MandrakeSoft Files for Bankruptcy Protection 495
An anonymous reader writes "It's official: MandrakeSoft has filed a 'declaration de cessation des paiements' - the French equivalent of a U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. From a statement issued by the company: 'This reorganization of liabilities enables MandrakeSoft to continue its current operations, which are showing increases in revenue and significant decreases in expenses. MandrakeSoft's strategic partners are supporting the company in this process and the MandrakeSoft team is focused on continuing to deliver high quality services and products to its customers.' Best wishes to MandrakeSoft as they work through this process."
Here is your chance! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now is the time to contribute to MandrakeSoft and help them out. If you have ever used it, if you use it now, if you have ever found it useful, now is the time to contribute.
I run it, I have contributed. I even saved them the money by d/ling my copy from linuxiso.org and then sending them the money.
But think for a moment, how much a license for Windows costs, and how little it costs to shoot five, or even one, dollar to Mandrake as a "thank you" if you use their software.
"Free" is a misnomer.. nothing is "free".. but "user supported" is probably as close to "free" as we can get, with an important distinction between "user purchased" and "user supported".
I would hate to see what is a rather good distro tank now, because of money woes.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:5, Insightful)
But doesn't it prove just the opposite? The company dies, but the software lives on. I expect that the vast majority of people who use Mandrake will have no problem moving their setup across to another distro. But imagine what would happen if a traditional, closed source company died. Then you'd be screwed.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:5, Insightful)
Not sure. I would think from the "us" level, yes, that would be true. Most of us can do that without too much trouble. But from the "them" (read: big business, small business, etc) perspective, no, its catastrophic.
This is a pretty big name distro, at least in the eyes of Joe Buying Software Off The Shelf. He has seen it. If he is thinking of moving his small to mid-sized business to it, he wont if he sees this and realizes the company could tank on him at any time. We all know Microsoft Support is often less useful than the 17 year old next door when a problem crops up, however one of the major selling points is that _it is there._. If one of the "larger" (figuring RH, SuSE, Mandrake as "large presence" distros) tanks, then Joe Consumer will lose even more faith. What RedHats stock did after the IPO put a hurting on the reputation, because most of the people approving these things spend time looking for the enter key and watching stocks, not having a clue about software.
Im not looking at this as much from a personal standpoint, as from a "company X is seriously thinking about moving to a cheap alternative to MS, which would be Linux.. what can I show them to point out a GOOD reason, with a solid company behind it."
Maeryk
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:3, Funny)
Re: Joe User highly overrated (for now) (Score:3, Insightful)
I never like to see a company with a decent product go under, but frankly, Joe User and Aunt Tillie will just have to wait about 8-10 years to get Linux on their home PC, although they will likely be surrounded by Linux in embedded units. And that's OK: that's not where the real opportunity for Linux lies. Large businesses are the real consumers of Linux, and they weren't even looking at Mandrake (hence the bankruptcy).
Joe User will buy a home PC to match his work system, not the other way around. Make sure he has a Linux box at work and in a few years he'll want one at home to stay compatible in case he "has to take some work home one day". The Quickbooks-oriented small business market is as tough to crack as the consumer market.
It doesn't matter anyway; while the naysayers say "see! I told you so!" and the cheerleaders wring their hands and wonder if the sky is falling, Free/Open Source Software will continue to march along at its own pace, blissfully unaware of the uproar surrounding it.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:5, Informative)
Heh... Not quite. Stock price is meaningless. It's market cap (price x shares) that counts, when you're comparing valuations. Sun's market cap is $11.77 billion (according to today's WSJ), whereas Redhat's market cap is $1 billion. Sun's total equity as of June 2002 was $9.8 billion. RedHat's total equity was $327 million as of 2-28-02, probably has gone up since then.
Still, a market cap of a billion for a Linux company is pretty impressive.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:4, Informative)
That's a pretty impressive display of confidence by the market in RedHat.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm a capitalist, and I firmly believe that any business must make money through the sale of goods and services to turn a profit and survive. Look at RedHat. They took the same product, spent large amounts of capital developing a product, and sold not only that product, built on freely available technology, but support services and add-ons that people want to buy.
The difference between them and Mandrake? They created a business model that works. Mandrake was built on top of RedHat, with most of the work already done for them. If Mandrake has been unable to attract investors in a Linux-crazy world, something must seriously be wrong with their fundamentals.
So sorry, Sally. I won't be giving a failed company a handout. I'll continue to purchase products that warrant it. This is Darwin's theory of Capitalism at its finest....the strong survive.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:2)
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:3, Insightful)
Things have a specific value, yes.
Things also have a specific cost.
These are two distinct concepts.
That cost is not always equal to its value to you, and getting something at an agreed upon lower cost than you perceive it to be worth is not some terrible sin.
If you buy a bag of potato chips on sale does everyone call it welfare for the chip eater? If the company is selling the product for below its cost are you obligated to pay them the difference?
Mandrake made a business decision to give away its product for free. Many people took them up on that offer, and somewhere along the line they noticed that they don't make money doing that. So now we're supposed to go back and pay them extra? Sorry, it doen't work that way.
Re:Here is your chance! GET A CLUE (Score:5, Insightful)
Get real, if they can't run a business then they should fail, it has nothing to do with Linux or free software.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, think of how many people run linux, and have the cash to donate.
You will need a VERY SERIOUS movement to keep Mandrake alive. And by serious, I mean big enough to grab media attention. Then what are you telling commercial software companies? We can help our companies when they are down. But what happens when they go into debt again, then a third time...
I love linux, don't get me wrong. And Linux isn't going to die, even if all the 'company distros' go out of business, but to think that you can save it to prove a point to proprietary software is, well, its a sad dream that will, most likely, not come to fruitation.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:5, Interesting)
Why the hell should I give my hard earned money to a company that isn't doing enough innovative stuff to be able to sell their product? RedHat and Apple don't seem to have these problems.
Realistically how many people does it take to make a distribution? Patrick V of slackware probably doesn't do it alone yet I wouldn't be surprised if he did.
If you really want to contribute just write free code. Otherwise stfu about "contributing" to a bad business model.
To say it in french, "Je m'en fiche".
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:5, Insightful)
Mandrake is mostly a Joe User distro, and as much as I don't like it, I can see that the people maintaining it (even if it was 3-4 people) need to get paid. When everyone goes and downloads the iso in under an hour with their broadband, they see no money in their hands. THAT's the problem.
-bm
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:2)
If they did remove free downloads public mirrors would still exist when the software started showing up on peoples doorsteps, however Mandrake could save money on bandwidth this way. Cost reduction is smart business, and typically the only people affected are the ones that wouldn't buy the software anyway.
Asking for charity and having a donations page is hardly the way to run a successful for profit business. If they want donations they should change to a not for profit organization.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:2, Interesting)
However I guess that would negate the essence of Mandrake - user friendliness.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:3, Insightful)
No, if Mandrake distributes source along with binaries (you know, those three CDs you never use), they have fulfilled their GPL obligations. The GPL does not require that you host an FTP site for the whole free-loading world.
You can charge as much as you want for a CD, but you have to accept that someone can turn around and distribute GPLed programs from the CD. Note, however, that the CD itself (i.e., the compilation) is not necessarily GPLed. The proprietary installer and configuration tools on SuSE CDs prevent you from sharing them with your friends. The trademarked icons on Red Hat ISOs prevent you from selling them.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:4, Informative)
See the following for examples.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.
http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/standards/ORDERS
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:4, Informative)
Correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the GPL mean require them to release the source code freely? (As in publicly downloadable?) So a user could compile Mandrake free of charge? I'm not sure about this, but it seems to me that Free-as-in-GNU is a superset of free-as-in-beer. When you have to release your source under the GPL, how do you have to do that? If you CAN release it on a CD, how much can you charge for that? $5? $50? $500? Where does it cross the line?
Now, it wouldn't be free as in freedom if you weren't allowed to charge a fee, now would it?
I couldn't find a link to give you, but I have read documentation written by Richard Stallman about this exact subject. Basically, what it comes down to is that you can:
However, you can *not*:
This isn't a complete list of cans and can'ts. The important thing to remember is that the purpose of the GPL is protect freedom. It's not about making software available non-gratis, it's about making software available without sacrificing the end-user's rights to protect corporate interests. When a company decides to make/distribute free software, they have to make a serious commitment to protecting their end-users' freedom, or they will fail somehow.
As far as mandrake is concerned, they have worked damn hard to stick to the GPL, and have had a LOT of problems besides that. I love their distribution, and I'd hate to see it go (although I'm willing to try out something besides just switching to RedHat), and I really want them to pull through. However, I agree with some of these other posters, that if they failed they've failed. We should move on.
But filing for bankruptcy protection doesn't mean disappearing completely. They may still have a chance and make a comeback, so I'll be watching for that. :)
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:3, Insightful)
The GPL requires you to offer, for an at-cost charge, the source on the same format you offered the binaries. Thus, if Mandrake only sold the CD's, then they would be required to put the source on a CD and offer that to anyone who bought the binary CD
Offering ISO's on the website is a long-standing tradition of distros, but it isn't required. In fact, Lindows [lindows.com] doesn't.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:2)
I think buying a boxed set every once in a while is enough help from an average user. If everyone who uses Mandrake yet never purchased a boxed set goes out and buys one now I think Mandrake would be in a much better shape.
-bm
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:3, Insightful)
YEah so Mandrake shouldnt relesse Mandrake 9.1 until they get their donations. They shouldnt provide any free services until after you pay for them.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:5, Interesting)
Distros like Mandrake give the typical user a useable-right-from-the-box alternative to Windows, and this is a good thing.
And Mandrake not innovative? Please. Multi Network Firwewall, MandrakeClub, letting the users pick the packages they want in the distro, all the Drak tools that make administration easier for a newbie, an installation easier and quicker than Windows...every bit of this is innovative. All this while maintaining a commitment to GPL sofware. I am happy to support a company like that.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:2)
I don't think companies can make money selling completely open source software. I think selling completely open source software IS a bad business model.
I haven't seen any examples of corporations making a profit doing this. RedHat makes it's money from selling services, right? How much of their revenue is from shrinkwrapped boxes? I'd be surprised if it was over 1%. Apple uses open-source software such as Darwin but they don't try and sell it by itself. They add their proprietary code such as Quartz/Aqua/Finder/etc and sell the whole package as OS X. It's great for them because they saved a lot of money on kernel development, however they aren't trying to sell their kernel. And Safari is free-as-in-beer.
Are there any companies making money from selling a completely open source software product? To me the point is this: the GPL requires you to release your source code, essentially for free (as in beer). I say essentially because you can release it at cost of distribution. People don't pay for things when they can get them free-of-charge - it's human nature.
Sorry if I grossly misunderstood the GPL or something.
Re:Here's your chance (not mine). (Score:3, Interesting)
You can read the piece here:& day=15&year=2003&t=00 [reser.org]
http://ben.reser.org/rants/invisible.cgi?month=01
Unrealistic Reasoning (Score:5, Insightful)
For-Profit businesses exist for one reason and one reason only: to make money. If they cannot do this, it's their own fault -- especially if they are expecting people to whom they give away their product to send in "contributions", as you call it.
MandrakeSoft is going the way of the dodo because they haven't successfully created a way to make money. End of story. God willing, they'll be replaced by a business which can do so, but don't expect me to send my hard-earned bucks to save 'em.
Re:Unrealistic Reasoning (Score:2, Interesting)
You're exactly right. The parent of this post needs to be modded up and it's parent modded down... way down.
I'm still trying to understand why I should donate money to a for-profit business. Why don't I just give my money to Microsoft? Or the government? Oh that's right, because I don't "give" money to a business, I "invest" money. And I expect a return on my investment, or I'll take my money elsewhere...
If you feel bad for Mandrake, get over it, and donate some money to the EFF or Debian. Or if you don't like their social contract, donate to a local LUG.
Re:Unrealistic Reasoning (Score:4, Insightful)
I like Mandrake. I've used it for several years and it has just finally gotten to a point where I don't have any problems with it... or maybe my knowldege about Linux in general has matured to the point that I can take care of problems as soon as they arise... either way, as time goes on, Mandrake keeps getting better. I would hate to see it fail after so much time and energy has gone into such a wonderful project/product.
They have a lot of good people working there and a lot of good ideas, but like anyone else, they need to be able to eat and pay their bills at the end of the day and they may end up having to find other jobs or other ways to keep their company going in these tough times.
Re:Unrealistic Reasoning (Score:5, Informative)
MandrakeSoft is in the current financial situation because of their former management team (now sacked) who tried to turn them into some sort of e-Education dot.com company - increasing their operating expenses 400% in the process.
They've sorted out the worst of the mess, and they're doing much better now, but they have a big financial hole they can't fill. This is the reason for the Chapter 11-like filing. Without huge debts to service, I believe they can easily be profitable (although they might have to be a little less generous with how much they give away for free).
If you're going to say "End of story", make sure you've read the book, not just the covers.
Re:Unrealistic Reasoning (Score:4, Insightful)
Mandrake puts out a good product and God forbid that they should ask for donations! Oh horror! The assumtion is that people who contribute use mandrake so it's not really wealfare!
If Mandrake dies a horrible, ugly death... (Score:3, Insightful)
The so-called closed source junkies can say whatever they wish, Red Hat and Suse are proof enough that free software can entail viable business. And Debian, Apache, OpenOffice and Mozilla are proof enough that it does not even has to be a business.
So, if Mandrake can't survive, either because there is no room for another distro or because its managers are not good enough, too bad. Business die every week for those and many other reasons. Something supposed to be profitable opperation can not rely on custumer donnations...
Re:If Mandrake dies a horrible, ugly death... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about debian but Apache, OpenOffice and Mozilla are funded heavily by corporate interest. Heck most of OpenOffice is still code bought by Sun, and they have the most full time programmers on OO.
Mozilla is still run by Netscape/AOL, and I'd guess more than half of Mozilla's code is still being done on AOL's dime.
Apache group gets money from all over.
The linux kernel has more paid fulltime hackers than any other projects have known. You think all those redhat guys work for free?
Open source projects are no different from other projects. They need substantial resources to grow.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:2)
Now is the time to contribute to MandrakeSoft and help them out. "
Errr, here's a secret; The closed source liscensing junkie corps just might read slashdot and figure out what we're up to!
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:5, Insightful)
If you open a grocery store and give apples away for free outside. But inside you keep slightly shinier apples inside the store and charge money for them. As long as the ones outside aren't rotten (iso downloads are far from rotten) nobody is going to come in and buy, unless they are really rich. And if someone across the street is giving away shiny good apples for free, you lose. I might like your apples a lot, or the most even, but I'm not going to pay for them unless I'm rich and I don't care about money.
So yeah, free as in beer software can't survive, as a profitable business. But it can survive as in people will use it. Look at winamp its been free beer forever, and its #1. A well deserved #1 at that. Free speech software can survive as a profitable business, as long as it also isn't free beer. The problem is that most OSS is often both. You might really like ford. But if they start giving away ford foci(focuses), you aren't about to buy a mustang. If they give away the plans for the focus, you aren't about to build your own, unless you are a nut(read geek).
Yeah, I think I made the same point like 10 times already, this post is done.
Prostitution (Score:2)
Why buy fish if you can just get them for free out of a lake?
Re:Prostitution (Score:2)
Re:Prostitution (Score:5, Funny)
So why does prostitution exist if people can get sex for free?
Have you *seen* the so-called free software women?
'nuff said.
Bottled Water (Score:3, Insightful)
People bottle free water, and sell it. You can actually make money on free stuff.
Re:Here is your chance! (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree.
However, the fact that the user community will be able to resurect or continue supporting the project will prove that that "free" (as in beer) software can survive. This may prove to corporations that it's better to rely on these open-sourced projects as a result and benefit everyone in the long run.
It still is a shame to see Mandrake fold, though.
New Business Model (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said, they won't make it by staying this course. I fell a little (more)tweaking in their business model is necessary for their growth/survival:
1) I'd like to see them concentrate on a single-CD distribution. Cut costs by consolidating efforts, making the single-CD a simple desktop with the framework for significant pre-configured updates from MandrakeClub-only rsync servers.
2) Provide MandrakeClub-only rsync and ftp servers.
3) (AND HERE'S THE KICKER) Stop releasing downloadable ISOs before the Box Set arives in stores. Even further, stop providing free downloads of the latest/greatest version, putting the ISOs on MandrakeClub-only ftp servers. If you want Mandrake GNU/Linux 9.1, you'll have to buy it, or become a club member. Keep the free downloads one release behind, when 9.0 became available, you can download 8.2 for free, when 9.1 is ready to ship to stores/club members, then you can get 9.0 for free and so on.
I know a LOT of people will disagree with me; but even those slight changes could put Mandrake in the black by the time 9.2 is ready.
Re:New Business Model (Score:3, Informative)
According to the GPL, ANYBODY can freely post any version of the Mandrake ISO's on their ftp server if they want to, and there is nothing Mandrake can do to stop them. There is no real way to make money selling GPL software.
Re:New Business Model (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice theory, not practical (Score:3, Interesting)
Mandrake did a faux pas when they hired that management team a few years back which defocussed them. Their current business model is working fine, and but for that mistake they'd be way profitable. All they need is to survive to about June and the rest will be easy.
The problem is not that their business model can't fly, the problem is that their business model had about 20,000 feet lopped off the altimeter not so long ago, and its nose pointed at the ground. Now their nose is pointed up, they have flight speed, everything's going nicely except for the minor detail that the ground is much too close.
Kicking something back in for what you've used will push the ground down a bit for them. Mandrake pay for hackers to fix stuff (KDE, for example) that everyone uses. Mandrake GPL all of their packages. RedHat 8.0 has software (entire packages) in it from Mandrake (as they should). If Mandrake goes kerplonk it will cost all of us developers, and credo, and the UnitedLinux pound-of-flesh business model and LindowsOS source-what-source business models will reign supreme, and who wants that?
Story in The Register (Score:4, Informative)
This is bad news...
Cheers
Not a surprise (Score:2)
Given that Mandrake has been begging for money [slashdot.org] I don't think this really should surprise anyone.
awful quiet (Score:2)
This really makes me wonder about what their plans are for the near future, or if they have any significant plans. It will be interesting to see...
rumors (Score:5, Insightful)
This is all rumors so please take it with a grain of salt.
From what I understand during the dot-com boom Mandrake signed contracts regarding e-Education with many bankrupt / troubled dot-com companies. Mandrake has pulled out of those contracts and is now in the penalty phase. These companies want to collect their penalties from Mandrake and Mandrake cannot make the payments.
Under French bankruptcy law these penalties would be voided and the remaining company (the company that sells a Linux distribution) would be viable. So by threatening bankruptcy all they really mean is walking away from their e-Education related debts. This may or may not be a tactic to get the e-Education creditors to be willing to take 10 cents on the dollar rather than the nothing they would get under a bankruptcy.
In any case a bankrupt Mandrake my not mean the end of the Mandrake distribution.
Just to throw in a person note I hope its not the end. Mandrake has a great niche as the desktop distribution for the computer power-user who is not necc. all that knowledgeable about Linux. That's very different from the current crop of easy desktop distributions which are much more power limiting and very different than the server / corporate based distributions. I think its an import niche and one that gets filled regardless of what happens to Mandrake.
Translation (Score:5, Funny)
Optimism. This is a good thing. (Score:4, Insightful)
"Rumors are just that" (Score:5, Informative)
Re:"Rumors are just that" (Score:4, Informative)
- Robin
Re:"Rumors are just that" (Score:3, Informative)
now if they were doing a "similar to Chapter 7" then it could be a "demise" situation. Reorganization under chapter 11 is a way to continue forward avoiding corporate death.
Sad to See (Score:5, Insightful)
At my LUG, whenever a newbie asks, "What distro should I install?" A bunch of techies respond, "Debian." To which I now point out (after having spent over a week trying to get Debian Woody to work with my ATI Radeon) that newbies have no idea how to handle the module config and that I've had a post on the local LUG board for almost a month now and NOT ONE Debian fan there has been able to tell me how to get Woody to support a common video card (I did get it working - that is not the point -- the point is that it wasn't supported.)
At this LUG, Mandrake has become a dirty word. I've noticed, overall, that programmers (and I used to be one -- used to program a LOT in Assembler on my Apple
If computers and all OS's stayed as difficult to set up as Debian or Slackware, there would not be many computers in offices or homes. As much as I hate M$, Windows is easy enough for even my 80 year old mother to use. That ease of use is a large factor responsible for the omni-presence of computers.
Mandrake has brought Linux to thousands, probably tens of thousands (or millions, for all I know) of users and computers. This is the distro that dared to explore the desktop years before Redhat introduced Bluecurve. This is the distro that is easy enough to use that it is pre-installed on computers at Wal-Mart. While those of use who think we know better act like snobs and talk with disdain over any distro that does not play by our rules, Mandrake has done a better job of any distro (except maybe Lindows) at spreading Linux aroudn the world and making it more popular among people other than programmers and techies.
If you want to talk ugly about Mandrake, go on. It just shows an elitist side that does not realize that without users, programming is just writing utilities and tools so we can write more utilities and tools. In short, without users who need easy to use distros, all we're left with is writing code and making systems for ourselvs. I don't know about you, but to me that is a bit much like masteurbation.
I hope Mandrake pulls out of this.
I also hope those who keep ragging on Mandrake take a step back and realize if it weren't for the easy to use desktops, computers would not be popular, would cost MUCH more, and far fewer of use would have jobs in computers (and these jobs are getting rare enough already).
Re:I'm a newbie and I like Debian... (Score:2, Interesting)
It was no harder to install than DOS, and I'm finding it extremely easy to use. Key things that I like: GREAT website and documentation, dead-simple to find configuration data, easy package management.
Now, the disclaimer. It's a headless server, and will stay that way. I never *once* considered using Linux on the desktop. I looked at RedHat, Lindows and Knoppix and thought they were all a joke. IMO linux in general has a loooong way to go before being a desktop OS, but is absolutely wonderful as a simple server OS. I already have dhcpd, samba (as a PDC) and apache running on my box and am about to tackle mail. Nothing but port 22 will face the public until I know more of what I'm doing.
Re:Sad to See (Score:2, Insightful)
You seem to be forgetting that the tech industry is dominated by people whose only socially redeeming quality is their intelligence. I'm not trying to troll--it's an observation that has been borne out repeatedly. Anytime the "unwashed masses" or "Joe Sixpack" figures out something in technology, too many in our industry scurry to raise the bar in order to maintain an intellectual elitism. As soon as regular people figure out bash and vi, those will suck, too.
As much as Linux users preach about how much better Linux is than Windows, if the desktop market suddenly rushed to Linux, Linux users would rush out.
One of the biggest obstacles to widespread Linux adoption is the Linux community.
P.S. I use Linux
Re:Sad to See (Score:2, Insightful)
Greg
Re:Sad to See (Score:3, Interesting)
That was just one of MANY things I tried. Not one of the local Debian fans or anybody else I contacted had a good suggestion that actually worked.
My experience is that many Debian people have forgotten the install because updates are so easy. That's the reason I wanted to change over. If/When I can get Debian working on that machine, I'll probably switch. In the meantime, it's Mandrake, which I got up and running quickly and even got all the extras (like firewire) working easily. It's my first Linux video workstation!
Re:Sad to See (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Right off, the best example I can think of is Chrysler. They went under bankruptcy protection, but came back strong and even paid off loans and debts early.
If you don't like something about Debian, join up and change it.
Good point, but, to me, the computer is a tool. I use it in business. I'm not a programmer and, frankly, I don't have the time to sit around debating or going against the grain to try to improve.
If you spend some time and learn how Debian/GNU programs operate, you can work wonders.
Like I just said, to me the computer is a tool. Like a hammer. I'm in business, which means I produce products. I have to focus my time and efforts on producing products that make money, not on playing around with Debian and learning what it does.
Different people have different needs. I'm glad we have a lot of distros. I don't like seeing ANY distro go under.
My only complaint, in my original post, is that so many Debian fans keep talking about how wonderful it is, but seem unable to understand the basic fact that if you're interested in productivity, you don't have time to sit around learning a new system. You have to go with what works. Again, different people have different needs.
Oh, and whether or not one distro is around in a year and another is not does not prove anything. Betamax was better than VHS. When is the last time you saw a home betamax for sale in a store?
Re:Sad to See (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder how many Mandrake fans who feel like this turn right around and talk shit about Red Hat being "The Microsoft of Linux" or say "Red Hat sux0rz! Mandrake is 31337!!!11" or try to score cool-points by fighting against "the man"?
Pot, kettle.
Re:Sad to See (Score:5, Insightful)
Sad. My first year with Linux was a matter of endless frustration. It was only because I desperately wanted to get off the Microsoft treadmill that I stuck with it. I'm glad I did, because I love Linux, and the process of clawing my way to competence taught me a lot. (And made me a lot of money, since I went from selling furniture to being a sysadmin over the intervening eight years. Not everyone wants or needs to be a sysadmin, however.
I tried installing Debian recently. Frankly, I was appalled at how primitive it was and how many common packages (including some I depend on) were not included because they were not "free" enough. I would recommend Debian to someone who likes tinkering with their OS, just as I would (perhaps more strongly) recommend Slackware or the highly educational Linux From Scratch. I wouldn't recommend any of the above to a newbie unless I hated their guts and wanted them to stick to Windows.
Mandrake is quick and painless for inexperienced users and, in my experience, autoconfigures more hardware than any other distribution. Nor would I say it's just for newbies -- the experienced desktop user shouldn't have to manually configure anything unless the defaults don't suit him or her. Ever. It's just plain asinine to suggest that there is some kind of moral virtue in using unprofessionally packaged software.
Mandrake is also nice for certain server applications. Their Advanced Extranet Server project bundles pretty much every commonly conceivable Apache-related package in a series of modular RPMs. (Yes, I can compile it myself, but I get paid for producing results, not my hard-won understanding of the poorly documented and often poorly designed dependencies between the necessary packages.) Mandrake's install disk functionality means I can do one install and have some newbie intern roll out dozens of machines for the web server farm without a hitch and without working out the networking issues in advance.
Easy is only bad when it comes at the expense of power and flexibility, a la Microsoft. Mandrake delivers the full power of a feature-packed Linux distribution and manages to make it easy to use as well. I hope Mandrake manages to come through their current difficulties for the simple reason that they make good product that actually helps people get real work done, and they are to be commended for doing a much better job than the other commercial distributions which have had much larger resources to draw from.
Re:Sad to See (Score:3, Interesting)
You complain that debian was hard to install.
This is good! Because:
*) Like you said, you learned a lot in the process.
*) It forced you to realise that some packages aren't totally free, and made it just that tiny bit harder to get them - that's a good thing.
*) If you weren't smart/compentant/knowledgable to install debian, then what use are you to us?
*) You used the new found knowledge to make money, and so I assume helped someone else move/use linux, and possibly develop for it - definetly a good point.
Over the years of helping on a chat channel, I've noticed questions have gone from "How do I check dma is on on my hard disk" to "How do I use kmail?","How do I add a bookmark?", "".
I've noticed more than one person complain/comment on this. If you feel I'm being elitest, just imagine all those AOL'ers suddenly using linux and clogging up the irc channels with really dumb questions.
At the moment, the linux community wants people that will help and develop. Even if that is in translating docs, writing docs, doing art, etc.
Having said that, there are some useful points to having the general AOL'er using linux:
*) More people = hardware companies taking linux seriously.
*) More people = games companies taking linux more seriously.
*) More people = UI considerations taken more and more seriously. (Good as long as the UI only becomes easier to use, not dumbed down and reduce efficency of those who know how to use it)
Re:sorry spanky.. (Score:2)
I just think a lot of people making their keyboards so sticky need to take the advice William Shatner gave out in his (in)famous Saturday Night Live skit.
Re:Sad to See (Score:2)
Not Fair to Rail MandrakeSoft (Score:2, Insightful)
However, I have to say that for a company to successfully market Linux, it would seem most logical to use a minimalist production schedule, keeping the boxed copies to a minimum, just enough to fill orders anyway. Everytime I go to Best Buy or Wal-Mart, there's 100s of Mandrake boxes sitting around with price tags a bit on the heavy side (for a free OS anyway).
Perhaps eliminating the fat manual would have saved a bundle. Maybe a better question now is: How could they adjust their marketing/business practices to recover from such a blow? Perhaps we can tell them what we expect from a Linux distribution, and what is useless (or unnecessary).
Re:Not Fair to Rail MandrakeSoft (Score:2)
Slackware turns a profit the old-fashioned way, they keep their overhead extremely low. If Slackware has more than a handful of employees I would be shocked.
I find this humorus... (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Chapter 11 Bankruptcy does not equal dead (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Chapter 11 Bankruptcy does not equal dead (Score:2)
Don't argue for capitalism (Score:2, Troll)
Remember, this is still Linux vs. Windows on the desktop and MS has a huge lead. No matter how good it gets, the only way that Linux will ever make a push on the desktop is if Linux users start a grassroots movement to get it there. Well, folks, donating money for a cause is grassroots. Given the quality of Mandrake Linux, it might be the one that will eventually crack the desktop.
If you don't agree with charity, then by all means do nothing. But if you want to see Linux succeed on the desktop and are willing to be part of the solution, then buy the distro and join MandrakeClub.
Re:Don't argue for capitalism (Score:2)
More reason to now than ever (Score:2)
"Donate?" No, purchase. (Score:5, Insightful)
That seems so much more natural than downloading their ISOs for free, then donating as if they're a charity. I suppose the PBS [pbs.org]/NPR [npr.org] funding model might work if things were more centralized, but it can't work for 30 different distros. Those are marketplace conditions.
Re:"Donate?" No, purchase. (Score:3, Informative)
So, And no, this is not a way to screw the creditors. It's a way to get the creditors something back.
I recommend that everybody just sit tight until the bankruptcy distribution is done.
Bruce
Declaration De Cessation Des Paiements? (OT) (Score:2, Funny)
(Offtopic moderations and/or flaming commences in 5,4,3...)
It's time for the Mandrake community to move on... (Score:2)
The piece is available for viewing here:& day=15&year=2003&t=00 [reser.org]
http://ben.reser.org/rants/invisible.cgi?month=01
What about HP? (Score:5, Informative)
I submitted that story to
Rather than cut-and-pasting from LWN, (Score:3)
Further discussion (Score:2)
You may wish to join in and set some of them straight.
I personally don't use Linux on my machines (I prefer BeOS) but I'd hate to see a good *nix company go down.
(Posted as plain text because I prefer it that way)
Hold donations for now. (Score:5, Interesting)
This might be a mistake. If you donate now the money might go into the distribution fund available to the creditors. Please email Mandrake (I did) asking them to set up a separate untouchable account that only becomes available once the appointed Judge has approved the bankrupcy distribution and reorganization plan.
The fund should be earmarked for development as well.
Don't send them money now! (Score:2, Redundant)
Sad, But True (Score:2)
I had hopes for Loki when they did this, and while I do not use mandrake, I do wish them the very best, because I respect what they do.
Definition of bankruptcy (Score:5, Informative)
Judging by the readings I think alot of people have a misunderstanding of what bankruptcy really means.
Bankruptcy is not necessarily a bad thing. Alot of times a company will go bankrupted because it made alot of stupid payments, it's staff is overbloated or a bunch of various different reasons.
When a company files for chapter 11 (in the states) That specifically states they are free from all previous date for a protected time period. (ie they dont have to pay for any debts they accumulated) During this time period a company will then restructure it's business, ie. change of CEO, switch over of board of directors so on so forth to hopefully bring the company out of bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy is actually just a protection from the creditors coming in and "cleaning house" ie selling all assets of the firm and completely dissolving the company (that's a bad thing). So it's very well possible that if Mandrake sticks in a better business model that they can pull out of their bankruptcy (however I'm not too fluent with french bankruptcy laws).
For those of you who think
Simply stated you need to make sure you have a damn good business plan to pull out of bankruptcy which usually entails cutting alot of "fat" from the company.
Somtimes you have a realyl good business plan in place after bankruptcy and you're very close to pulling out but the deadline approached and yer still not quite there. A company can then file for a chapter 22 or a second bankruptcy. You can even go for a third bankruptcy.. but that doesn't happen too often.
Here's an interesting fact tho... in all of US history I believe there has only been 1 successful company coming out of chapter 11 and I think that's Texaco Chevron. (a little tidbit for those of you who care about stupid facts).
You heard it at Linux World, first (Score:3, Informative)
Chance of Survival (Score:2, Interesting)
Really this news is trying to sound optimistic, but let's be honest... Mandrake doesn't have any real good sources of income. They are like a
This comes to me as very unfortunate news, my Linux distribution of choice is Mandrake. I like how it improves on Redhat. It's really too bad that it is in danger of ceasing to exist. Especially considering that it's possible failure will leave a gargantuan opening for open-source software's opponents to throw down as evidence for how open-source software can not succeed, despite how untrue that statement is.
Open-source require different business logic (Score:2)
- Have a nice idea that you think is useful
- Develop the software, spending loads of money
- Sell the software until the money is back.
- start profit
With open-source software you have to go like this:Of course, it only works if your idea and your software are good, and recognized as such by others.
MandrakeSoft, maybe, did not stick to this logic. In the hurry to bring Linux to the masses, they invested too much. But, not developing closed-source software, they cannot recover what they invested.
Non!? C'est ne vrai pas! (Score:4, Insightful)
There are so many people out there who cut their teeth on Mandy, some who have become like the aforementioned zealots, but many like myself who still respect and support Mandrake the distro, and Mandrake the company. It's important that we separate those two things: the distro has always been user-friendly and remarkably scalable, whereas the company has been less stable than a beta-release.
Still, it would be a shame to see it go.
Why not eliminate free (as in beer) ISOs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Mandrake has done a fabulous job with 9.0 - amazingly good for a
I feel like if they just went not even an extra mile, but an extra 100 yards they'd have a fabulous distro. I've finally migrated back to using Mandrake much of the time, which I abandoned a few years ago (for my day-to-day desktop work) for Windows 2000 since desktop usability was just not there yet, and because I needed Outlook and Word on a daily basis for work. Thank god OpenOffice.org has solved the Word issue for me, and Ximian mostly addresses the Outlook issue (though thankfully I no longer need the Outlook calendaring features that everybody at my old company fucking loved).
Welcome to the Real World and the Free Market. (Score:2)
If you want to see Linux on the desktop survive and have some cash you want to use for that purpose, don't throw it onto a sinking ship. Invest in a company which holds some promise. Or you could donate to XFree [xfree86.org], Gnome [gnome.org], or KDE [kde.org], all of which are nonprofits (though only Gnome is currently recognized by the IRS as a nonprofit).
Mandrake doesn't have a "product" (Score:4, Interesting)
But, unless they fundamentally change the way they do business, I don't think they can survive. Their primary products seem to be a boxed distro that you can download for free and MandrakeClub, which as far as I can tell is paying $60 a year to feel good about yourself. The subscription adds nothing of real value, at least to me. I don't really want the free but commericial software they have there (and if I do, I can download it elsewhere). I don't care to "vote" on which RPMs get packaged up next, etc.
Here's what I want from a linux disto: The ability to use the OS. To not have to tinker with it. To not have to spend a week updating it just because I want to run a more up-to-date version of some program (GNUCash 1.6 comes to mind.) To not have to update the OS every year because the company drops support (and some here bitch at MS for dropping Win-95 support!).
Simply put, I think Mandrake would be better off concentrating on making less versions of their OS, supporting them better, and helping people move forward without updating the whole system. They could easily charge for access to their servers, etc. a. la. the Red Hat Network.
With Red Hat's recent decision to only support their Linux distros for 12 months, I think the market is ripe for something with real support for the end user at a reasonable cost. Move away from the hacker market who DOES like to reinstall every few months chasing the latest and greatest.
Geeks turned armchair MBAs... (Score:5, Insightful)
An actual explanation! (Score:3, Informative)
Follow the logic, pls:
1. Mandrake at this point is potentially profitable. Sales, consultation and other activities are doing well.
2. In the
3. Aforementioned staff got them into a lot of bad contracts in the name of accessing new markets. Very classic case of corporate over-extension.
4. The
5. Mandrake at this point has made cut-backs, re-organisations, etc. That make all other parts profitable; except that these contracts weigh them down.
6. The contracts have expensive fees to break them, but Mandrake needs to get rid of them in the long term, otherwise they will never be able to use their current profitability.
7. Contracts are broken, demanding huge sums of cash, right now to pay off the fees. Hence the request for support before Christmas.
8. Options are: a) Raise cash, pay off debt. OR b) File for chapter 11, etc. which effectively gets rid of the liabilities. Not fun to do, but a) didn't quite work, so this is the other option.
9. Once the debt is dropped, Mandrake essentially is left with their current operations when they come out of that protection. At this point, they can turn a happy profit, because their day to day business actually is profitable.
The End.
It's simply a neat tactic to remove debt and improve the situation of the company, which now looks more healthy than ever. It's a good thing; a very good thing!
Don't worry... There will be a 9.1 and 10 and so on... Everaldo is already getting set up to work on the new artwork for 10, in fact.
The problem: ISOs available earlier than the box (Score:3, Interesting)
You can buy the box, but weeks (!) after the ISOs are ready.
So the time the box gets available, I (or some friend with broadband connection) has downloaded it already. Why the heck should I buy the box (unless I want to support Mandrake)? I don't need a manual. I don't need the CDs.
Mandrake has to change this.
Full ISOs are fine, but I would give them to Club members exclusivly at least for 4 to 6 weeks.
Then the box has some weeks to get into the stores and then you can add a free download for everyone.
Remember that a normal club membership (bronze level) isn't more expensive than one box one time a year. So at least for me it's a bargain.
Bye egghat.
(silver level MandrakeClub member).
Re:And all I can say is good riddance (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously this is a person who knows something about OSS, since he's complaining about what Mandrake did to SYSLINUX, but his last statement: how was MandrakeSoft expecting to make money? Anyone? Anyone? seems to be a clear declaration that he does not understand the open source business model.
People may not like Mandrake -- I've noticed the more someone pisses and moans about Mandrake, the more technically oriented they are. It's a generalization, but it's something I've noticed.
While most of use doing development work realize that without users who need easy-to-use UI's, we would not have jobs, it seems that there are always those who are willing to go on a rampage and complain about anybody or any company that tries to make Linux easier to use.
While you may not like what Mandrake has done in their distro, I dare say they've introduced more people to Linux and have created more happy Linux users than you have.
Personally, I think the more users that are on Linux, the more opportunities there are for those of use doing development work to sell our Linux products. I know some people feel the opposite, and want to keep everything pure and clean and pristine -- all technical, all perfect -- just a haven for techies. We can do that, but if we do, it means VERY few jobs for Linux developers.
Without the users that need easy-to-use systems like Mandrake, (whether they use Linux or Windows or Mac or anything else), there would be far fewer jobs for developers, since computers would remain in the hands of the technically elite.
If you don't like it, don't use it. If you hate it, then it seems only fair that you make sure you never take advantage of what Mandrake has brought to the Linux world -- which is many more users and more opportunities for developers to sell their products and make money.
Re:And all I can say is good riddance (Score:2)
Very little else. Just anger.
I read your post. I stand by what I said. If you don't like it, don't use it. It's that simple. What you fail to realize is you have that choice. In this case, it might mean quitting a job. But that means you have a job because of Mandrake. Which means you have another choice. You can 1) Be thankful you have a job that gives you money to pay for rent and food and a car and any tv/vcr/home computer/dvd/etc you might buy, or 2) Complain because you don't like what you have to do in this job, or 3) Quit the job you hate so much and either find another or give up what this job, which involves Mandrake provides you.
It's that simple. I made the point that there are jobs out there because of easy to use software. Your first post and response shows that yours is one of them. Deal with it or get a new job.
Well, let's assume you actually know what you're talking about and your statements logically flow. Therefore, your next one should explain the "open source business model."
Not necissarily a logical conclusion. We're on
As for whh they're filing -- that has nothing to do with an open source business model. For example, Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection in the late '70s or early '80s. They came out of it. Your understanding (or lack thereof) of the open source business models has nothing to do with Mandrake filing for bankruptcy protection.
If you want to look at recent
As for your post being modded to troll -- take responsibility for what you post. If you post with anger and your post is full of insults and ugly comments, expect to get modded down. You had nothing constructive to say -- just a lot of pissing and moaning.
Re:And all I can say is good riddance (Score:3, Insightful)
2- Open source
3- Profitable.
There is NO profitable completely open source business model. Noone ever came up with one. If you have one, do share it.
Re:Just what the hell is going on? (Score:5, Informative)
They implicitly included bankruptcy as an option in their statement. There's no honesty problems here; they just didn't know what they wanted to do.
Bankruptcy protection doesn't mean the whole operation shuts down.
Re:Loki (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem isn't OSS, it's bad business models. We had a TON of those in the dot com era, people throwing money at technology as if it'd just magically create profit.
A lot of OSS businesses got their start in this era, so it's natural to see a good deal of them die off horribly.
Loki died, and yet http://www.linuxgamepublishing.com/ lives on.
Mandrake is in trouble, yet Red Hat seems to be doing fine.
Also TrollTech seems to be doing okay, MySQL has been chugging along, the PHP folks started up Zend and are doing alright... probably all because they have sound business models or just happened to find the right market.
What is it, 1 out of 10 businesses actually succeed? A few OSS companies folding doesn't reflect on OSS has a whole.