested no value would be created, and I'd be much worse off than I was before.

      • Investment (Score:3, Insightful)

        by WillWare ( 11935 )
        in my own cost/benefit analysis, the money I spend on their boxes is well worth it. I'm not making a 'donation', I'm consciously investing in my own future.

        This is a very powerful idea, and really gets to the root of the gratis/libre distinction. People are often initially attracted to free software because they don't have to pay for it. But the real prize, the one your grandkids will thank you for, is the intellectual commons and the long-term effect it can have on the world.

        It's easy to forget this stuff when everybody is out of work . When everybody got regular paychecks it was no big deal to drop some bucks on somebody doing something interesting. But the screwed-up economy is just a circumstance, and a transient one at that. It doesn't really deserve the deciding vote about which human activities are most worthwhile.

    • Which makes millions of dollars so you can use AOL 7.0

      You see, a service which asks the common man to pay, is a donation

      A service which asks big companies to pay is business

      Redhat is a business, Mandrake is a donation

      wheres the logic they both do the same thing!
      Mandrake Club, Up2date
    • I am glad for mandrake, and quite amazed at the amount of kindness shown by people online... (i.e. sending in money)

      KINDNESS?
      I fear you don't understand.
      I don't have the time to build and keep up-to-date my personal distribution, so I'm paying someone (Mandrake) for the service. It's not kindness on my part but pure and simple egoism. If they sink I'll be forced to switch distro, and after toying with RH, Slack, Debian and Mandrake I've decided for Debian in the server/stable-to-death department and Mandrake in the desktop/lotsa-new-gizmo-apps department.

      Mandrake Club or donation is not charity, it's PAYING FOR A SERVICE. And this looks to me a quite sound business model. The weird idea that a good busines model means you must "force" people to pay, Microsoft-style, indicates that there's still a long way to go before the idea of "free software" is understood and appreciated.

  • Great project, great company! (Score:5, Funny)

    by joestar ( 225875 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:41PM (#3303975) Homepage
    I see Mandrake/MandrakeSoft as today's real innovators in the Free Sofware world. First they totally changed the approach of Linux distributions makers by giving more importance to ease of use for instance. Secondly, they have a business approach which is *very* innovative. I can feel something about Mandrake, I don't know exactly what, which looks like the best approach around here to conciliate business and Free Software while always keeping 100% compatibility with Free Software.

    The Mandrake Club is a great way to monetize a user base as large as Mandrake users. It provides many advantages such as StarOffice 6.0 (final version!) which has not even been released just because Sun seemed to believe in this club and wanted to give it a boost... The Club is also a great "tool" for users to ensure that MandrakeSoft will keep on delivering great products such as the excellent Mandrake 8.2 (which I use mostly on servers, but which is so nice as well to replease Windows on my laptop!).

    Great project, great company - you've got my support guys!! :-)

    • I use Mandrake 8.2 at home now on a dual-boot, Linux/Win2k machine. I was incredibly impressed with the ease of installation and support for all of my hardware that came with this latest distribution from Mandrake. It was a big leap from 8.1. It is not 100% perfect, but then again, I have to download and configure drivers for Win2k also to get it working to its optimum level of performance too. I may be a Linux geek, but not by a whole lot. I certainly don't love the command line for a lot of things. I'm a visual person, and for me, the GUI is where it's at, but Mandrake has both worlds of Linux covered very well in my opinion.

      I've seen, and tried to install, other Linux distributions, but I keep coming back to Mandrake's product. Right now, if it weren't for all of the great games in Windows, I'd be using Linux exclusively at home. Mozilla runs great, XMMS is up to par, sound, networking, video, graphics - they all exist on Linux, and from my experience, when configured correctly, run twice as fast as the Windows bloatware. Even my "Word" documents saved in the OpenOffice 641 format are 2-5 times smaller in size than the actual MS Word format!

      You may ask, well what has it *actually* cost you to learn and run Linux? - Answer: A lot of time reading How-To's (which I love to do), a lot of time configuring the OS (which I love to do), and a cable broadband connection @ $44.95/mth (which I'd be using in Windows anyways). Free? Not exactly. Fun? For me, absolutely.

    • Where's the humor in this, oh crack smoking moderators with a +5 funny rating? This is serious. I use mdk8.2 on more than a few servers. From stability to security Mandrake has it down.

      Know any other desktop-friendly distros that don't want you to be root in a window manager or don't install telnet server by default because it's a security risk?

  • One of the nicest distros (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Daimaou ( 97573 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:42PM (#3303982)
    "That is great news since Linux community is now sure it will continue using one of the nicest distros available!"

    I agree that the Mandrake installer is nice, but I think when you compare installed systems instead of installers, you just can't get any easier or better than Debian.

    Keeping your system current takes only two commands (apt-get update, apt-get dist-upgrade). If you need a graphical apt tool, then I would suggest Synaptic.
    • The quote says "one of the nicest", not "the nicest".

      Why do Debian users have to post "Debian's better" to every thread on a linux distro that shows up on Slashdot, regardless of whether or not anyone in the thread talks about which distro is superior?

      Maybe Debian's "the nicest" and maybe Mandrake's only "second or third nicest". In common English usage this still leaves Mandrake as being "one of the nicest".
    • Just two commands, eh ? That would seem to be twice as many commands as just running 'MandrakeUpdate'.

      And it's graphical - no need to get hold of another utility from somewhere......

      Of course, not everyone likes graphical installers - so you have the option of using 'urpmi' instead.

      And it's not just official patches and bugfixes - your can download development packages from Cooker (Mandrake's development packages) too - if you dare...
  • I have Mandrake on my machine, and I even joined their club in order to support them. But I would like to upgrade my machine and I don't have DSL so I would like to buy a boxed set. But it looks like Fry's (big chain out here in California) has stopped carrying it (and they have not abandoned Linux, they still have RedHat and SUSE). I could shop around, but the fact that they have disappeared from the store I bought it from is alarming.

  • Out of curiosity... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Sheetrock ( 152993 )
    The linked article mentions that selling Mandrake company shares directly to users isn't feasible for a couple of reasons, but if Mandrake hypothetically got a wild hair and decided to do an offering in the U.S. what kind of hoops would they have to jump through setting it up?

  • Mandrake is Free! But we need you to donate! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Izeickl ( 529058 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:43PM (#3303993) Homepage
    Although this is good news, does this not curb the "free" aspect? i.e look at this wonderful free OS, but we cant keep it going unless the users pay for it.. I know, at least the payments are done out of "love" for the OS and not simply forced upon a user, but still, I find it kind of funny and ironic. For all the hate that goes towards marketing people etc etc, I think they are needed to sell Linux to the main stream, no matter how good a coder you are, or how good the product is, Geeks dont make good sales people. No matter if it costs money or not, you still have to sell the idea of Linux.
    • i.e look at this wonderful free OS, but we cant keep it going unless the users pay for it.

      Wow. and this is getting modded up...

      Anyway, you must have an IQ about equal to your shoe size. You're arguement against all this is the EXACT FREAKIN' POINT. If we (MDK users/Linux community) don't give them a few bucks here and there, how the hell do you expect them to keep a office building open to even TRY to figure out how to keep their programmer's bellys full?

      Geeks dont make good sales people.

      And pigs don't fly. Why do you think they have a marketing department? Do you think the packagers (or whomever) are making these decisions?

    • Although this is good news, does this not curb the "free" aspect?

      Nope, not a bit. Mandrake is still Free Software. Even if I *had* to pay to get a copy of Mandrake, I could still read/modify/share/sell/whatever the code to my heart's content (as long as I included the code whenever I gave it away).

      The "Free" in "Free Software" has nothing to do with being zero cost.

      Geeks dont make good sales people.

      Generally true, unless you're selling to geeks.

      For all the hate that goes towards marketing people etc etc, I think they are needed to sell Linux to the main stream

      Absolutely true.

    • > does this not curb the "free" aspect?

      No, not at all. "Free software" isn't about not making money for something, or about not paying for it. It's about putting software into the hands of people that can't, or are not yet willing, to pay for their software.

      In any community that has a sizable portion of "fans", there is always going to be a component that will quite willingly donate money to their chosen cause. This does not however imply that everyone has to pay.

      A semi-decent analogy would be the whole mp3 argument. People broadcast daily that they buy more CD's now because they got to hear the songs for free at first. Stuff starts out free (not neccesarily legal to distribute you but you know what I mean) and those who feel like it has value put in a few dollars to support the creator.

      That's what free beer software should be, giving people the freedom to put their own value on it and act accordingly.
    • Yes, they do ask for donations, so technically Mandrake may not be free as in beer. More like "drop $1 in the bucket if you take a beer; honor system."

      But it's definitely free as in speech, which is much more important, in my opinion. You can install Mandrake on all your systems, reconfigure it in any way you want, recompile it, reverse engineer it, publish performance benchmarks (I still can't believe some EULA's ban that), burn a CD for a friend, etc. All that's asked is that, in return, you help support Mandrake.

      Sure, I'll pay $20 or whatever to make sure that kind of freedom remains economically viable. What we're seeing is the collision of a non-idealist system (capitalism) with an idealist one (free software), and there will by definition be some dissonance.

      -John
  • As a mandrake club member, I think there would be twice as many members if they had a members-only FTP mirror. What good is a club membership if you have to wait with the non-members for the new releases? It's like joining a private a golf club and finding out that it is open to the public for less than what the members pay.
  • From the latest ROBERT X. CRINGELY: "Notes from the Field [infoworld.com]" column:

    Linux' so-called freedom

    Mandrake Linux came under fire last week for trying to redefine "free," as in free software, by charging corporate users a sizable support fee before permitting them to download its distribution of the open source Linux software. One of my spies gave them a chance nonetheless and ordered the professional edition of Linux, but to little avail. The thing is, Mandrake's system accepted and charged my spy's American Express instantaneously, but never sent the software. What's more, Mandrake's sales and support cannot track the order, leaving my spy without the software and the money.

    Look like Mandrake may be having some financial growing pains, hope they don't burn too many of their newly paying customers.

    • Cringely LIES (Score:2, Informative)

      by JM ( 18663 )
      That is a pure lie. I handle all transactions on the Mandrakestore, and we answer *all* requests.

      Before we take the credit card, we log the transaction into an SQL database. Then it's passed to the bank, where they enter their credit card number. The bank keeps the transaction into their database. Then, the bank returns the data to us (without the card number), we log it again, and we send an e-mail to the customer with their receipt number, and a copy to me, stored on an offline server.

      We can't possibly lose the information, unless the customer entered a bunch of "asajkd" and "adasdkj" into the fields, didn't print his invoice, and his e-mail bounced, and even then, we can ask the bank to find the info if the customer used a valid credit card number.

      I'm e-mailing the guy right now.

  • Why the attitude of some users.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by linuxrunner ( 225041 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:53PM (#3304053)
    Here's a quote from a prior post:

    If Mandrake doesn't make it, another user-friendly GNU/Linux distro will take up the slack.

    No offense to anyone, but is this the type of attitude we're supposed to have in the opensource community? Is this the best we can do? Just to have a revolving door, of when they don't make it, someone else will do it, until they fall too... repeat.

    Are you that cheap?

    The Open Source community should be about sharing code, sharing to make better, sharing to contribute, sharing to learn from... But not sharing to mooch off of.

    I say go ahead and mooch at first. Learn about the product, etc... but if you like it, then support it. I know most MDK users are fanatics. I am one. I also know redhat users are fanatics, I am also one.
    I support both buy purchasing future releases off of the web sites. I know the iso's are there... But I choose to support the distro's so they'll be there in the future with a BETTER product.

    MDK needed help so they had to ask for money, yet people mock them for it.
    MDK is not making star office 6.0 free since sun is not making it free, and people mock them.

    Are you a linux user or not?

    Are you going to support the cause? Or just talk about it?

  • Consider the plight of Loki Games and Ezeal. If they would have stepped forward and asked everyone in the Linux community for a little extra help they may have not gone under. If nothing else quietly slipping into the night is not the way to go.

    There is a warning though: although this is a great way to get people invovled and save some worth while endevors it does not fix broken management. The danger is that even with extra cash broken management will still make bad decision and may end up using this help as a crutch.
    • Well, not to sound doomy and gloomy but Eazel never had a market to work with. Every single linux user I know that nautilus was a piece of shit. I thought their business model was absolutely stupid, and asking the community to support them wouldn't work.

      You have to offer a product people really want, Loki may have been able to do this. I doubt Eazel would have managed to survive more than a month with donations, not enough people wanted what they had to offer.

      The reason why this model works with Mandrake is a lot of people want mandrake and want it to stick around.

  • Distro question. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Picass0 ( 147474 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @01:54PM (#3304064) Homepage Journal
    I'm a Red Hat user since 5.1. Red Hat was my first, and for the most part only, experience I've have with Linux.

    At the risk of being labeled a troll, I have a genuine question: If I were to try out a new distro with my next build, what are my advantages in switching to Mandrake? How many people feel Mandrake is an upgrade? I'm interested in desktop use for the most part. I want maximum compatability, and Mardrake has a Red Hat legacy.

    I also am aware that Mandrake is regarded by many as a "newbie" distro, and I am interested in progressing in my knowledge. What is a good "power distro" that features the advantages of Red Hat or Mandrake's distros?
    • One of the interesting things of Mandrake is the installer, which is really good.
      It has about 5 filesystems available, it has raid and lvm, it is in a logical following order.

      Also their draktools can be quite good. Some of them I like, some of them not so much.
      One I like is Printerdrake. You can select which spooler you want (cups, lpr, lprng), and which drivers. It detects your printer (even during install) and suggests a driver. For my Epson 670 I have fairly good printing.
      Actually, it was the first time I got Cups going. About a year ago I tried to set up Cups by hand, but i just didn't understand. I know how to set up lpd and ghostscript by hand, but Cups had horrible docs imo.

      What is also interesting about Mandrake is that they have up-to-date software. And if you really want bleeding edge, and love debugging yourself, you can run Cooker, which is Mandrake-devel.
    • go with debian then. the installer is good (though it is char based) and the APT tools are better than anything in the RPM world.

      if you want stability, you stick with the stable tree, if you want newer, you go with testing, and if you want the bleeding edge, go with unstable.
      all available via apt-get.

    • Re:Distro question. (Score:3, Informative)

      by Afrosheen ( 42464 )
      Mandrake advantages:

      Easy installation on a wide variety of machines, support for alot of newer hardware as well as old machines.

      Many filesystems to choose from.

      Good desktop integration. Apps span all desktops so if you use Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment, Blackbox, or whatever, you always have the same menu synced up so all your apps are a click away.

      Nice pentium optimizations for all packages. Redhat is stuck on i386 packages while mandrake has been i586 for years. This results in a 10-50% speed increase depending on the app, including the Advanced Extranet version of Apache, an excellent server that Mandrake ships with.

      Mandrake tries to keep newbies from making stupid mistakes. You have to install rpms as root. KDE has a red desktop and almost no icons if you login as root. This discourages newbies from using a root desktop where it's easy to do lots of damage. Telnet server is not installed by default, you have to urpmi telnet to get it to install. That's good for security, and ssh is a default part of the install if you pick the server packages.

      Fully customizable install. You can have a system install anywhere from 85 megs all the way to 2+ gigs. It depends on what you want. Also the installer knows what rpms depend on others so if you choose to remove packages from the install list it'll tell you what other packages depend on it so you won't end up with a broken system on your first install.

      Up to date libraries and programs. Mandrake has been on the bleeding-edge as far as this goes for years. While some other distros are a pain in the ass to get the newest whatever running on, usually with Mandrake it's easy since all the libs are new.

      Easy to update DURING INSTALL or post-install. During the install if you choose a mirror it'll hit the internet and get new packages for you. This was a brilliant move for mandrake because as bugs are found and squashed in 8.2, they can be added to this update list. Showstoppers can be squashed before you even boot into your fresh mandrake install for the first time. Post install updating is even easier, just open rpmdrake and click mandrake update. That's all it takes.

      There are tons of more benefits but these are really the ones that shine IMHO.
  • It's very interesting. It's on their corporate website only:
    ---
    (...)
    On a more global side, it seems important to note that we have been working to correct the difficult situation in which we found ourselves, following the strategic errors of the previous management team. The actions we have been carrying out have been in several areas:

    1. Refocusing the company around our original business, and what we are best at. It seemed necessary that we return to our original activity at MandrakeSoft: implementing Mandrake Linux, and offering value-added products and services around this solution.

    2. Lowering costs. This was necessary to bring us closer to financial stability, and took the form of removing unnessary expenses and reducing the head count. MandrakeSoft has gone from over 150 employees at the start of 2001 to less than 100 now.

    3. Increasing revenue and margins. This is done by developing new sources of revenue, such as OEM sales, e-commerce, services, online subscription services such as the Club, and increasing our margin on traditional product lines.

    January-March 2002 financial figures, which will show the results of this strategy, will be published shortly.
    ---
    http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/investors/news letter/april2002?wslang=en [mandrakesoft.com]
  • I love mandrake, and have bought a couple boxed sets, because unlike a couple previous replies, I think that its work getting linux on the desktop is highly important.

    The only problem with their club [linux-mandrake.com] is that you must pay for an entire year at a time. The least you can pay is $60.... Now, I'm not too rich at all, but I really wouldn't mind paying $5 a month even if it was autobilled. I'd even pay $6 a month - the extra buck to cover extra credit card fees that they'd have.

    Bottom line: I can afford $5 /mo but not $60 /year

  • They've lost me... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Otter ( 3800 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @02:07PM (#3304148) Journal
    I was generally pleased when I tried out Mandrake 8.0. even if some of the "user-friendly" features got in my way more than they helped. I was hopeful about 8.1, but it turned out to be a headache, breaking supermount and giving me trouble with the development tools. I switched back to 8.0.

    8.2 has been even a bigger pain in the ass for me. The update crashed during package installation forcing me to reinstall. Audio CD playback doesn't work, on a basic ATAPI drive. (Yes, sound does work.) Finally, when I decided to try Tuxracer, it or the dependant packages that came with it hosed X.

    Yes, given time I could fix this stuff but I'm not going to. I'm downloading Skipjack ISOs instead and I'll go back to Red Hat if that works out.

    (Once again, I gave Debian a try with no luck. I realize _someone_ gets it installed, but we're talking about a pretty vanilla system here - year and a half old Athlon/VIA/NVIDIA. I mean, I have code in that distro -- I should be able to install the damn thing.)

  • ... that based on user attitudes/comments Mandrake seems to be the "macintosh" of the Linux world?

    (intended as humor)

  • How to use some of that money (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @02:15PM (#3304203)
    I wish a distro - ANY distro - would invest some money in usability. Linux is never going to be ready for the desktop until someone sits 100 volunteers in front of a computer and asks them to do stuff - copy text, format a disk, connect to the internet etc. and implements the findings. There is no distro or UI (KDE/GNOME) which comes even remotely close to being user friendly as OS X or XP define it. The prize for the first distro to pull it off will be huge.


    While experts can find their way around existing distros, mere mortals will rightly conclude that XP or OS X is a better choice for them simply because it doesn't put up barriers at every stage. Even little things as more task orientation, hiding advanced settings in secondary dialogs and removal of needlessly jargon filled alerts can do much to simplify a UI.

    • There is no distro or UI (KDE/GNOME) which comes even remotely close to being user friendly as OS X or XP define it.

      Many would argue that Windows and the like have done exactly what you propose: define what is user friendly.

      Of course, taking a total computer novice and sticking them in front of a RedHat machine and a Windows machine is likely to result in similiar confusion. It just so happens that most people know how to use Windows.

      Does that mean Linux should try to replicate Windows? No. I don't want another Windows. If I wanted to use Windows, I'd use it.

      I think RedHat's best move was to decide to focus on what Linux does well instead of trying to push it into a saturated market.

      Mandrake is doomed. They have too much to lose placing all their eggs in the desktop basket.
      • They have too much to lose placing all their eggs in the desktop basket

        They do now offer a minimal install that comes in at around 65 megs. Combine that with the maximum security level and you've got the beginnings of a decent server. They just need to market it better.

      • You dear sir, are speaking out your ass. Get it straight. Microsoft was born on the the desktop. Not the server. It moved to the server. If you want to take out Microsoft, you have to take it out by its roots in the desktop. Talk all you want about server software blah blah it won't matter if Linux doesn't get real facetime with the people who count: management. Do managers look at servers? No, they do not. They look at their laptops and desktops, their pda's and their uberphones. If you want to give Mandrake or any other distro a name, you do it where the people will see it's name.

        Not to be rude.....

        No one, and I mean no one(not even your mom, she's just being nice) gives a shit that your prefer Linux Redhat-style because of what Linux does well(nice ambiguous phrasing there, chief.) If you stick a novice in front of a typical Linux distro for a couple weeks, the productivity will be measurably equivalent to sticking them in front of a TRS-80. If you stick a novice in front of Windows *.* for a couple of weeks, you will get some documents, maybe some internet, maybe some freecell. If you stick a novice in front of OS X for a couple of weeks, you will have documents, e-mail, games, plenty of wasted time on the internet, and a genuine sense of comfortability.

        Mandrake has it right: if it looks easy, that's half the way to being easy.
    • "sits 100 volunteers in front of a computer"

      100 people in front of one computer will never get anything accomplished.

      Seriously though, If someone can get 100 computers in an organized setting, you'd get a lot of volunteers. You can't just sit them there though. Give them a task, and have some people who know the software (not people who wrote it) walk around with a notepad and take feedback. Watch the people. Tell them maximize a window, save a document in their personal folder, install a program, backup their work, change thier print setup, or play a cd; and note the first thing they try. Note the second thing they try. With XP or OSX, the second or third try they'll get it. With linux/KDE or linux/Gnome it will probably be the 4th or 5th. And not only because they've been trained to think windows or think mac.
    • I did just such a focus group, to find the best desktop package for a company overhauling their whole IT approach. We compared Mandrake and Redhat with Windows, Mac OS9, and OSX. As a long time Mandrake user, the results were no surprise to me- people familiar with Windows or Mac were initially more productive on those, but Mandrake was about as easy to use and adapt to as a Mac for Windows users, or Windows for Mac users. So really, they're all about the same. System administration tasks on Mandrake were actually easier than Windows, for Windows and Mac users!

      Personally, I find Mandrake/KDE is a little bit ahead of Win2K, usability-wise, especially with moving files around, and in system administration. I use both regularly. I hear XP is a big improvement over 2K, but I haven't spent much time with it.
    • GNOME Usability Study Report [slashdot.org] 'nuff said.

    • Re:How to use some of that money (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Arandir ( 19206 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @06:06PM (#3305880) Homepage Journal
      I must respectfully disagree. I haven't used either OSX or WXP yet, but so far KDE blows the socks off of Win95/98/NT/2k in terms of user friendliness, usability and functionality.

      I've used everything *but* Windows for the past twenty years. CPM, 44BSD, DOS, GeoWorks, OS/2, Linux, FreeBSD. But recently I've started using it. There were some games I wanted to use, and they're also making me use it at work now and then. Frankly, it sucks.

      Most people who say Unix/Linux/BSD is too hard say so because they are used to Windows and not used to Unix. My situation is the opposite. I'm used to Unix but not to Windows. Windows is hard to use. It's inconsistant. It's clunky.

      I can install most Linuces and every BSD with one single reboot at the end of the process. I can rebuild every piece of software except the kernel and never have to reboot. I upgraded from FreeBSD 4.4 to 4.5 with one reboot, and that included a fresh partitioning and format of the harddrive. Try that under Windows. I did a Windows install a couple of weeks ago and I had to reboot four times. Afterwards I had to reboot forevery driver and program I installed. This is ridiculous.

      Under XFree86 I have to tell it what video card and monitor I have. That's easy. Under Windows it won't let you specify what your hardware is. It must guess instead. And it kept guessing wrong.

      And configuration! Don't talk to me about ease of use until you've tried to configure a Windows system without knowing WindowsSpeak. Why do they hide all the necessary configuration stuff under layers and layers of badly designed dialogs? Why must it keep resetting all the values I type in by hand? Why can't they use plain English instead of their stupid euphemisms for god knows what? And what they hell's the difference between the hostname and the machine name, and is a group name the same as a domain name? Gah!

      Finally, the desktop. Gnome and KDE win hands down. Frankly, the Windows desktop is a piece of shit. Windows under Windows won't snap to the edge or to other windows. You can't send them to the bottom of the window stack with a single mouse click. You don't have window rollups. You can't maximize vertically or horizontally. You don't have multiple desktops. Hell, it can't even display a JPG wallpaper without firing up an instance of Internet Explorer!

      A few months ago my employer decided to standardize on Outlook. So our engineering department all got new PCs with Win2K installed next to their Solaris Sparc workstations. What a horrowshow! People who could write kernel drivers in their sleep couldn't figure this Windows thing out. The rest of the company looked at us like we were idiots because we didn't know what to do. IT was flabbergasted because we were asking questions they had never heard before.

      "How do I ssh to stomper from Windows?"
      "How do I enable plaintext in Outlook?"
      "How do I turn on command completion in the DOS shell?"
      "Where's vi, emacs, gcc, pine..."

      "How do I get a static IP like I've got on my Sparc?" "You don't need one." "Then how to I log on remotely to my PC?" "Why would you want to?" "Because I might be in the lab." "Aargh! Why can't you guys be like everyone else and just do what you're told!"

      I guess that's the big difference right there. Windows users are content with being told what to do. Unix users are only content if they are in charge of their system. Maybe Windows is user friendly to sheep, but it ain't user friendly to most other species.

  • Temporary (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kkirk007 ( 304967 )
    Mandrake pushed the User-Club as a short-term solution to being mismanaged last year. Currently they are under much better management, and now that they're no longer in the red I believe they're clear of immediate danger.
  • Mandrakes new business model is a very important step for Free Software. Every software company in this space has been struggling to find a model that will work to support the culture and ideology that underpins this movement.

    Many companies have abandoned their roots based on certain philosophical principles only to say "well...we're grown up now so we have to be capitalists..." causing incredible divisions in their internal corporate culture. As soon as they "grow up" they forget what has driven their success - the human interest in sharing.

    Mandrake has successfully found a model based upon the notion of sharing. They have extended the concept of giving to enable the users who have the financial resources to give with a way to do it. No longer are poeple restricted to only giving back code or free support. Those users who have a little money (or more) can share it freely with the great people in the Mandrake community who are sharing their code with the commons.

    If anyone doesn't think this fits "capitalism"...well maybe capitalism in cyberspace needs an adjustment. Finally, an innovative business model which doesn't destroy the Free Software culture!
    • I agree with you that they really are trying a new business model, and in many ways, I think it's a very sane one for the software development community. The strength of a software platform depends on the community of its users and particularly developers, and Mandrake is clearly trying to combine some sort of revenues with a strong relationship with its user and developer base. Frankly, I think it's a great direction for business in general, and Mandrake didn't have to screw around with silly acronyms like CRM to figure out that good business is symbiotic.
      In reading over the terms of the Club, I get the sense that their vision is somewhat vague. Not to throw rocks, but the combination of novel and vague methods makes it easy to make mistakes. Nonethless, they seem to have their heads on pretty straight. Perhaps Mandrake won't make it as Mandrake, but those folks will do good stuff, and I wish them the best.
    • Their "business model" is to expect $60/year in donations (roughly the cost of Windows @ $100/1.5 years).

      Currently there are 5600 members at an average of $75 apiece. They hope to increase this by a factor of 10, giving an anual revenue of $4.2 M. At present (based on Q4 2001 from their own letter) they're leaking $6.72 M anually, after conventional sales, service and support.

      By their projection, they'll still be losing money, but not as bad as before. The problem is, the "donations" come directly from their user base which cuts into conventional sales. Here's a much easier solution (co-opted from the RIAA's lack of understanding) -- if you overcharge for a plastic disk with a little bit of tinfoil on top, people won't pay for it. But if you charge a reasonable price, and they like your product, they will.

      Alot of people use cheap bytes or some other burner because they don't have their own bandwidth. But a lot of people don't -- because they'd rather get the original thing. If you could get an OFFICIAL Mandrake CD for $10 (plus shipping -- geniune sticker included), would you? For $5?

      Say Mandrake has a million users. 1 in 10 of them is a poor unfortunate soul without broadband or just wants to support the distribution (that's roughly the percentage they hope to get with subsriptions.

      At $10 a pop that's $1 M. Much more likely. Much more sustainable. A quarter of their charity wet dream, but more than double their current offering. If they want to make it a club they could include geniune certificates and maybe a decoder ring. At the least an encrypted monthly newletter. For $60 a year you get a coaster in the mail every month with the lastest snapshot (and exclusive membership stickers of course-- you could even have a sticker design competition by the members) -- That's a club I'd join. And I don't even use mandrake.

  • Is that it's the easiest to install of the lot. A little background: I just started futzing with Linux recently. I've done 3 linux installs. Two were nightmares that never actually technically ended, and one was flawless, simple, and took under 30 minutes.

    The one that went off without a hitch on the first try? Mandrake. It detected all of my crappy second-hand non-standard Gateway hardware no sweat, suggested sizes for partitions and went off on its merry way. 27 minutes later it was rebooted and prompting me for my login and password...

    Damn, if I had known Mandrake was so easy I would've used it the first time...

  • Doesn't anyone see what's wrong with this?

    The company is "cash flow positive" because people are making cash donations to it? This isn't sustainable. The "dot com" companies tried to live this way -- the only difference was that the money was coming from venture capitalists instead of consumers. Once the VC went away, they all went bankrupt very quickly.

    Sorry folks, but the only way to stay in the black is to consistently keep your revenues higher than your expenses. A one-time cash infusion in tough times is nice, but you can't count on it to continue indefinitely.

    • It's quite early to declare that this isn't sustainable and the early indications are contrary to your declaration.

      Maybe it will be. Instead of discounting Mandrake's efforts to stay true to a culture of giving...why not applaud them for innovating. They deserve credit for this.
  • I like the Mandrake distribution But Mandrake's commercial nature doesn't give me much confidence in their future. As a commercial company, they are ultimately out to make a profit, but they don't seem to be able to do so without donations. It seems odd, though, for people to donate money to a supposedly profit-making enterprise. I don't see a good path to profitability, despite their article.

    Wouldn't it make more sense for Mandrake to become a non-profit? Employees would still get paid, they would have tax benefits, and people who donate money would be guaranteed that their money goes into making a better distribution.

  • Uhhhh, hang on... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @02:52PM (#3304465) Homepage

    I'm puzzled... Mandrake are saying that it's an innovative idea to offer more stuff in return for more money.

    Before you get the troll stick out, go and read their statement. That's exactly what they say. That people were buying the box set (instead of downloading) just to give them funds, and this is a better method than that "charity purchase" because it gives more benefits to the purchaser.

    You ever see that Dilbert strip where Dogbert is explaining the basics of economics to a .com startup?

    • Startup Guy: Wait... you're saying we need revenue to make profit?
    • Startup Gal: Ouch. I have a headache on one side.

    Sounds to me like Mandrake has just discovered the basics. Sell stuff. Offer more stuff the more money you pay. Tell your customers that they're partners, because that way they're more inclined to pay (in this case, it's actually true, but the point it that it's still standard marketing spin, and business types are comforted by familiar mantras).

    Hurrah for Mandrake. I've been thinking for a while now that we could do with fewer commercial Linux distros, and better concentration of funds. I'm a SuSE user (and purchaser), but really, I don't mind who gets the money, as long as we get a few sustainable businesses out of it that we can all donate to/buy from - and get our employers to buy from - with a degree of confidence that they'll still be there next year to offer support.

  • I was very hesitant to "donate" money to a business. I was an economics major in college and giving money to a publicly traded company is against my religion. I finally justified it by telling myself that Mandrake wasn't a "normal" company and Linux isn't a "normal" product. It's something better, because it provides people with freedom instead of trying to tie them to some proprietary product.

    One of the most amazing things behind Free Software and Open Source is that anyone who can program can potentially contribute to the project. Many programmers donate their time and expertise to producing Free Software. But there are many people like myself who aren't programmers, but who also want to contribute. Mandrake Club provides a method for me to contribute, and I give them some money much as I would give them my code if I were a programmer. I hope that my contribution will keep Mandrake alive so that not only I, but many others can benefit from their work.

    As a final note, I just installed Mandrake 8.2 this weekend. It's by far the slickest Linux distro I've tried. It's not only a great desktop, but it has all the power of linux underneath and therefore makes a great server as well.

  • not yet a member. I'm over my credit limit :) but soon I will be. Mandrake jsut seems to be what this whole thing is about. If you like something you support it. thats it. we've been complaining about getting music on a more reasonable system usch as the honor system. Yet when a software company that does good creates an honor sytem club type thing we crap on it. I hope it is a huge success. As far as I'm concerned if I join the Mandrake Club I'm not a member but more a patron of software. I can make suggestions to the developers and they implement them and I show my appreciation by paying a certain amount to continue that work.
  • How about an iso of the source downloadable for free, but a fee of a few dollars / pounds / whatever to download the compiled distro? I'd be happy to pay $5 to download the latest version.
  • Here at Gael's Boutique we sell the world's finest flowers. But the flower market has been a bit soft lately. So we held a bake sale. Dear customer, we want to thank you. Because you donated to our bake sale, we are proud to say that our flower shop has finally made a profit.
  • Then donate to the Debian project through the non-profit organization Software in the Public Interest. Why the heck would you give your money to a corporation? If you donate to SPI, you'll get a tax receipt too. Can't say that about MDK User Club.

    See this page: http://www.debian.org/donations

    Why choose Debian over Mandrake?
    - More packages than any other distribution.
    - Latest software versions available faster (use Debian's 'unstable' tree.. which btw, is pretty darn stable! Nothing like the buggy mess that is MDK cooker.)
    - Packages are exceedingly well built, highly integrated, and well optimized.
    - It's cleaner / faster. Debian's default install isn't loaded down with lots of junk you probably won't need anyhow.
    - Responsive support mailing lists: be polite and you'll get quick answers
    - Incredibly easy to maintain / update due to superior dependancy handling
    - All packages are available from a single location with many mirrors. No hunting.

    Please note that you should be using Debian testing (Woody) to install as it's very mature and up to date.

    And now come the whining newbie flames about how Debian is so impossible to install or other such entirely unfounded nonsense. RTFM and try before you cry folks. (-:

  • concerns about mandrake (Score:3)

    by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Monday April 08, 2002 @11:57PM (#3307792)
    The only concern I have about Mandrake is the package management system that it uses. I used to be an avid Mandrake user, and loved it to death. However, I got sick of RPMs, and went debian due to the superior apt/dpkg package management. Sure, Mandrake has uirpm (or whatever it is; it's been a while since I've used it) but it still seems like an inadequate hack in an attempt to immitate teh function of apt/dpkg. I was wondering if anyone knew if there was any reason behind why mandrake has not switched to the apt/dpkg duo. It certainly makes for more secure systems. (MandrakeAutoUpdate would be nice for a newbie installation option - "Would you like MandrakeAutoUpdate to automatically connect to the internet and download program security updates when necessary? [y/n])

Slashdot Top Deals

"And remember: Evil will always prevail, because Good is dumb." -- Spaceballs

Close