Linux Mandrake Gets Major Investor 122
Stone writes "It's seems that Red Hat get a big competitor with Mandrake. Axa announces today an equity position in Mandrakesoft. Axa is the second world leader of assets management with 650 billion USD and the owner of DLJ who makes a lot's of Nasdaq IPOs." Thus it begins.
Oh boy. (Score:1)
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
Re:Am I alone? (Score:1)
Uhhh...Mandrake can be had for free too. In ISO format no less if you want it. So what's the problem?
Re:This will be great for enlightenment! (Score:1)
Re:With GPL there is no 'steal' ... (Score:1)
It's called "positive feedback", and while a Bad Thing(TM) in control systems, it's a real good idea in this context. More power to 'em.
"Study the past if you would divine the future."
-- Confucius (K'ung Fu-Tze)
Re:No, Just Dumb! (Score:1)
Read the GPL? Trust me, I know very well that they are allowed to do what they are doing, and I have no problem with that they are doing it either.
That RedHat uses GPLed software in something they sell doesnt bother me. When someone release a piece of software under the GPL they dont expect to make money from it, and they absolutely do not loose money if it ends up in a dist like RedHat.
Mandrake is making money off something that RedHat is trying to sell, and I just think that it is crappy. I would happily use Mandrake, but I would never pay for it. I know its available, just like RedHat, for free. But at the same time I am more than happy to pay for RedHat, simply because I like the idea of supporting their work.
Re:Fragmentation (Score:1)
They now sell themselves as "RedHat Compatiable"
They are trying to further themselves from
RedHat has much as possible.
Re:Aarrrgh! (Score:1)
Re: Restrictions (Score:1)
Ironically, this type of restriction would, I believe, also make the program undistributable with the debian system, as it does not allow such restrictions.
--
You people are pathetic (Score:2)
"You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium..." -- GNU General Public License [gnu.org]
Most of the programs in Linux distributions are under the GPL or similar licenses. Where in these licenses does it say, ".. except if someone else has already distributed the program?" I write program ABC, I release it under the GPL. Everyone in the world is free to copy it, mirror it on ftps all around the globe, modify it, even put it on a distribution CD. Are these programs only to be distributed by one vendor?
Yet, there is a ton of people that come out for EVERY Mandrake Linux story here, bitching and moaning about how they just "stole" everything from RedHat, and they do not even deserve the right to exist. With Corel's upcoming distribution based on Debian, will this same situation arise? I sure hope not.
We release programs under the GPL so that they are able to be used/copied/etc for everyone. So where on Earth does this hostility for a small group following the copy clause of the GPL have ANY legitimacy?? If you do not want your program to be copied freely, give it a license that states something like, "This program can only be used on Debian systems, and not any stupid copy-cat distributions either, just the genuine Debian one." As author of a program, that's your right. But you have no right to say, "These people should not copy programs, because well, RedHat already did it."
If you come up with conspiracy theories like stockholders demanding RedHat not allow this sort of behavior, then the stockholders should have read RH's IPO statement, should learn about a company and how it gets the programs on its CDs, etc, before investing any money in it. If this homework is done (primarily reading the GPL a few times), you will see the copy clauses and either believe in them and invest your money, or get scared by them and not invest. If RedHat did anything so close as to make a distribution unable to be copied (they couldn't use any GPLed code, so that would require totally reengineering EVERYTHING), they would get hounded so horribly they would have to go out of business as I doubt anyone in this community would ever trust them again. That is a much larger risk for them than shooting down everyone who wants to copy the distribution.
The official people involved, both RedHat and Mandrake, have said they do not mind either side. Bob Young is always asked this, when I saw him at Comdex this Spring and again at LinuxWorld just a few days ago.
What's this mean for the Linux community at large? Yes, you can copy a Mandrake CD and slap a label on it that says, "Slappy Joe's Spiffy Linux," and sell it for $20, $50, even $199.99. But, to win the hearts of anyone, and make a name for yourself you will have to put in work and make it something that is noticable. Copying alone doesn't win you Product of the Year awards
So, shut your pieholes and do something useful with your time.
Re:Aarrrgh! (Score:1)
--
Re:Hello (Score:1)
Debian Forever
Purple Hat distro ? (Score:1)
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:2)
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
Re:Oh boy. (Score:1)
Re:Fragmentation (Score:1)
paradox (Score:1)
I just but my competitor under, but he was also my supplier, so I guess I fold too.
Re:Fragmentation (Score:1)
> been recompiled with CPU optimizations
> for all Pentium-class processors
> (Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III,
> Celeron, AMD K6/K6-2, Cyrix 6x86,
> Cyrix MII, etc...). This allows 5 to
> 30% of speed gain to your system!
what about the optimization stuff?
has anyone noticed the difference?
Is this a good thing? (Score:1)
bad for Linux.
The strength of Open Source is simple, you have
the collective strengths of many, working on the
few projects that make it through the survival
of the fittest.
Basically a group of individuals downloaded
RedHat, added KDE and gave it a new name. Any
arguements to this, just read their concepts page
on their site. Later we read, the Press Release
on some new utilities, whereas they are downplay-
ing their connection to RedHat stating "RedHat
compatible". They are trying to distance them-
selves from RedHat, and become more of their
"own", a necessary marketing move.
I fear this concept will start a trend of individuals downloading various distro's and trying to make a profit.
With the LinuxExpo awarded for Best Distro, and
this commercial backing, this only legitimizes
this concept.
This will cause a large amount of developer re-
sources to be focused on creating an individual
distribution, as opposed to killer apps. Sooner
or later, these distributions will HAVE TO insert
proprietary software in, to make their distribu-
tion the one people will buy.
I don't know I see some good, but I fear the bad
may outweigh all of it.
Re:Can you imagine what them investors are saying (Score:1)
Good Day, and please ignore my sig on this post.
Re:Purple Hat distro ? (Score:1)
Re:You people are pathetic (Score:1)
Mandrake on my AMD box, I see a big performance
increase.
My only concern is people jumping on this and
seeing 100 Linux distributions by Christmas. The
more distributions is not necessarily the better.
Now survival of the fittest says the best will win
out in the end, no so if someone can copy and re-
package with new utilities.
So how can a distribution be commercially viable
in this atmosphere. Granted there are the Debians
and Slackwares, but it is the commercial distri-
butions that have really added the simple tools
and polish that make Linux a little bit more
productive, they have to in order to stand out.
(NOTE, that statement isn't meant to start a
route add default xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is better than
control-panel, the simple utilities make life
simple, admin simple, and Linux more usable.)
Writing better tools will not make a commercial
distribution stand out, if a competitor takes it.
Eventually, the only thing that will make commer-
cial distributions stand out, is the proprietary
software they bundle with it. I predict a trend
whereas you'll see at least five more distribu-
tions trying to make a profit by Christmas. You
will see the bundling of proprietary software
end of 99, early 00.
Re:Am I alone? (Score:1)
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
>available for free. Most of those that do
>wouldn't know how to get it anyway.
This is true, talked to my younger brother the other day (he is still in school). He was talking to a group of guys who were trying to get enough money to go in on a store copy of Red Hat 6.0. They were amazed to learn that he already had a copy (I burned it for him right after it was released), and that we would make copies for them. He has now taken to selling copies of it for $5 to these people. (wish I had made money that way in school)
Re:French imperialism? (Score:1)
You would think...... (Score:1)
Re:Aarrrgh! (Score:1)
*sigh*
Why is it one cant post a thought on Slashdot without being called an idiot? I have no problem with people telling me I am wrong if they tell me why, but this?
I guess more can not be expected. It seems most people are confusing Free Software with Free Beer.
The GPL, as pointed out several times in this thread, does indeed encourage people to share. That RedHat has done this is good, very good. My point was not that Mandrake should not be allowed to do so.
I have released really silly, and very simple CGI-scripts completely free. Not GPLed since I really dont care if anyone uses the code and doesnt credit me (they are simply too simple to care), and I enjoy the feeling that gives me. That someone may perhaps have been helped by it. I enjoy being able to find free code someone else has written and learn from it. But I would never do what Mandrake is doing. Taking a complete product, put a sticker on and sell it, thereby taking the business (and thereby the motivation of the original coder away) away from whoever wrote it.
End of discussion. End of thread. For me that is. I am sure there will be a few more you-are-an-idiot-posts. I am just through answering them.
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
I was hacking when suddenly..I was BURIED IN MONEY (Score:1)
Does this seem like a way to challenge Red Hat's
business strategy.. or just rich people having fun??
pan
Why is RedHat the *only* competitor? (Score:2)
where the hell am I going... (Score:1)
Should it really matter...so long as it's linux and stable and controlled by the philosophy of "You'll get it when it's ready, dammit"? Do you think this tried and true free software development model will work with all of the commercialization that is sure to follow?
We shall see, we shall see
I think this is healthy (Score:2)
I'm looking forward to the Corel distribution myself. Hopefully, the beta version of their distro will be easily available and not restricted to a few beta testers. It'll be time for me to finally take another run at linux and try installing it on my P2-400 128Mb. I like the looks of KDE too.
It gets more interesting by the day.
The final victory will come when Microsoft starts to release software for Linux, that will be their white flag surrender.
Linux: a distribution in every pot (Score:1)
I do suppose that since RH is trying to include KDE into things now that we have an unusual situation: A value-added reseller being repackaged by a value-added reseller. I do hope their Lothar project gets some of that cash!
will marketing wars tarnish linux? (Score:2)
"don't use distribution X...they're still using kernel x.x.x" what does this say about the kernel in general in the public's eye?
Re:where the hell am I going... (Score:1)
No I really don't think so. As long as there's free debian I could care less.
Re:Fragmentation (Score:1)
Re:Fragmentation (Score:1)
Wha?
Mandrake sells itself as "Redhat +". It's pretty much just redhat + KDE (and I'm sure some other differences and improvements).
Granted this may change but given that Mandrake's strength is "improving on RedHat" there'll be precious little fragmentation as a result of this deal.
Different markets (Score:1)
Mandrake, by contrast, wants to be 'your mothers distro' and isn't really shooting for wide deployment by the PHB's. Not only that, but they use the RH way to do it. As everyone's favorite Redmond company has shown, there is value in people following your lead and allowing you to set the standard, your particular way of doing things, as the common standard. Redhat wants the home user doing Mandrake so that those users are comfortable with the version they may use at work.
Calmness. All is calmness and tranquility. We are not a business. We are a community. And we are each helped by the contributions of our members. That is our nature.
With GPL there is no 'steal' ... (Score:3)
I'm sick and tired of reading that linux-mandrake
have stolen from Redhat.
GPL is an invitation to share, with the condition that the sharing goes both ways.
Claiming that Redhat's works has been stolen is show a complete lack of understanding of the GPL. If Redhat didn't want threir work to be shared with others they wouldn't have released it under the GPL. Since Mandrake's innovations are also GPL'd Redhat is free to share them also.
Can you imagine what them investors are saying now (Score:3)
Deap in the heart of a nameless American investor's firm the following conversation was recorded by Agent 000 of British Intelligence. The message was sent across the world through the Echelon network, and picked up by my tranceiver in Sidney, Australia. Many an agent risked his life to bring this message to slashdot, so enjoy!
"Oh my f'ing lord, Larry, look at that."
"Uhhh, yeah Bill?"
"Ya know that Linux thingie we invested in?"
"Yeah, I remember that. It had a stupid name, Red Cap or something"
"Well I just read here that this other company , Mandrakesoft, is being invested in by this Axa joint"
"Uhh, so?"
"Uhh, so! This Mandrakesoft stole Linux from the Red Hat people, and you wouldn't beleive this . ."
"What Bill?"
"Them danm bastard Red Hat people LET them steal it, they practically gave it away, if what I'm reading here is true!"
"That's kinda sucky isn't it?"
"Hell it's sucky! I'm pulling all my money from those bastards, before ya know it, they'll be giving their product away for free!"
"Well, if ya think it's a good idea Bill, I'll do it too"
"Them danm crazy's if ya ask me. I meen that's no way to run a business"
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Lothar, DiskDrake, Panoramix, KOffice funding the list goes on. How can anyone not love a company that puts it's own money into producing GPL'd software?
What about LinuxPPC? (Score:1)
The big problem (Score:1)
Re:Yes (Score:1)
Ask all the Red Hat bashers on here :P.
(For the record, I currently use RH 6.0 GPL, but plan to buy "Official" Mandrake sometime in the next 3 months).
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
I bought the Macmillian/Mandrake 6.0 box at Sam's Club for $25 (it was marked as a utility...I guess that's partially true: once you install it your computer should stop crashing). I tried installing it, but it couldn't get past the re-partioning step. No matter what I did, it would lock up and I would have to hit the reset switch. What surprised me about the lockup was that the machine is running an older version of Linux, so it's not like the hardware would have been unsupported. Has anyone else had such a problem? Oh well....at least I got my money back from Sam's
Re:Can you imagine what them investors are saying (Score:1)
Re:You people are pathetic (Score:1)
seeing 100 Linux distributions by Christmas. The more distributions is not necessarily the better. Now survival of the fittest says the best will win out in the end, no so if someone can copy and re-package with new utilities.
Of course if there were 100+ distributions not all of them will survive for long. Users will pick what they like, gives them the features they need/want, etc.
Mandrake started as a Pentium optimized, more customized GUI, KDE added, more internationalized RedHat. It turned out there was a substantial market for just a thing. And Mandrake has done very well. Now with custom programs like the repartitioner, GUI installer, hardware detecting thing (lothar). All of which can put utilized by other distributions, even RedHat. If another group of people see a hidden market, they can tweak Mandrake or whatever and have a shot at stardom. That is exactly what survival of the fittest means. A pure copy, just changing "Mandrake" with "Foodrake" will die because people will see the fraud. But if they add the Foo office suite, translations of all HOWTOs and whatnot into the Fooian language, specially optimized for Foo-based hardware, etc, etc and the Fooites like such a thing, they have a good chance at surviving.
So how can a distribution be commercially viable in this atmosphere. Granted there are the Debians and Slackwares, but it is the commercial distributions that have really added the simple tools and polish that make Linux a little bit more productive, they have to in order to stand out.
A distribution has to have some good points to make it standout and survive, they've got to get a user base and convince us to convert (or try them first) from other distributions. And if they GPL those programs, all the better for everyone, not just those that use their distribution. No one loses. As for profits, I read somewhere that RedHat's income is more from their support contracts and the like, not so much from the boxes people buy at Best Buy. Maybe there IPO filings have more breakdowns on like their last year's income. The boxes at Best Buy and the features of the distribution get the name recognition, so big businesses will spend moolah on the support contracts.
The most important advantage of Linux over many other OSes, is this free software idea. The GPL doesn't discriminate on who you are. It's just free. That's what we need to concentrate on. It's free for everybody, even Bill Gates.
This will be great for enlightenment! (Score:1)
I really can't tell if this is a troll ... (Score:1)
BELG wrote:
Let's say you should pay for Mandrake's distribution. Would you be somehow supporting Mandrake's software contributions (GPLed) and at the same time *not* supporting Redhat (also GPLed, and thus able to take full advantage of Mandrake innovations)?
You say it's "crappy" that Mandrake should sell a distrib based on RH work, but as you can read in other posts and other places, Redhat is as much a reseller of previous works as any other Linux distributor. Both RH and Mandrake are paying full-time developers to improve their distributions as well. Each is free to fold back in (or reject as buggy, or as useless, or whyever
And also, as you can read in this same discussion, RH has publically expressed support for Mandrake, and I see no reason to doubt their sincerity, at least not for a few years (when competition might become closer between them.). Mandrake is expanding the Linux market by making installation of what-is-essentially-RH-6.0 easier; as market leader and brand name extra'ordinaire, Red hat probably stands to gain nearly 1-to-1 with Mandrake sales in the medium -term because people are trying / switching to and Mandrake is one big reason why.
So if RH doesn't think it's "crappy," (and they're the ones you're trying to support), then to what end do you dislike Mandrake so? RH doesn't, and they're the ones who ought to know about the good of RH.
I bet those guys would have / have had good parties together, and they deserve it, too.
Just a thought,
timothy
And thanks for the help (Score:1)
Re:You people are pathetic (Score:1)
than good points to make it standout. They
don't have to convice users to convert either. Why
try and convert from a pool of a million, when
you can market to a pool of a billion business
nonusers.
A majority of RedHat's money does in fact come
from boxed sets (via prospectus), as well as the
fact that they were 90k in the red last year.
My point is from strictly a commercial standpoint,
eventually one company is going to want anothers
customers. If OpenSource Evolution pans out, each
distribution will have the same primary features.
A company is eventually going to have to choose
between..
A. Write an Open Source Killer App to gain
market share, and risk that a competitor may
bundle and market better.
B. Write a prioprietary killer App to gain
market share, with no risk of a competitor
taking advatage.
I truly believe that when and IF Linux becomes
truly profitable in the commercial sector, you
will see individual distributions using closed
source apps to nudge ahead of competition.
Re:You people are pathetic (Score:1)
The Mandrake distro began by filling a gaping hole created by RedHat and gave the users what they wanted. Since that time, it has grown and improved. If the users didn't want what they produced, it would have died on the vine a long time ago. It grew because users wanted what Mandrake had to offer. This is true for all Linux distributions.
--doc
optimization (Score:1)
Re:Am I alone? (Score:1)
I don't think RH has to be too worried here. They really have a huge lead in the market and have established a "name brand" that has more or less become the reference distribution for major projects that are ported to Linux. Also, it's not going to be just about selling the OS, but also service and support. I think RH will be the distro of choice (with juicy support contracts) for the PHB's for some time to come.
This sort of thing happened before... (Score:2)
Back in The Day(tm) (actually before I really started using Linux at all...) there was the SLS distro, which served largely as a basis for Patrick V. to come out with Slackware. The guy who started SLS whined about how Pat got the glory for taking his distro and adding some scripts (and IMO fixing it up quite a bit) and calling it a different name. Of course, the fact that SLS never really got fixed/updated made it irrelevant in the 1.0.x kernel era.
And now, ppl are using other distros than Slackware, oft because of their new features (such as more sophisticated packaging systems)
The moral of the story: In the Linux distro community, evolve or become irrelevant. If Red Hat falls behind the curve so to speak others such as Mandrake will pick up the slack and take over.
Re:Can you imagine what them investors are saying (Score:1)
In all seriousness, though, I'm sure the GPL came up once or twice in the boardrooms.
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
Re:Am I alone? (Score:2)
From what I understand Mandrake asked RedHat first. They were told ok. Young has said he doesn't mind CheapBytes either. This, IMO, is very smart.
RedHat right now makes all their revenue from box sales, true. But they know this can't last, their business model has to be brand name and support, not boxing software. When broadband goes in lots of people will be downloading, not buying, unless they can get good help, documentation, and support.
If you thought distributions were going to IPO, then not compete with one another I don't know what to say. Thats what its all about. This is not bad for us - it will mean more innovation, more full-time open source programmers, and cheaper prices.
There are some worries, like if one distribution tries an embrace and extend to become the "one true distribution". We should be watching for this, and let it be known that engaging in certain competitive tactics will not be tolerated. And the weird thing is they have to care, cause we write their code. Funny, eh?
Re:Aarrrgh! (Score:2)
AAARRRRRGH!!!!
...okay now, where was I? Oh yeah, please go read the Debian social contract. Then go read the GPL. Then go read the collected essays of Richard Stallman. Then go look up the interviews of Bob Young. If after this, you still feel that Mandrake is stealing Redhat, then stop bogarting that doobie and pass it around.
Re:Can you imagine what them investors are saying (Score:1)
Anonymous Coward said:
It's -Sydney-.... not Sidney. Get off yer Linux box and do some geography.
I reply (in my big I know everything voice):
Okay, man! You got me, but not in the way you thought you did. I accidently wrote Australia, instead of Ohio. Yes, I meant the grand old city of Sidney, Ohio USA. You see, this Sidney place is kind of a hub for the Echelon network, and so the perfect place to spy in on it. I guess the message my spies came across this morning, about how all the Australians are really aliens, was still on my mind. Sorry!
By the way, I didn't even have to get off my Linux box to find that out! Neiner Neiner!
Re:Yes-Go Mandrake (Score:1)
Mandrake IMHO is much nicer than RH6.0. I bought (using others money) RH6.0 for the Corporate Cred it brings with it. I pretty much could not stand it from the get go and got more and more dissapointed as time wore on. Though redhat looked good to the bosses, so it made linux an easier sell.
Me, I have not been a redhat user since some 4 version- I could not stand the installer, but I got curious about this RedHat fixed Mandrake distro and downloaded and installed it at home. It is real nice, they seem cool (for redhat types *wink*) and they aren't worth 5.3 billion dollars for using someone elses software.
IMHO, if you are gonna play the game that RedHat is playing, which is betting the bank on free software, you have to be willing to play by the rules(of the license), which is if mandrake, you or I wish to repackage and sell the work as our own, that is our choice, unless we infringe on something not protected by the license.
I am just glad that Mandrake is improving the product.
Re:Am I alone? (Score:1)
Re:Can you imagine what them investors are saying (Score:1)
Re:nail in redhat's coffin (Score:1)
And guess what? They were pretty much the same price.