MacMillan Sells Most Linux, gets No Respect 226
g8orade wrote to us with a
column currently running on ZDNET about Macmillan Linux, aka Linux-Mandrake. The column is regarding the fact that while Macmillan is the best selling, the "geeks" of Linux don't give it any respect - which is an interesting point, although I would like to say that we've done more then one story on it. The column has some thought-provoking comments about useability and the direction of Linux, as well.
What's the diff anyway.... (Score:1)
I disagree. They do marketing. (Score:1)
------------------
Amen. (Score:1)
If Linux wants to be a 'major player' it has to be Linux. It can't be Corel-Linux and Redhat-Linux and so forth otherwise we'll end up with a huge holy war which will, end up in the end, Hurting the GPL and the 'movement'.
The only way I can think of to save us from ourselves is by getting People who run Distros (by that I mean the dev teams of groups like Corel, VA, Etc., people who have respect need to try to stop these wars before they start.) to pass some sort of test to prove that, while they like the distro they work for best, (as they work on it) they will never spread lies, flames, or the like about another distro or another groups work. That way we wont end up like those we scorn for their policy, philosophy, and what we consider to be general evil, (or as I see it, those who put the profit motive above people, or friendships, or trust, that sort of thing. But hey what do I know, i'm stuck up. And obviously I can't talk for everyone.
-[ World domination - rains.net ]-
Linux users should be grateful for Macmillan (Score:1)
Use the brain, Luke (Score:1)
The box labeled "The Complete Linux Operating System 6.0" is, in fact, Linux-Mandrake. It's not some crazy distro by Macmillan. It's Linux-Mandrake packaged by Macmillan. Linux-Mandrake is a distro put together by Mandrakesoft, not Macmillan.
Similarly, Macmillan also publishes plain-vanilla Red Hat 6.0 and Power Tools. This doesn't make them Macmillan Linux 6.0 and Macmillan Power Tools. Imagine the confusion if every company that packaged Mandrake and Red Hat just put their own name on the box. Hrm, Linux Mall Linux 6.0? CheapBytes SuSE?
If not, he wishes he was.. Or should.. (Score:1)
I could personally care less about World Domination. I'm all about choice. While I personally dislike Windows, MacOS, and even *BSD, I could care less if people use them. I'm also concerned with the truth. I don't care if Evan is a "suprerior techno-geek", but if he can't keep from lying, misrepresenting, and otherwise pressing false conceptions through his articles, I'm going to continue to trash him. :)
*rofl!!* Now that's funny.. However.. I'm sick of all the lies. *BSD fanatics lie about GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux fanatics lie about *BSD, Microsoft lies about everyone, etc. etc. I may sometimes get the facts wrong myself, and occassionally troll (ok, only once on Slashdot, really ;), but then again.. I'm not writing news articles. And I don't lie on purpose. And if I'm wrong, I'll admit it. Or if someone points out an interpretation of something I say I didn't think of, I'll elaborate. Nonetheless, if you're going to be a journalist, you should get your fscking facts straight, because you're going to be reaching a far wider audience than, say, me, and the last thing the public needs is more lies. It's enough to make me sick .
If Evan reads Slashdot, as he clearly does, he has absolutely no good reason for his gross errors in that article. End of discussion.
more mandrake users (Score:1)
I highly recommend it to the emails i get as well, however, this buzz is obviously strong because the influx of new linux users seem to head straight for Mandrake.
Mandrake is faster than redhat and easier to install and comes with a few more apps. Redhat seems to have taken a hint with their newer gui install.
Re:There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:1)
Linux-Mandrake(TM) 6.0 (Red Hat(R) Linux(TM) 6.0 with enhancements)
And, in much larger type:
The Complete Linux(TM) Operating System 6.0
And the logos for Macmillan Publishing USA and Mandrake are equally sized, albiet small, in the upper left-hand corner of the front of the box.
Re:Evan's not a troll (Score:1)
According to the article MacMillan is not respected by the "geeks" (as evidenced by his search here at Slashdot i.e. they/we don't care). According to the article MacMillan is not concerned by this. So if neither the "geeks" nor MacMillan care about this whole issue then why is it even brought up?
I don't see why anyone should respect or disrespect MacMillan. What have they done to earn the respect of the Linux community? Sell Linux? Should I respect the local supermarket for selling Coca Cola? Should we show our respect to Cheapbytes too? To all the magazines that bundle CDs with Linux on it?
Interesting that he has to bring up how users are allegedly abandoning Red Hat, mainly because of the KDE/GNOME "issue", all the time too.
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
Re:Balderdash and Humbug! (Score:1)
FUD FUD FUDdy FUD (Score:1)
Oh, yeah, and of course there's the plain old Microsoft quality Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt:
"Even egcs... has had its problems..."
of COURSE it's had problems at some point.. but problems get FIXED. pp, have you even *tried* compiling a kernel with a *recent* egcs *stable* release? Have you read of someone else who has, and failed?
"I know of at least one kernel developer who ignores..."
Well, Anyone can come up with at least one person who does something. Without more details about the "problem", like the pgcc version used, the version of Mandrake used, and whether it was actually a kernel problem, and not just user error, might be helpful.
Yes, this is a strongly-worded reply. Someone might even click it to (0: Flamebait) or worse. But, the whole point of slashdot discussion (it seems to me anyway) is to elucidate the facts, and to point out the falsehoods.
Two problems (Score:1)
FUD FUD FUDdy FUD (Score:1)
Oh, yeah, and of course there's the plain old Microsoft quality Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt:
"Even egcs... has had its problems..."
of COURSE it's had problems at some point.. but problems get FIXED. pp, have you even *tried* compiling a kernel with a *recent* egcs *stable* release? Have you read of someone else who has, and failed?
"I know of at least one kernel developer who ignores..."
Well, Anyone can come up with at least one person who does something. Without more details about the "problem", like the pgcc version used, the version of Mandrake used, and whether it was actually a kernel problem, and not just user error, might be helpful.
"...but using pgcc for the kernel is just irresponsible"
Sure.. if you say it enough times, in enough ways, maybe you'll convince someone, without having to back up the statment.
Yes, this is a strongly-worded reply. Someone might even click it to (0: Flamebait) or worse. But, the whole point of slashdot discussion (it seems to me anyway) is to elucidate the facts, and to point out the falsehoods.
And look.. I am aware that compilers aren't flawless... but slandering a major project, without backing it up with any facts just seems wrong to me. It just incensed me enought to type this...
Linux, Marketing and Mandrake (Score:1)
there are quite a few companies who do that, even in the computer industry, notorious for ridiculous EULA's and skyrocketing prices
(note these cost nothing to manufacture once designed)
does that call in for special respect? that's for you to decide.
as for the "geek" issue, i believe it's part of redhat's marketing strategy. and obviously, it seems to be working very well, as redhat gets a decent exposure.
this might be a good thing, to drive macmillan to try and 'work with the geeks' aswell, producting and supporting more software.
on the other hand, is linux all about geeks? macmillan is trying to sell a product.
we will have to wait and see, which of "silent" marketing like macmillan's or "loud" market like redhat's work better.
i personally believe linux can and should make it without "geek" stamped to it. so does macmillan. but they don't earn my respect, since they earn my money instead
Re:There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:1)
Sorry Dan, but this is not true. Even if it doesn't really matter who did what first I can not resist to point out that Stampede Linux was the first 2.2 kernel distribution that was compiled with pentium optimization.
Re:The Need for Useability (Score:1)
doing "Click... Click... Click...". Now, what is
your point and how it relates to Mandrake (as a RedHat derived work):
a) processor optimization: same for both (correct me if I am wrong, but there are i686 packages for RH6.0)
b) what does it mean *complete* ?
c) install: very the same (at least for "Venus" verison of Mandrake, the only I've seen)
d) KDE - included in RH 6.0 as well
e) publisher - see posting about "Get thick books quickly" somewhere above
[Moderators, this is "troll, offtopic, flamebait" posting. Please score it down several points. Thank you and have a nice day]
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
Whenever I go into Linux rooms on Efnet, that's the sort of thing I see. But if I go into #linux on dalnet, I see people actually assisting each other.
Re:But What Did Macmillan Do? (Score:1)
Are Macmillan trumpeting their contributions to Linux? As long as they continue to just sell Mandrake I don't care (although I assume Mandrake are getting paid for their work, and they are contributing to the community)
I just think that we'll just have to get used to people that want to use Linux, not code it, not spend a large portion of their online life in newsgroups and
Re:Mndrake is better (Score:1)
The only reason I run Mandrake is b/c it was out first(prolly their plan), maybe I'll switch to RH tho
Mandrake hasn't done anything worth technical praise yet, but at least they're working on it(or so they say...)
Marketing (Score:1)
Re:Cloning distros and balderdash (Score:2)
My first Linux, RH 4.1, was a Mac. But only because they put "Red Hat" on the box in big letters and "Macmillan" in fine print. I didn't realize what I had done until I saw the return address on the registration form.
I didn't bother sending in the form. What kind of tech support could I expect from a book seller? Better to learn to RTFM than to sit on a line with someone else who hasn't.
If you want tech support, buy from the people who develop the distro. If you don't need a FM, download or buy from CheapBytes. If you fall between those extremes, Mac may be just what the doctor ordered. But let's not add them to the "boo hoo my favorite doesn't get equal airplay" list. We've got to long a list of those already.
When Mac does something interesting, I'm sure we'll be eager to talk about it.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
Aux money? (Score:1)
Didn't this strike anyone else? I mean, isn't what you pay for when you buy RH (or #include 'other_distros.h') the support? I mean, if you just need a CD, you go to a guy with a fat pipe to the net and a CD burner.
I, for one, would have some very serious doubt about buying a Linux distro without support. On the other hand, I have nothing against Mandrake - I'm considering it for my next install.
It seems somehow strange to me that a distro with 'ease of use' as it's primary asset comes without support. (I doubt it's so easy to use that nobody will need support...hehe) Don't get me wrong though - I'm not condemning it. The GPL allows people to make money in the strangest of ways...
dufke
-
Increasing specialisation (Score:2)
The increasing competition between RedHat, Mandrake, Suse etc can only lead to more refinements and (hopefully) better software solutions provided nobody uses standover tactics. T'is good.
LL
Re:uhm? (Score:2)
More likely, ZD is just trying to start a distribution flame war to get us off their back over publishing their assinine "security benchmark".
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
I didn't think this post was actually sent... (NT) (Score:1)
Re:uhm? (Score:1)
And also with Macmillan-Mandrake you get FREE segmentation faults with emacs! A custom tweaked kernel! Something hacked in which won't let you recompile the kernel!
I saw this (v6.0) in my local computer centre last Saturday and bought it to try a different distro from RH and COL. Installed it, keeping my /home directories and as before. Had some weird problems.
nice little penguin logo on login, though.
dave
Re:FUD FUD FUDdy FUD (Score:1)
Yes I have compiled kernels with egcs and run them all the time. My point is that pgcc hasn't been tested nearly as heavily as egcs (which other major distributions have been using for quite a long time and which cygnus supports commercially)
I don't think the users of a "linux suitable for newbies" should be the ones to be the ones to find out if the compiler generates bad code or not. If it was "hackers linux" we were talking about I wouldn't mind at all, since the users would (hopefully) know what they're getting into.
This from the PGCC faq:
The kernel problem I'm referring to was a driver (not one of the simpler ones either) failing to work. Sure it could have been an user error, but the logical conclusion (same hardware, same kernel, same driver version) really would be that something got miscompiled with pgcc.Don't see this as a "pgcc sucks" post. pgcc has it's purpose as a testbed for new x86 optimizations in egcs, but IMHO it really doesn't belong in a distribution that claims to be suitable for newbies.
Re:If not, he wishes he was.. Or should.. (Score:1)
Do your worst. I stand behind what I said, and incredibly little has been advanced here that refutes much of what I've said (beyond the name calling).
I was legitimately called into question on issue of fact and one issue of timing;
Are the above "gross errors"? Not at all. Are any of the other points factually wrong? Nothing else has been pointed out.
It's all-too-easy around these parts to disagree with an opinion by calling it a lie. I write opinion pieces by design, yet I try to do research to make sure I can back up what I say. In this case I'd interviewed the presidents of MandrakeSoft, Macmillan, and Red Hat before writing. There's also a lot of background to what I wrote that never made it into print.
As for "false conceptions", you'll have to explain what that means. If you think I've achieved incorrect or inaccurate perceptions based on facts at hand, then we can debate that. But you haven't done anywhere near the very difficult task of proving that an opinion is false.
So go ahead, be very concerned with truth. But also keep in mind that my piece says "Commentary" at the top, that I have done a fair bit of homework before preparing it, and I'll be more than happy to rethink things if someone offers a different intepretation of the same premises.
Aimlessly throwing the word "lie" around accomplishes little of value, and certainly does little to disprove my conclusions. Did I lie, as some have suggested, because I deliberately did a /. search on "Macmillan" rather than "Mandrake"? Not one shred, especially since the Macmillan box of Mandrake has some significant non-technical differences with MandrakeSoft's own package -- bundled-in Linuxcare tech support, for one thing. You may not agree with my opinion that this is a significant distinction, but it ain't no lie.
Anyhow, I still stand behind what I said, minor flaws above notwithstanding. Want to disagree? Fine! But indiscriminant shouting of "liar!" gets one nowhere...
Hunh? (Score:1)
Re:If not Slashtroll, questionable journalism (Score:1)
No such thing. Mine was an opinion (and clearly marked as "Commentary") that was expressed, based on observations I've made both amongst /. readers and amongst new users. I give quiet a few "Intro to Linux" lectures, and I believe I have a fairly good idea where new users are coming from. They're most certainly on a different wavelength than this bunch. Not better, not worse, just different.
The reaction I've seen to my column here does nothing to change the perception that an awful lot of people just don't get it. Some come across as "I get it, so what?", and that's OK. But some of the nastier replies I've seen (including some really precious ones in private email) have a common theme: how dare I suggest that /. readers are losing touch!
Looks from here like I've touched a nerve. Totally unintentional, but fascinating nonetheless.
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:1)
"RedHat employs Linux developers and improves it."
"I haven't seen Mandrake do anything. Until then they can get no respect or cash from me."
Mandrake does too, but Mandrake is a small company when compared to Redhat, but they all the create, they are giving back to the community.
Look at my previous post, or even better, look at mandrakes website, for information about what they do.
"Mandrake sucks!"
This is pretty imature - it's just as bad as all the FUD Microsoft publish, imho.
Why? - you don't write one single fact that supports you claim.
It would be allright to write that "Mandrake sucks", if the Mandrake dsitribution had huge flaws, but until now I haven't heard about that being the case.
Please, lets have a serious discussion instead.
It's probably a stupid decision to reply to your post at all, but it's my hope that you'll think a bit more, before you post again.
Opinions as lies and factual failings.. (Score:1)
Hmm. I'll attempt to tread a little more carefully with the following assertations, though I'll cut out the notion that I will bother reasserting any points questioning the validity of your work that have been previously posted by others right away. Not all of it boiled down to simple name-calling, however.
By the way, I believe that despite drawing your ostensible ire, I've proven my time-honored point that I tend to choose my words quite carefully. My proof?
I would bother to disagree, but all of the relavent points have been disagreed upon throughout the course of this entire discussion. To rehash them would be redundant. I was simply responding to the thread insinuating you "Slashtrolled".. To the point, however.. Since you are obviously talking to me, I never once called you a liar. In fact, if you'll take a closer look at most of my commentary, it's rather abstract, general bitching, mostly brought on by responses other than yours (wow, and you think Slashdotters have some serious ego). Only a small minority is actually directed against your article in particular. ;)
Well, that might be because I have not attempted the impossible and highly paradoxical task of disproving something that is not a fact (i.e., an opinion). Opinions are by definition subjective, while facts are objective. This does lend further credence to the idea, however, that you are attempting to troll on a massive level. You'll have to do a little better to sucker me in.. =P
Interesting point, but, um, I still never called you a liar, on top of the fact that as you pointed out, someone else brought that up, not me. If you're going to make a point out of talking to me directly, you can at least track our discussion a little better. :)
To your credit, the quote of mine you included in your post is as close as I came to calling you a liar:
Now that I've had an oppurtunity to stare at this a little more often, I realize I should have said "and/or" rather than "and". Even so, as it stands, I dare you to prove who this explicitly states that I am indeed referring to you as a liar. As people can with your opinions, or you can about theirs, anyone can feel free to read into what I say all they want and claim it implies this or that, but until I say that what they claim is the gospel truth.. it's all hearsay and wild-eyed speculation.
Most of my posting was general bitching about the uninformed viewpoints and/or deliberate mistruths represented by a grand majority of "techie" articles. My strike against you, however, is that I see very little reason why you would not be informed enough to assert a few opinions that made a little more sense than the ones you did. Sure, you're entitled to your opinion, but I find it all too easy to imagine why someone might accuse you of trolling. A lot of your statements are misleading and appear rather uninformed (and, if you'll note my only post directly replying to yours, the only thing I really accused you of was being clueless.. not of being a liar) The fact that you said the following makes it even more mind-boggling.
I'd be very interested to read the rest of that background. Why not post it here? =P At any rate.. Hmm.. Slashdot. Your information resource one-stop. Even a brief period of stay, or a few more carefully selected uses of the search box, will enlighten one to practically no end, so long as they maintain their threshold of one and are open to new thoughts and information. :)
By the way..
Yeah, I believe.. perhaps.. that was me! [slashdot.org] Wow, imagine that. However, I believe I was dissing the editors on that point, not you. =P
And yeah, come to think of it, I did participate in a little name-calling in that post as well, but I didn't call you a liar because of it, you know. ;) I was simply stating my opinion. Obviously you felt the distinction was important.. I didn't. So what? Big deal.. But if you're going to say I was calling you a liar, back it up. I backed up my factual points, and was simply flaming with regards to my opinionated points. Makes sense, does it not? Whatever you do, do not mix the two.. That is the essence that holy wars are spun out of.. ;)
At any rate, anyone who thinks we are going to care enough to make the distinction between "Macmillan" Mandrake and just plain Mandrake (you seem to confuse the issue yourself, actually) is probably a little nuts. There are already far too many distros out there without becoming even more specialized in our coverage of them. Mandrake happens to get a lot more attention than many, but since it's not actually Macmillan that creates the distro, no one gives a damn about Macmillan. People do care about Mandrake, and talk about it, however. Your entire point seems a little murky and bizarre, if you ask me.
Re:sales do not earn our respect (Score:1)
Does Mcmillion include a CDROM with every book or magazine sold? Do they count these as sales?
I don't.
This seems like a PR stunt to confuse the masses. They are not earning any brownie point from me.
More power to them [Macmillian]. (Score:3)
But please do not whine [UK: whinge] they get no technical kudos. They have done nothing worthy of technical notice, nor do they aim do.
They just do a marketing job, as important as it is. Let them get marketing kudos.
-- Robert
Re:If not Slashtroll, questionable journalism (Score:1)
You accumulated the necessary hits for your employer - mission accomplished. Just like Jesse Berst.
OK (Score:1)
Mandrake is fun to play with... (Score:1)
Cloning distros and balderdash (Score:2)
Perhaps Mr Leibovitch ought to wake up to the idea that it was us "geeks" who brought him linux in the first place, and if we don't credit a Macmillan distribution (I'd never even *heard* of it until today!) then that's the way it goes, whether it sells boxes or not.
It's called doing the Right Thing, and I suspect merely cloning distributions doesn't deserve as much "respect" as writing your *own*, surprisingly enough...
As for we shun it "because it represents what [we] don't understand: marketing and sales", bollocks. I understand "Marketing" and "sales" as far as they're useful - they get credit for supplying my salary, and that's about it. For selling their souls to push something and having no brains (as per Dilbert stereotype), no credit.
The phrase is "box-shifter", and we've never yet had any respect for them, if they lack any developers - brains! - of their own...
Re:Balderdash and Humbug! (Score:2)
They're publishers! Book publishers! They probably couldn't tell the difference between a new and malloc if it segmented between their ears
"Have they contributed funds or other resources to organizations like the FSF, The XFree86 Project, Software In The Public Interest, or other such?"
No, but they have contributed funds to the organization that started the linux i18n project, the first Free partitioner/resizer, etc. As for not contibuting to FSF or SPI, those are political organizations (surprise), and perhaps Macmillan doesn't want to get involved in politics.
..."there isn't any other source of "positive points"..."
What is this, Boy Scout accounting? Helping old ladies across the street isn't good enough? Maybe they figure if 99% of the extreme vocal advocates of Linux don't give back (give back what?) to the community, they don't have to either.
"It appears that their priorities are largely economic"
Hello, McFly! Macmillan is a business. They are supposed to make money. Their shareholders will tar and feather them if they don't make money. Respect don't put food on the table, economics does.
Mandrake sells more because.... (Score:1)
Contributions (Score:2)
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
Mandrake IS based on RedHat, but they've gone through and recompiled the ENTIRE distribution for use with modern processors (i.e. processors created in the last few years (586+ class) rather than the last decade+). Most will argue that this shouldn't make much of a significant (read "visible") difference in performance, to which I say: TRY IT. From my experience, it's the kind of difference you'd see between running Windows 98 on a 486 with 8MB RAM and a Pentium with 16MB RAM - while not like the difference between an 386 and a new Alpha running NT, it's still a very noticeable difference.
IMHO RedHat is disgustingly slow - after trying 5.2 (when it was the latest) I had strong doubts about ever wanting to look at it again. Then I heard numerous reports about how unstable it was compared to other distros (Slackware, for instance), which made me start wondering why it seems to be so liked by the Linux world...
We need to realize that just because a company has the most publicity, that company does NOT necessarily make the best product (in this case, RedHat arguably has the most publicity (or close to it) of the Linux distros)... I mean, come on, MS Windows has more publicity than Linux overall, and does anyone truly believe Windows is a better OS?
-----------------------------------------------
And as to the #linux channel, I whole-heartedly agree... I went in to ask about a new boot-loader for use on a multi-boot system because I couldn't find any documentation anywhere, and what response did I get?
Answer:> Why don't you just use LILO? It does more than you think, and besides, it's obviously the accepted one.
Me:> I'm using Linux to learn and play (that and to use a real OS) - if I was going to do what was "accepted" and only stick with the defaults, why would I be using Linux? No development is done without some form of testing, and the only real testing that can be done is for people all over to try the program under development... If everyone is going to "stick with what's accepted," the Linux environment overall would go nowhere.
The other annoying part was the vast quantity of people trying to communicate at once (granted that's going to happen when there's 150+ ppl in the channel)... IMO some people need to go in and divide up the channel into some sub-channels (installation, general help, chat, etc).
There's my $.02 on the matter...
Mndrake is better (Score:2)
Losing touch (Score:1)
Again Slashdot has its collective head in the sand while Ziff Davis Meggacorp has its finger on the pulse of the Linux mainstream!
draws the ire of the Linux faithful
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:1)
Amen 2x (Score:1)
I have never heard of any of the actual distro makers do this. But (some of) their supporters, on IRC, /., Usenet, etc... do it all the time. (Hey, just read thru the comments for this article...) I just hope they will realize it hurts the OS they love.
Otherwise I agree totally.
dufke
-
Re:Yea Mandrake May sell more BUT DEBIAN IS FREE (Score:1)
I like Debian, it's too bad that their last official release is still on the 2.0.36 kernel... You get what you pay for, and since Debian isn't pressured to release they don't, granted their releases are usually better but, hey I want to run glibc2 stuff but Debian can't do that out of the box now can it?
Not surprising... (Score:1)
----------------
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
RE: They do marketing. and we don't need it!! (Score:1)
Re: More whining (Score:1)
I see your point. You would like corporations to contribute more/differently.
Sorry, they won't. Open source is a volunteer effort in every respect. Don't try to ruin it by making people or corps feel guilty they aren't doing more. Guilt is not a good motivator, especially not of corporations.
FWIW, Macmillian _is_ doing what they do well. And distributing/marketing especially valuable since few others around here can do it at all.
-- Robert
Well, it'll pass (Score:1)
Quite simply, in the Open Source mentality, the amount of work you produce has no direct correlation to the money you'll make. It's something we all realised when we got on this boat, or so I hope.
Anyway; Linux-Mandrake is a good distro. It installs easily. It's "nice". But people, it's Linux! This is like arguing about the value of a novel because of the choice of covers. Every time a Linux-Mandrake CD sells, it's a Linux CD being sold. Whether they call it Linux-Mandrake, Corel Linux, Slackware, or Microsoft Linux (eek), it's still Linux gaining territory.
Besides, I have a sneaking suspicion that this backlash against Linux-Mandrake is only motivated by the fact it's a 'user-friendly' distro. We geeks can be so macho at times... It may not be about cars, but it's about processing power, how much wasabi we can eat or what Linux distro we use. (I'm guilty of all of the above.) Fine. I suspect with the coming of Armed Linux [armed.net] and WinLinux 2000 [winlinux.net], geeks will consider Linux Mandrake to be true to the hardcore Linux mentality, and turn to bashing those sissy distros that don't even bother to wipe the FAT32 partition.
Me, whether the newcomer installs Linux by sweating over dozens of manuals over two months, or by popping in a CD and running Linux under Win32, I don't really care. They're still getting a taste of what a real OS is.
"There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
no sissy editors in there, no GUI either, and no monitor or keyboard support, and definately no mouse, if you don't know what your computer is doing without looking, you shouldn't be using it.
the funny part is that the people that posted above me thought this guy was serious, and probably will think that i'm serious too. come on people, don't you remember the old jokes?
"i had to walk 30 miles to school with nothing but rags on"
"you had rags?..."
---
The REAL reason for this article (Score:1)
This is nothing new: ZDNet, CNET, and many other media outlets have been doing this for years. Highly "respected" newspapers have been creating filler for decades, only these were called "human interest stories".
Hiring good writers and reporters and giving them the time to write and report something meaningful takes lots of money and time. Far easier to just make up something like this drivel.
I've found that the only writings worthy of my time are books, a few select magazines, scientific journals, and the occasional
Re:If not Slashtroll, questionable journalism (Score:1)
I think this is the whole point. You made a generalized claim about an entire group of people, with little or no substantiation. If the distinguishing characteristic of the group in question was a particular skin color, rather than an operating system, this kind of commentary could be called racism.
You now acknowledge that this claim doesn't actually apply to the whole group. Well, there are jerks in any group, particularly online ones, and particularly surrounding something as heavily hyped as Linux. But your reaction to this, via the column, makes you part of the problem.
I think your characterization is particularly unfair given that it's the Linux geeks and Slashdot readers who will shoulder much of the burden of free support of friends, family and neighbours as Linux grows.
"Looks from here like I've touched a nerve. Totally unintentional, but fascinating nonetheless."
This is a common refrain of columnists who make provocative statements in public forums, and profess to be surprised by the response. Often this is sheer disingenuousness, but it can also be because they haven't sufficiently examined the basis of their own opinions and motives, or thought through their statements from an outside perspective. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and put you in the latter category.
But If They Want Respect... (Score:2)
The most critical thing that can be contributed is working code. There are an assortment of other things that could be useful.
And if they don't contribute anything, then they will have to continue to remain "underrespected."
It's entirely likely that they will remain thus, which transforms their complaints into whining. Actions result in reactions; if their actions don't merit respect, then they won't get respect.
Re:There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:1)
Well, the boxed package they sell in the software stores (that I've seen) says "Linux Mandrake" on it in big letters across the front of the box, with MacMillan in a corner somewhere. Unless they've changed it recently, I'd say the name-marketing was pretty well in favor of Mandrake.
-My $.02
Re:What has Macmillian done to deserve respect? (Score:1)
In my hand I hold the box for this very product. Oh look! In big letters! 5.2!
Macmillan is doing exactly what cheapbytes is doing -- except they add several THOUSAND pages of linux reference materials, and a support agreement through LinuxCare. Doesn't sound like that bad a deal now, does it!
Re:Cloning distros and balderdash (Score:2)
They use the same basic tools, and are developing their distributions independantly.
Patches that make sense are usually taken over from one distribution to another (it's obvious that Mandrake is using a lot of Red Hat code from the way it started - now it works both ways. Look at the KDE packages from RH 6.1 to see an example of Red Hat making use of Mandrake code).
Evil blood sucking leeches (Score:2)
If I recall correctly, and I may be wrong, both the FSF and the OSI see nothing wrong with commercial Free Software. I also see nothing in the FSF or OSI forbidding the redistribution of Free Software by non-geeks. I see nothing mandating "giving back to the community". I see nothing requiring distributors to be officially baptized by the elite.
Continually, to the point of nausea, madvocates keep telling everyone who will listen (and those who won't) that Linux is "NOT ABOUT FREE BEER". If that is so, then what's the difference between a $2 CD from Cheapbytes and a $30 CD+Book from Macmillan. Other compaints are based on Macmillan distributing something that they didn't make, that in fact, they are resellers. Again, what makes Cheapbytes holy and Macmillan evil in this matter?
But the GPL, BSD, AL, MIT, and every other Free Software license allows the redistribution of software. Linus, Richard, Larry, Kirk and Eric all knew very well that people would be distributing their works without contributing to it first. If they didn't like this situation then they shouldn't have used the licenses that they did. Are any of the people complaining here actually developers whose works are being distributed by Macmillan? I seriously doubt that there's even one. But in case there is, I must ask: If you didn't want someone distributing your work without your specific permission, why the fsck did you use a Free Software license?
But I think the real reason so many people are pissing in their panties is that their personal distribution of choice isn't winning the sales competition. And of course, being slashdotters, their personal choice is, ergo, the One True Distro(tm), and Macmillan has committed heresy, blasphemy or worse.
MacMillian sales == ("Red Hat" && low_price) (Score:1)
However from my experience, Mandrake is far from RedHat. It has major compatibility problems (the installer freezes on two of the three machines I needed to install it on). The machine that I did get it installed on is flakey. The PCMCIA services fail every 5-10 minutes requiring a restart. I've never had problems like this with RH. All of these machines were previously running RH 5.1 with no problems.
I'm not sure what Mandrake is trying to do, but I can see why they are not getting any respect.
Re:Slashtroll (Score:1)
I've had a lot of pieces picked up by /. without mentioning it, that generated a lot more response. I didn't ask for this one to be put in, and really don't care that it's here.
If the /. editors think that a mere mention of their site in an article makes something immediately newsworthy, that's ego at work rather than judgement -- the same ego that seems to think that a troll accusation is "insightful".
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
Sure, Caldera is hot in the Enterprise which is its home turf, but outside it I consider Debian to be more noteworthy.
Just my opinion of course, I have no intention to start distribution crusades or anything (besides, Caldera makes an excellent distro).
Yippie Skippie Revision Numbers (Score:2)
"Mandrake just announced October 1 the availability of release 6.1 for download, while Red Hat's 6.1 is still on the drawing board."
This (even though it's innocent and I could be mis-interpreting it) is one of the concerns we must address.
When you look at the linux self at your favorite computer store, you see many different distributions of linux sporting many different revision numbers. More than once my local CompUSA has announced the arrival of Linux 6.0 (they've even called OpenBSD Linux).
The problem is the general public has been corrupted by lame revision numbers, to the point that some think developments parallel one another (eg the 4.0 browers). Many will pick the software that has the highest revision number, reguardless. This is normally the mark of the well informed user, but the "higher is better" has corrupted the idea of these little numbers.
This leads to the Mandrake/Redhat/Caldera/Debian/TurboLinux/ problem. All have toyed with their revisions just as much as a certain other company. Would someone be more inclined to get OpenLinux 2.x or RedHat Linux 6.x or even Mandrake Linux 6.1.? They'd pick the higher one, because "higher is better".
We must struggle to ensure that all linux distributions are uniform in saying Kernel 2.2.x on the box in big letters, or else the uninformed will lose all track of what's going on. The other day I asked someone what kernel they were running, "6.0" was the answer in a display of blissful ignorance equal to the "what ISP do you use?" "netscape" question.
BSD != Linux
Linux 6.0 == null
CompUSA == lame
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:1)
Re:Yea Mandrake May sell more BUT DEBIAN IS FREE (Score:1)
Out of the box, no, but -unstable is based on linux-2.2/glibc-2.1. Getting slink(stable) up to potato(unstable) is as easy as typing apt-get dist-upgrade.
Potato, as it's unstable designation implies, *may* be unstable, but I generally keep on the cutting edge, package-wise, and have had few problems.
mike.
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:1)
Why is that sickening?
Isn't that one of the things that makes OSS so great? If you don't like something, then make something better. That's excatly what Mandrake does.
If that is sickening - then Redhat is also sickening, they are doing the same thing (all distributions does...). They just take the Linux kernel and put some "stuff" on top and sells it for about 80 bucks - is that any better?
Mandrake does not only put KDE in the box, and most of the work they do, they give back to the community. AFAIK they pay at least one of the main KDE-developers to work full time on KDE, and they (as stated in the article) has made a site for internationalization of Linux, and they also sponsor the Lothar project.
Besides Redhat is free to use all the changes Mandrake makes in their next distribution, if they like.
As I see it, it's a win-win situation.
recompiling (Re:Mandrake Revisted.) (Score:1)
you need, then rpm --rebuild *.
If you want speed, you'll probably want to use gcc 2.95.1 or pgcc 1.1.3.
gcc 2.95.1 has problems compiling some packages because it got stricter ANSI and also modified the asm() syntax a bit, and not everything got fixed yet.
I'll put up an archive of gcc 2.95.x-related patches soon. (as soon as the admins give me the space I need, that is
How many copies are sold as book bundles? (Score:2)
So how many "boxes", as this article talks about, are actually strange information containment mechanisims called "books"?
When you take that into consideration, of course they sell that many- they can sell linux in barens & noble and waldenbooks, instantly bringing up the number of point-of-sale locations by an order of magnitude. Think about how many bookstores there are compared to computer stores savy enough to carry any linux distributions.
Not that I have any problem with more sales of any version of Linux. I'm not knocking Macmillan, just the idiotic article. Someone else called it already- a new trend "slashtrolling", writting articles designed to get on slashdot to attract all those slashdot eyeballs.
*obDisclaimer-- I have worked as an independent contractor for Macmillan in the past.
Re:Aux money? (Score:1)
(Perhapse getting all the facts before you post your FUD would be helpful).
-S.
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:1)
This was once true (if you don't count that the early Mandrake versions added some non-KDE packages such as licq, as well), but definitely is no longer the case.
By now, both distributions do their work - and copy over patches from the other, of course. There's nothing wrong with that, it's what free software is all about. (Yes, this does work both ways - it should be quite obvious that Mandrake inherited a lot of stuff from Red Hat, but also, any Red Hat 6.1 user who has used Mandrake before will already be familiar with some KDE customizations.)
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:1)
Don't say "managed to screw up" without giving even a hint of a reason.
"It's the only Linux Distro that people compare to Microsoft products" is hardly a reason - the primary reason for this is that the bigger distributions are of course the first ones to get compared.
Besides, not everything about Microsoft products is bad. If you say Windows sucks, I'm the first to agree. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have any features we should be (and already have been) taken over.
The really bad things about most Microsoft products are their instability, bloat, lacking security, the concept of payware and closed-source, and the close-to-impossibility to get a bug fixed if you report it.
Can you see any of those in RedHat 6.1? If so, let me know and I'll be glad to fix it for 6.2.
Intel bug (Score:1)
Because the Intel Pentium II processor on many laptop models, and the Intel Celeron processor both have "On-Die"
cache, Intel's CPUID Utility reports the Intel Pentium II as an Intel Celeron processor. Intel is aware of this issue,
and has stated that the next revision of the CPUID Utility will fix this issue.
heh (Score:1)
zd is just baiting us, afterall. whether they are just trying to get more banner ads out, or they just printed it out of spite, i don't know. but c'mon...if people were really snubbing macmillan then why are they the best selling "distribution?"
they don't get any press because they are just the publisher. how often do people swoon over Bantam publishing because a new paperback has come out? rarely...the attention goes to the author, in general.
get with it, folks...zd is pulling our chains, there's no reason for us to attach that chain to our new, shiny nose rings.
Geeks seem to be portrayed badly here. (Score:1)
The distribution is a boxed up copy of Mandrake. Why would we take a lot of interest in it on Slashdot. There are other books with a Redhat CD in the back, and the focus here has been on Redhat/Mandrake, rather than MacMillan/SAMS/QUE. This is a geek site, not a marketing one.
Still, putting Linux on computers is a Good Thing, and the fact that MacMillan do it rather than Redhat is of no issue to me.
The fact that MacM don't contribute back to the community is not so true. Mandrake is available free! so they are contributing to open source by paying Mandrake. And the Mandrake guys then fund other open source developers. As I remember, Mandrake are funding some KDE/Kernel development.
I'm not too sure that Redhat are concerned about the difference in sales either. MacM probably aren't shifting many support contracts.
Slashtroll (Score:5)
I give Macmillan the credit they're due (Score:2)
If the other vendors develop merchandising/packaging/distribution skills, they will gradually displace Macmillan in that channel. But until then, Macmillan takes a decent Linux product, bundles it with online textbooks and goodies, sells it to newbies and people looking for a bargain, and pays royalties to the developer of the distro they use. It's a win for everyone right now...
- -Josh Turiel
Re:pay attention. (Score:2)
No grudge against Mac really. It's just silly (IMO) to think of them as a major player in the Linux game. But perhaps they will be some day.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
Re:sales do not earn our respect (Score:2)
Microsoft made rich through marketing? (Score:2)
By the time they started serious marketing, they were already in the number one position - a big advantage in marketing in and of itself!
D
----
What IS this thing? (Score:2)
In the OS section they had "MacMillan Complete Linux" or something like that .. and I thought to myself, isn't MacMillan in the BOOK business? What are they doing selling Linux? And -- why isn't beyond.com selling RED HAT?
It wasn't until a few days later that one of my more clueful buddies informed me that it was a boxed up Mandrake.
I checked again after I read this article and discovered that beyond.com is selling a MacMillan "Complete Redhat Linux v5.2 OS Del Secure Server" -- whatever THAT is. I could be wrong but it seems to be several releases behind ... with the additional irony of the recent /. discussion about the zdnet secure server trials and the patches needed for Red Hat, here's MacMillan selling what appears to be an out of date version billed as a "secure server." Interesting.
sales do not earn our respect (Score:4)
They say that they are the "best selling". Perhaps that's true. But so what?
That doesn't even mean they're the most popular. All of the good Linux distributions are free software, which means that we're free to share them with our friends. Around here, a lot of people burn Red Hat CD-ROMs for each other. (Well, OK, not a lot of people, but enough that I thought it worthy of mention.) On the other hand, I use Debian, and while I have purchased Debian CD-ROMs (makes bootstrapping faster), usually I download from the unstable release.
So, in at least two cases, there are major Linux distributions in use where sales aren't being made. This is basically the same problem that the Linux counter project(s) have tried to address -- since Linux can be freely redistributed without accountability to the programmers, there's no real way to know how many people are using Linux, or what distribution(s) they're using.
And more to the point, most of us here are not strongly commercial. I don't care that AOL is the best-selling ISP in this country; I use a local ISP because they offer me real (albeit slow) connectivity to the Internet, whereas AOL... doesn't. I don't think AOL is a better ISP just because they're richer. And likewise, I don't think Mandrake is a better distribution just because it's selling.
Respect Must Be Earned (Score:5)
Unfortunately, while that strategy does get books onto bookstore shelves quickly, quality suffers just a tad...
They may be giving some funding to the Mandrake/Linux folks, but they haven't sponsored the development of X servers like Red Hat or SuSE, and it appears that they generally don't actually produce any free software themselves.
Unfortunately for their "level of respect," the "quality of product" matter results in some "negative respect points," and there isn't any other source of "positive points" that they are using to earn back respect.
None of these things are the "fault" of anyone other than the management of Macmillan, as they represent their policy decisions of what to do and what not to do. It appears that their priorities are largely economic; to get "respect" they would have to modify those priorities as well as their actual behaviour.
I don't feel sorry for them in this; they have made their bed, and will have to sleep in it...
This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:5)
I think another thing I consider to be a problem is Distro-bigotry. A case in point: last week I went into the efnet #linux channel. What a disgrace! The ops were there flaming everyone they could, made fun of this one newbie because he was playing around with WinLinux and was having some problems with it, and just plain making asses out of themselves. I was in the channel for an hour and all they could do was sit and bash this distro and that distro. Of course, they had their favorite, and everything else was pure crap to them.
So, imagine what is going to be happening... new guy comes in and wants to get some opinions, everyone chimes in "Red Hat!" and off they go. Those using Mandrake or Caldera or SuSe are not going to say a word for fear of either a) being flamed, or, as I saw the ops do to the WinLinux guy, b) kick and ban him.
We in the Linux community have a lot of attitudes to change and they need to be changed really fast.
-------------------
Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be drafted...
Re:FUD? Read before you call me a zelot. (Score:3)
What I'm saying (again) is that this is the way Open Source works (and is supposed to work) - you're free to take the Mandrake-distribution (or Redhat, or SUSE or Caldera or...) and put your name on it and sell it. Nobody stops you from doing that.
Even Redhat think Mandrake is great!
Don't believe me? Read this: http://www.linuxworld.com/linuxworld/linuxworldto
As I said, it is a win-win situation for all of us, because, as Donnie Barnes (from Redhat) states in the article, it is all GPL'ed (allright - KDE isn't, but that doesn't matter in this case).
When Redhat don't see a problem with this - why do you?
And why do anybody have a problem with Macmillan selling a lot of Mandrake boxes?
I think it is a great thing - more people gets to know Linux, which I think is good. They add value to the boxes (books AFAIK), which is really needed for a newbie, if he shall have any chance of using and learning Linux.
I don't understand why people is flaming each other just because the other person is using another distribution?
Ups - this is getting offtopic, sorry...
IMVHO a bunch of lame cry babies... (Score:2)
A lot of companies are selling Linux. And a lot of companies are developing Linux (note; 'developing' like making your own distro. For example the way SuSE does). Both ways are very supportive for Linux IMO and people deserve credit when they're working on projects like these.
I'm sure glad there are companies who are shipping / selling Linux. Thats great & what Linux IMO needs to get well known. However... Being such a company does not make you special. Face it; if you look at this worldwide (because Linux is known wordwide) you will see you are just one of the many. However; not special does not mean companies/people like that deserve no respect. On the contrary.
Back to our friends... They ship Linux and for that they should earn some respect from the Linux community. Unfortunatly they are throwing this away them selves (as far as I'm concerned).
Mandrake is, IMHO, a RedHat ripoff. And now we have a company who is dressing MD up (add (C) tools and some books) and selling it. You know what? I can live with this. Its great, helping MD out shipping their distro (whether I like it or not) helps the Linux cause in a way.
The thing that pisses me off is the simple fact that this company is acting like Jabberjaw; demanding respect for something everyone could have done. Investing money in a distro does not make you special. Many people want to make money out of Linux and this is just one other way to do it. As far as respect goes; the minute I see that those companies are also doing something back for the community (like RPM, Yast to name just 2) they got it. Whether I like the distro/company or not.
One website and some hardware detection module is not included here as far as I'm concerned. For a company who started out ripping other peoples work I expect a whole lot better then that.
I'm actually a little upset at MacMillan (Score:2)
The reason I bought it at the time is that Rasterman was working for Red Hat, and I wanted to support the company that would do such a cool thing.
Imagine my shock and dismay when I learned that the box was not "Official" Red Hat, but rather MacMillan's version! Now, perhaps I was just being a stupid goober and what-not for not checking the package more closely before buying, but the way it was marketed still left a sour taste in my mouth.
Now, I see official Red Hat versions all over the place. If they lower their price, they'll gain most of their lost market share back, me thinks. I'm not at all sure why they priced their latest releases so high.
D
----
My experience with Mandrake... (Score:2)
Java. The IBM JDK does not run well on Mandrake for me, in particular when trying to access a network.
Video. I had Redhat 5.2 and 6.0 running X on a machine fine. When I installed Mandrake 6.0 (and 6.1) the video was freaking out. I had the same settings for X on Mandrake as I did for Redhat.
Besides that, Mandrake has worked well for me, but I think that I'll stick to Redhat for Java development.
Isn't it obvious? (Score:5)
Personally I think that the more people using Linux, the better. More newbies using things like Gnome or KDE means more usability feedback, which in turn means better applications.
I don't think that more newbies means that the command line should be hidden: When I first started with Slackware and Redhat 4.1 in early 97, I wondered what the hell BASH was. Was I doing something wrong, hence the system wanted to "bash" me? Now of course, I prefer to do most stuff from the command line, like editing the xfs config files to add a truetype directory... Although I must admit I'd prefer it to be done for me, and for those sorts of functions to be grouped in some kind of windows-like control panel (with nice icons, etc, I detest Linuxconf)
The more people that use Linux regularly, the more likely it is that we'll get stuff like quicktime at the same time as other platforms. The more people not using windows, the better the web and computing in general becomes. (Even the worst MS-loving PHB won't want to drive 60% of customers away from an "e-commerce" (blech) web site by making it IE specific if IE is proven to be installed on only 40% of computers)
The fact that the MacMillan books tell people quite a lot about Linux should be helpful. Hopefully the whole clueless factor of newbies will decrease. (I was one, and O'Reilly's Running Linux was a godsend)
But What Did Macmillan Do? (Score:2)
I don't have a whole lot of trust in the Thick Tomes that publishers like Sybex, Que, SAMS, and, yes, Macmillan, put onto shelves. They tend to be rushed to market, made as thick and garish as possible, with the result that quality suffers.
Your criticisms of "What's Hard About Linux" represent things likely to be solved by organizations contributing to the development of tools like Linuxconf or COAS.
Macmillan isn't contributing to those sorts of developments, which means that they're effectively not part of the solution. This doesn't necessarily make them "bad people," but it does mean that they are not in much of a position to claim that they are helping substantively.
Re:Yea Mandrake May sell more BUT DEBIAN IS FREE (Score:2)
The book looked nice - it had that 'Produced with LaTeX' feel, making it look like a real manual.
I may purchase it this week - Debian seems to be the only distro I can trust, and I lack the diskpace or Bandwidth to download it.
Re:There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:2)
I stand corrected. They were the first 2.1x kernel based distribution w/ PGCC optimizations, I'm almost positive.
My memory's kinda fuzzy, but I remember spazzing quite excessively over Berolinux's contents. Anyone out there have a more accurate timeline?
Re:There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:2)
Wait a sec, I could have sworn I've seen some book from Macmillan w/ Mandrake included that barely mentioned Mandrake.
If what you say above is true, then I really don't think that ZD guy did his homework. We've been talking about Mandrake for months now.
Mandrake Revisted. (Score:2)
I have a question:
Could one download the Redhat Source cd and do a huge rpm build install to have automake compile the distribution optimized for your own computer?
(I'm not certain of the syntax for rpm, but I know you can have the rpm build itself.)
Joseph Elwell.
Evan's not a troll (Score:2)
Of course, since he's not a superior techno-geek, Slashdotters will diss him. But folks like Evan, and like MacMillan, are just as important to the success of Linux as the uber-geeks who actually produce the technology. What's the use of great technology, if you can't come out of the closet? Aren't we tired of Linux being the gay stepchild of operating systems?!
-E
Re:My experience with Mandrake... (Score:2)
By default, Mandrake installs the 'colorgcc' package. This colourizes the output of 'gcc' to make it "understandable". Unfortunately, it makes it totally INCOMPREHENSIBLE to Xemacs and other similar development tools that rely on parsing 'gcc' output in order to do things like, e.g., take you directly to the file and line of code that has the problem.
I find the default to the color 'ls' to be somewhat distracting because with the color scheme I use for "X", the yellow text on white background is virtually unreadable. I use a white background because it's easier on my eyes than the traditional white text on black background (yellow would be quite visible there). Point: color 'ls' is a Bad Idea on an "X"-oriented distro like Mandrake.
Plusses: I like some of the other choices. The 'klyx' included with Mandrake 6.1 works great. It includes 'eps' files just fine. The version of KDE is the latest, and works fairly well except for a disturbing tendency for 'kfm' to lose its configuration (and lose its mind, i.e., refuse to start at all). The 'yp' functionality is bug-free -- I updated our NIS server (running Red Hat 6.0) with the 'ypserv' and 'yppasswd' packages from Mandrake 6.1, and it fixed all the annoying glitches that I'd been working around for months. In general, it's a well-debugged and easy-to-use version of Linux, and aside from having to change my makefiles to directly call 'pgcc' rather than 'gcc' ('gcc' gets 'colorgcc'), it's been surprisingly annoyance-free.
And it includes XEmacs too, unlike RHL. I did mention that, right?
-Eric.
Re:This does not surprise me and it is sad (Score:2)
Linux hype and reality (Score:3)
I just don't see making distributions being the kind of high margin business that would justify all the interest in RedHat. I think a lot better argument can be made for cross-distribution support and training operations like linuxcare [linuxcare.com] being a big growth market with higher margins.
It's not that I don't think that RedHat isn't providing a great service to the Linux community, I do. I am having a hard time with the business model justifying the astronomical stock price. If what I think is reality later sets in, a crash in RedHat stock price in the future will not do the Linux community any favors as it might signal a lot of people that the "Linux Revolution" is over.
On the other hand, it might be better if the "Linux Revolution" hype cooled off. Linux doesn't need the hype to be really big. The big industry players (the IBMs, Compaqs, SGIs, etc.) like the hype because it keeps stirring the pot, getting people to buy new systems and services. Just as customers were tiring of the Microsoft/Intel Upgrade Treadmill, here comes Linux to get customers back on the "install a new IT infrastructure because it's the coming thing and we don't want to be left out" treadmill.
What has Macmillian done to deserve respect? (Score:3)
Mandrake has come up with a new spin on RedHat's distribution (different default desktop, Pentium-optimized binaries, and a few other changes). They did some new things, also deserving of some amount of respect.
Cheapbytes has taken RedHat and Mandrake, copied everything that's freely redistributable, and packaged them at a much much more affordable price. They didn't do much creatively, but their price opens up Linux to more people, which is worthy of some respect.
Macmillan has taken Mandrake (they used to take RedHat), cloned it, charged an arm and a leg for it, and flooded the shelves of companies like CompUSA with misleading packaging. I know many people who bought Macmillan's RedHat 5.2 thinking they were buying the "New version of Red Hat" (6.0 at the time). Their business practices border on fraud, they don't do anything creative, and they sour people to the Linux community. Why should we respect them?
----
There Is No MacMillan Linux. (Score:5)
I like you guys. I actually do. Your Personal Bookshelf [mcp.com] is an surprisingly useful site when I need a quick primer on some tech that I really should know off the top of my head by know, and you've kept that thing up for years.
But it's not fair for you to say you have a distribution. I think you know it.
Fellow Slashdot readers, I've been following the Mandrake guys ever since they merged with BeroLinux. BeroLinux, for those who don't know, was the first 2.2kernel distribution with everything recompiled to be pentium optimized. It was one heck of a slick package, unfortunately hobbled by some broken install routines.
Once Bero joined Mandrake(at the time, "Redhat+KDE"), I knew we'd be seeing a major powerhouse.
MacMillan may be doing great sales and marketing, but they're marketing the superlative work of the Mandrake people. I'm sorry if some Sales and Marketing folks at MacMillan don't feel they get much respect, but the bottom line is that the entire Linux community has been delivering rounds of applause to the Mandrake folks--those aw-shucks kinda guys who actually put together the package--to the degree that they got product of the year at the last Linuxworld Expo.
MacMillan should do the honorable thing and allow Mandrake to market the name of its distribution. There seems to be something quite faustian about his whole arrangement if you ask me; it's as if MacMillan went to Mandrake and said, "You could create the number one selling distribution, but it wouldn't be your name on it..."
That being said, I think they're doing a tremendous amount of good getting Linux out there, and we shouldn't take biased ravings(those geeks don't know what Linux is all about, thus he raved) too seriously--not even, mind you, from the person doing the raving. Five bucks says the guy was just quoting some out of line MCP guy off the record.
One lamer does not an organization doom...
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com