Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Aug 2010 19:14 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Permalink for comment 436431
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-12-07
I wonder how do you imagine that people are doing business today. Do you think that companies edit and recompile the source code of the servers they run their business on ? Open Source or not makes little or no difference.
If some company decide they want to use open source product, they are likely to go to vendor like Novell or Red Hat. If they do, they will very pay steep price, and very much depend on support from those companies.
There is a difference if company is using modified OS as a part of their business process, like some who are selling devices running embedded Linux. But, such companies are small percentage.
I have been doing business with the company which is major Red Hat partner in the region. There is no much difference between the way they do business, and, for example some Microsoft partners.
I am 100% sure that lack of Oracle involvement in Open Solaris would not lose them any significant customer.
Why should they pay their developers good money, only to have some guy being able to download OS for free ? It is a waste of resources. Unlike Linux, major part of Solaris have been developed in-house. Contributions have limited significance.