Ask Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik 666
Red Hat has made several changes in how they run their business, notably concentrating more (perhaps one might say "entirely") on enterprise-level Linux users. Some of Red Hat's moves have upset long-time users, and many people seem to have trouble understanding exactly where Fedora fits into all this. Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik has offered to answer your questions and clear things up, so ask away. Please don't ask questions he's answered in recent interviews and statements, and try -- hard though this may be for some -- to ask only one question per post. We'll forward 10 or 12 of the highest-moderated questions to Szulik tomorrow, and run his answers when he gets them back to us.
I have a question... (Score:2, Insightful)
Fedora (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:up2date (Score:2, Insightful)
personal OS choice? (Score:5, Insightful)
thanks in advance for your honest and direct answer.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fedora (Score:2, Insightful)
Small Business Market? (Score:4, Insightful)
Question: Why has Red Hat never articulated a strategy appropriate for the small business market?
Example: My small business has 8 workstations and 2 servers; here's what's important to me:
I'm willing to pay roughly $200/year for standard support services for these machines plus per-incident costs if they arise. I have been running Red Hat 7.3 with 2 Red Hat Network subscriptions and manually propagating updates to the other machines (which is annoying but tolerable since N is small).
I have been a paying customer, and I'm basically amenable to any sort of metered service system where payment is for services used. However, now I am being jettisoned as a Red Hat customer: Fedora has no support, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux is too expensive. Red Hat has all the resources already in place to support my needs, yet is unwilling to do so.
Why is Red Hat unable to support this type of revenue stream which seems perfect for linux?Re:What's next? (Score:1, Insightful)
Support from Redhat (Score:2, Insightful)
I would rate as one of your best assets the old Cygnus organization which is providing excellent support on the GNU gcc/g++ compiler. My company was a Cygnus client for years and has also gotten great support from the Redhat team in this area.
Enterprise is a word that always sounds big to me. How much support can you give to a smaller company? What kind of price levels/support levels (approximate) is Redhat now offering?
SOHO Support? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have at least a half-dozen entitlements -- faithfully renewed each year. I've offered a few of my paid-for entitlements to clients, for free, as part of my service. My plan has been to expand this to more of my clients in the near future. But now, I feel stuck.
These are mom & pop shops (in the dozens) who will NEVER be able to afford your Enterprise offer. They wouldn't know how to keep their Red Hat, back-office server up-to-date if it meant saving their business. I make a living by saving these people from hours and hours of servicing Microsoft patches, updates and malware. If you will not be effectively supporting the SOHO market (including my clients), what do you recommend?!
SOHOs know "Red Hat". I will have to teach them "Mandrake", "SuSE", or perhaps maybe not so much "Novell", instead. I believe today's SOHOs are tomorrow's Enterprise buyers. What do you believe?
Explain the strategy? (Score:4, Insightful)
The only thing the makes your "Enterprise" sustainable is the support of commercial software vendors like Oracle, IBM, etc.
What happens when Oracle decides that it's easier to provide their OWN distro for running Oracle?
It seems to me like RedHat is turning its back on the community and throwing itself to the wolves.
If you know what the answer will be... (Score:5, Insightful)
This, and a number of other highly-rated questions where the answer is "Fedora" (followed by what will boil down to some hype for Fedora), should probably be moderated "Overrated" in the interest of presenting questions for which the answers the Red Hat CEO will give are not immediately obvious.
(Normally I wouldn't question moderation, but in interviews mods are more like votes, so this is a valid opinion.)
(And of course, in the event this gets rated highly it does not constitute a question.)
Re:Emphasis on Enterprise-level Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
I knew this question would show up quick. Let me sum up how this appears to me...Mr. Szulik, I am a laoyal Linux advocate and longtime user of Red Hat Software. I have downloaded the OS that you put together with your high paid developers (using your expensive bandwidth) ever since RH6.2. I can not understand why you are selling out and abandoning us....we got you where you are today.
Okay, so that may not be quite fair. However, I am guessing that the desktop was a financial loss for Red Hat. It was one that they cleverly supported, but a loss none the less. The fact that they supported it made a larger Linux base etc....and they benefited intangibly, but a board of directors will not tolerate intangible bennies only for long. A corporation is a math machine work plus money = more money that equation MUST be satisfied. Red Hat is going a natural route. When Linux is entrenched in many small-mid size corps then the desktop will be opened up. For now it is GENEROUS of Red Hat to support Fedora.
Re:Fedora (Score:3, Insightful)
We're talking about OS's. The Director of Information Technology was once a help desk guy, or at least a network admin. HE is the one making the OS recommendations, for servers and clients alike.
And guess what - he uses a computer at home.
More importantly, his replacement 5 years from now uses a computer at home.
The upper and middle IT management of today are the network admins of 5 years ago. 5 year plans, people. 5 years ago, these folks started playing with linux - many of them, redhat.
5 years from now, there won't be the grassroots component. Grassroots is what MADE redhat, and every other linux distro. It is their backbone. And regardless whether they think otherwise, not even linux in general (regardless of distro) is free from needing to keep the grassroots strong - that's the reason Fedora exists at all.
So...same operating system? Learn to build your own damn kernel. The apps are either the same, or available. RedHat is still barely more than package management - the only difference between "fedora" and "redhat advanced server" is certifications, and default capabilities. So yes, you can get the latest kernel source, build it, and YOU TOO can have smp support, >4gb ram support, or whatever else is supposedly "missing" in fedora.
Its the same OS.
Re:SOHO Support? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you didn't make money doing this, would you still do it? RedHat didn't make enough money providing updates for their desktop distribution, so they stopped doing it. Seems rational to me.
There's no sign up process for Fedora because it's no longer required, not because it's going away. What has changed is who's responsible for providing updates. It's now not RedHat's sole responsiblity, it's a community process just like Debian.
You need to take a deep breath, relax, and read the information at http://fedora.redhat.com [redhat.com]
Why stab everyone else in the back? (Score:5, Insightful)
Mods: checked the reports on this for reasoning but didn't find anything; if I missed it please feel free to mod this to oblivion but I would still like to know.
Re:Why (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why (Score:3, Insightful)
It's common place for a company to produce many products and for some to lose money but the company to come out with a profit thanks to the other products.
By getting rid of the "losers" the company can raise profits by doing "less"
Re:Someone's already doing that (Score:3, Insightful)
IBM and RedHat (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that desktop RedHat has been replaced with Fedora, and the consequent loosening of control of the distribution by RedHat, has IBM indicated any change to their business relationship with RedHat?
IBM is now pushing to have more Linux desktop systems out there, and presumably either is or will be sending that message out through their field consultants. Now that you've dropped desktop RedHat, are you concerned that SuSE, or indeed any other Linux vendor, may step in and establish themselves as the dominant desktop Linux platform by riding on IBM's coattails, and that they may be able to leverage this strength to cut into your enterprise sales?
Where will your *server* software be field-tested? (Score:3, Insightful)
In those Bugzilla discussions I mentioned, I've seen a lot of highly-informed, to-the-point correspondence from people just like me -- we have no problems patching driver code, recompiling kernels, parsing debugger output &etc., and I'd hazard a guess that the issues we raise and the bugs we help troubleshoot in the field (the ones that make it past your inhouse QA folks) are part of the reason that RedHat has been so rock-solid. This translates directly to the stability of the server-class packages you sell to our cousins in the corporate trenches. The targetting of Fedora at bleeding-edge enthusiasts and hobbyist installations means that these bugs (remember, these are the ones that made it past the in-house RH team -- have a look at the tg3 driver issues in bug 69920 [redhat.com] for one example) likely won't be caught before they bite your paying server customers. Do you foresee a decrease in stability for RHEL as a result? If not, where do you envision getting your field/beta testing done for the server components of your OS? Isn't it possible that, while taken by itself the "free" version of RH was an operating loss, when viewed in context of overall product line it was actually part of the reason you started operating "in the black"?
Red Hat's Financial Priorities (Score:3, Insightful)
Mr. Szulik, I keep seeing Red Hat put out one unusable, confusing and ambiguous interface design after another. Anaconda is a textbook case of what you shouldn't do when designing a user interface for non-geeks.
A Red Hat employee a while back who went to my campus' LUG told me that the reason why Red Hat software had such bad usability was they didn't have the money to fund HCI folks running a usability dept. at Red Hat.
Yet when we look at the financial history of Red Hat, we find that the company spent over $700,000,000 buying out other companies like Cygnus (purchased for $650M).
Mr. Szulik, how would you answer the charge that your company destroyed its chances to gain real home desktop marketshare by not investing a small sum of money that would make your software more accessible to the people you were trying to target, as well as substantially lower the costs you company would have incurred supporting that market?
--
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Re:Education and Research Markets (Score:3, Insightful)
If RH could provide some sort of option for non-profit/academic/research groups we could continue to use it. However the lack of this option is putting these communities in a serious quandry. Some thought is being given to repackaging the Enterprise version after removing the propriatary bits, but this seems like re-inventing the wheel to me. Overall this decision on RH's part is leaving a very bad taste in the mouth of a lot of influencial people (and some non-influencial folks like me).
Where I would like to see the Scientific/Research community go is to Debian. Easy upgrade, conservative release durations, excellent security
Hmm... to keep on topic:
Dear Mr. CEO,
How badly do you think it is going to hurt Redhat in the long run to alienate the scientific and academic sectors - two groups who are introducing linux to lots of smart professionals and students who will be the corporate decision makers 10 years from now?