Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Jul 2010 08:52 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source The HURD was meant to be the true kernel at the heart of the GNU operating system. The promise behind the HURD was revolutionary -- a set of daemons on top of a microkernel that was intended to surpass the performance of the monolithic kernels of traditional Unix systems and in doing so, give greater security, freedom and flexibility to the users -- but it has yet to come down to earth.
Thread beginning with comment 432310
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Reason Linux lives:
by Kebabbert on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Reason Linux lives:"
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

The problem with investing in Linux is that your competitors can take your R&D without paying a cent. Novell and Red Hat make money from Linux by selling support, not the actual software. They are not getting rich and Novell in fact has been privately put up for sale.

"they are not getting rich"? The RedHat founders became multi billionaries when RedHat went through IPO. I saw a list of all new dollar multi billionaires just because of Linux a couple of years ago, in a magazine.

Regarding Novell, well, Novell had that old Netware and no new OS. They just embraced Linux and put out a Linux distro which costed very little time and R&D, in comparison to develop a whole new OS


Red Hat could just as easily sell RedBSD.

RedBSD is based on FreeBSD. RedHat can not sell FreeBSD as I wrote, earlier.


What are you talking about? Starcraft became popular because it was a great game. Blizzard still sells it directly from their website.

SC became big because of Korea, where it is bigger than Soccer or Hockey or Baseball. And it became big in Korea, because of Kespa organization. Kespa started tournaments and TV shows and got all income from them. Now Blizzard is trying to get a piece of the cake with SC2, and Kespa will not favour SC2 anymore.

What I am trying to say, is that SC1 was free to earn money from. So Kespa did that. SC2 is not free to earn money from anymore, the creator Blizzard is there. So Kespa loose interest in SC2.

Just like companies loose interest in Linux, if Linus T would be there and get all income. Where the big money is, everyone follows. Espcially if it is free and no one claims ownership.


Proprietary software can also make you rich and you don't have to give out your R&D. Getting rich by software is difficult and even moreso if your competitor can just take your innovative additions and stamp their corporate logo on them.

That is my point. Someone else spends R&D on Linux, and you just grab it and repackage it and sell it. Splendid business idea. Let someone else develop it, and because it is free, you can grab it and sell it. It is like Klondyke. Just grab it and sell it. Noone will stop you.

The reason Linux became big is that you can get rich on founding a company around Linux kernel and create a distro and sell it. Noone would buy another FreeBSD distro or OpenSolaris distro - there are official distros. Why buy a copy, instead of the original?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Reason Linux lives:
by nt_jerkface on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 16:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Reason Linux lives:"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


"they are not getting rich"? The RedHat founders became multi billionaries when RedHat went through IPO. I saw a list of all new dollar multi billionaires just because of Linux a couple of years ago, in a magazine.


The founders got rich from the IPO but then a lot of founders in the tech boom. As a company they are not getting rich. Adobe and Rockstar games have better financials.

This issue was actually covered recently in computerworld:
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?blogid=14&...


RedBSD is based on FreeBSD. RedHat can not sell FreeBSD as I wrote, earlier.


Why couldn't they sell their own modified version of FreeBSD? Maybe you should read about the basics of open source licenses before commenting here.


Splendid business idea. Let someone else develop it, and because it is free, you can grab it and sell it. It is like Klondyke. Just grab it and sell it. Noone will stop you.


So what about the company that invests the R&D? Are they just suckers?

Red Hat invested quite a bit in Linux and then Oracle came along and offered support for RHEL at half price. This actually caused their stock to drop a while back.

What a truly splendid business. A company like Red Hat invests in Linux and a massive corp like Oracle can come along and undermine their profits without improving the software.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Reason Linux lives:
by Kebabbert on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 17:27 in reply to "RE[3]: Reason Linux lives:"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

Red Hat invested quite a bit in Linux and then Oracle came along and offered support for RHEL at half price. This actually caused their stock to drop a while back.

What a truly splendid business. A company like Red Hat invests in Linux and a massive corp like Oracle can come along and undermine their profits without improving the software.

But this only proves my point. Oracle CAN do like this with Linux. It would not be possible to do like this with Apple OS X or Windows. This possibility is the sole reason Linux attracts lots of business people: you can easily make money out of Linux.

I am not saying this is good, but I am saying this opportunity draws attention from lots of business men who wants easy money. (Personally, I dont like this at all).

But seriously. Why would a business man NOT sell something that lot of engineers has put a lot of hard work into? It is free! Let someone else (the hard working nerds and geeks that gladly code for peanuts) take the R & D cost. You just brand it as a package and sell it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Reason Linux lives:
by phoenix on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 23:41 in reply to "RE[2]: Reason Linux lives:"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

"Red Hat could just as easily sell RedBSD.

RedBSD is based on FreeBSD. RedHat can not sell FreeBSD as I wrote, earlier.
"

Where do you get the idea that "no one can sell FreeBSD"??

Anyone can sell FreeBSD. No questions asked. In fact, many people do sell it:
* FreeBSD Mall sells FreeBSD CDs and DVDs
* Juniper sells routers with FreeBSD inside
* PC-BSD is built on top of FreeBSD, but it's still vanilla FreeBSD underneath
* Walnut Creek used to sell FreeBSD CDs
* iX Systems sells laptops, desktops, and servers with FreeBSD pre-installed, along with support for FreeBSD

There are many many more, those are just those I can think of without resorting to google.

Anyone can download the sources for FreeBSD, stick it on a CD, and sell that CD to anyone else. It's perfectly legal, so long as you leave all the copyright and license notices intact.

You can also download the sources, compile them, stick the binaries on a CD, and sell that CD.

You can also stick the sources/binaries into specific pieces of hardware, and sell those.

It's all allowed by the BSD license.

That is my point. Someone else spends R&D on Linux, and you just grab it and repackage it and sell it. Splendid business idea. Let someone else develop it, and because it is free, you can grab it and sell it. It is like Klondyke. Just grab it and sell it. Noone will stop you.


This is the same for *ALL* open-source software. So long as the license allows it, you can do whatever you want with the source (and binaries usually), including selling it, or founding a business around it. This is not something restricted to or unique about the Linux kernel sources.

Noone would buy another FreeBSD distro or OpenSolaris distro - there are official distros. Why buy a copy, instead of the original?


Tell that to all the people using FreeNAS, PC-BSD, pfSense (all "distros" of FreeBSD), or all the embedded developers using picoBSD, nanoBSD, microBSD (variations on FreeBSD) or all those people/businesses using Nexenta / NexentaStore (a "distro" of OpenSolaris).

These are all projects that are fairly popular, going strong, and even making money for people. And none of them are based on Linux.

Edited 2010-07-02 23:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Reason Linux lives:
by Kebabbert on Sat 3rd Jul 2010 08:54 in reply to "RE[3]: Reason Linux lives:"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

Tell that to all the people using FreeNAS, PC-BSD, pfSense (all "distros" of FreeBSD), or all the embedded developers using picoBSD, nanoBSD, microBSD (variations on FreeBSD) or all those people/businesses using Nexenta / NexentaStore (a "distro" of OpenSolaris).

These are all projects that are fairly popular, going strong, and even making money for people. And none of them are based on Linux.

So you are saying that you can fork off the code, and close the source and dont give back anything to the community? And further develop on this code and sell your product? It is true?

Reply Parent Score: 2