Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fedora 9 Would Cost $10.8B To Build From Scratch

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the that's-a-lot-of-hats dept.

Linux Business 293

ruphus13 writes "The Linux Foundation's recently released report claims, '... it would take approximately $10.8 billion to build the Linux community distribution Fedora 9 in today's dollars with today's software development costs.' The article states why this might actually understate the value of the distros, though, since it doesn't include the power of the brand and the goodwill value. 'There were several approaches that the Linux Foundation employed to reach the $10.8 billion dollar figure, including calculating the number of lines of code in Fedora 9 (204,500,946), and using an average programmer's salary of $75,662.08 — as determined by the US Department of Labor — to measure development costs ... On the balance sheets of Coca Cola and many other huge corporations, you find goodwill listed as a major asset.'"

cancel ×

293 comments

Average salary? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481395)

average programmer's salary of $75,662.08--as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor

Holy hell, that's probably more than I make in 10 years.

Re:Average salary? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481455)

Maybe it's time for a new career.

Re:Average salary? (2, Interesting)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482275)

There was that study a couple of years ago that showed that top programmers are 4x as productive as the average ones.

So hire a bunch of top programmers and pay 'em twice that rate, and you'll still halve development costs.

Of course, if the guys in charge of The Linux Foundation's estimation were actually top programmers, they'd have relized this. But noooooooo, they're trying to rhetorically prove a point.

I suppose if you hired 4x as many crappy programmers for half that rate, you can pay $20 billion to develop Fedora 9.

Re:Average salary? (4, Funny)

jagilbertvt (447707) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481527)

Perhaps you should consider working on something other than an open source project :)

Re:Average salary? (3, Interesting)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481567)

You make $3.78/hr ?

Where I live people who make $75k have to live in an apartment, and it is unlikely they will be approved for a home loan without at least 30% down (around $150k). If you save aggressively on that sort of salary it should only take about 5-7 years to scrap together enough money for your down payment. Once you have the house, I'm not sure how you pay the mortgage (roughly $3k/month).

For you it will take closer to 70 years.

Grinding (0, Offtopic)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481615)

You make $3.78/hr ?

Or twice that per hour and half the hours, while working part-time to grind experience. Worse, I had to work for two years for $0/hr as a regular volunteer for the local veterans' hospital before employers would see past the symptoms of my (mostly controlled) mental illness.

Re:Grinding (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481921)

Worse, I had to work for two years for $0/hr as a regular volunteer for the local veterans' hospital before employers would see past the symptoms of my (mostly controlled) mental illness.

I don't mean to sound offensive but what mental illness requires such investment on your part? Again, I mean no offense to you (shame on potential employers, though)

Re:Grinding (2, Interesting)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482047)

This coupled with his salary tends to make me think his job market is similar to the one when I first got out of school. Employers are looking for ways to make the employees feel their below average salaries are really average salaries. I applied several times for an entry level job that sat open on a particular company's website for a year and a half, I had been doing everything in the req except for ADA academically for years but not even a call. The "we would rather not hire anyone than fill an open job with someone without professional experience" attitude for an entry level job really gets me. My current employeer does it to. If they are completely incompetant fire them. It isn't like they are going to destroy the world if it is entry level and they screw up.

Re:Grinding (1)

feldicus (1367687) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482087)

I've had similar reservations on the part of employers because I'm bipolar. Thankfully, my boss decided to trust me somewhat, so I didn't get this kind of a shaft.

feldicus

Re:Grinding (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482135)

what mental illness requires such investment on your part?

I blame my former unemployment on a combination of 1. poor interview performance due to my failure to completely hide a mild case of autism [wikipedia.org] , 2. a surplus of labor in my sector four years after the height of the dot-com bubble, when people who had gone to university for the money were graduating, and 3. restricting my job search to within reasonable public transport distance of my relatives.

Re:Grinding (2, Insightful)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482223)

If I had a nickle for every time I heard a geek claim Aspergers, I'd have roughly 500 cents.

"A comprehensive assessment involves a multidisciplinary team that observes across multiple settings, and includes neurological and genetic assessment as well as tests for cognition, psychomotor function, verbal and nonverbal strengths and weaknesses, style of learning, and skills for independent living." .. I'm not saying this was not done for you specifically. But generally when I hear someone claiming this, it is some bullshit self diagnosis and means nothing.

as for #2 and #3, I'm sorry to hear that. I symapthize

Re:Grinding (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482241)

Oh good, another aspie to disregard the opinion of.

Re:Average salary? (0, Offtopic)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481789)

Or you move to somewhere where you can afford to buy a house (if you really do want a house). This whole economic crisis of ours is/was exacerbated by people Keeping Up With The Joneses (tm) and being way over their heads debt to pay for it all.

Re:Average salary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481825)

Mmmmmm - You live in the Bay Area or something, don't you?

Re:Average salary? (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482259)

Got it in 1.

I live here because I can find lots of work. I just don't plan on buying a home here while rent is relatively cheap compared to a mortgage. I can invest the difference in money somewhere else while the housing bubble deflates a bit.

Re:Average salary? (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482035)

Sounds like where you live, housing is way over valued and needs to fall even further to be realistic.

Re:Average salary? (2, Informative)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482105)

Buy a smaller house or condo. 30% down? Usually its 20%. The housing in your area sounds a tad overpriced to me or your example is just another case of living beyond one's means.

Lastly, home purchasing in the US is priced for couples, not individuals.

Re:Average salary? (2, Interesting)

WhiteWolf666 (145211) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482123)

No necessarily to the parent, but the GP, there are places in the US where you can live very comfortable on $50-$75k per year. Mostly smaller towns 100-150 miles from major metropolitan areas. I'm thinking Chicago's Rockford, or Elgin. Or any of the various industrialized suburbs of Milwaukee, or Brookfield, WI, or similar towns.

Take out an FHA loan on a cheap property, something that needs a lot of love, and put in the work yourself (that way you *know* the value will go up; it's not appreciating, its sweat equity!).

$50-75k is a very good salary in some areas, particularly if you aren't keeping up the Jones, and don't mind doing work around the house (probably a lot).

Re:Average salary? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482203)

there are places in the US where you can live very comfortable on $50-$75k per year. Mostly smaller towns 100-150 miles from major metropolitan areas.

And then the salary would be even smaller than $50-$75k. I'm an employee of a small online toy and hobby retailer in northeast Indiana, and my boss and I are having trouble finding enough work to take me from part-time to full-time.

Re:Average salary? (-1, Offtopic)

WhiteWolf666 (145211) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482071)

You make $7,566.20 a year?

In the U.S.?

You know, Aldi's is paying cashiers $12.50 an hour plus benefits at entry level. There's really no excuse to be making less than $25,000 a year, in the U.S., if you have no physical, psychological, or family barriers preventing you from working.

Re:Average salary? (1)

Grimbleton (1034446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482257)

Yeah, but Aldis only hires women and homosexual males.

This, from a homosexual male at Aldis when I tried to get an application.

Oh yeah? Guess what Microsoft can do! (3, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481407)

They can spend twice that much money and only deliver a tenth of the functionality! That's a win! I think.

I don't have smart comment to say (-1, Troll)

netdur (816698) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481417)

am a loser that uses $10.8B operation system

Re:I don't have smart comment to say (1)

mentaldingo (967181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481609)

Kind of glad I saved my $10.8b and got my OS off bittorrent.

Re:I don't have smart comment to say (1)

lattyware (934246) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482205)

Duh, they are talking about the value of the source code, try getting your hands on that!

Uh, Goofy Accounting (5, Informative)

smack.addict (116174) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481427)

Goodwill only shows up on the balance sheet when an acquisition or some similar event occurs which creates a discrepancy between the purchase amount and the balance sheet of the acquisition.

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (5, Funny)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481475)

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

And THAT is why I failed my economics class. My teacher never did appreciate my 'creativity'. I would simply explain that I wanted to be a CEO someday.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (5, Funny)

besalope (1186101) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481941)

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

And THAT is why I failed my economics class. My teacher never did appreciate my 'creativity'. I would simply explain that I wanted to be a CEO someday.

Economics does not use Balance Sheets, that would be your Accounting course. Perhaps that is why you failed?

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482025)

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

And THAT is why I failed my economics class. My teacher never did appreciate my 'creativity'. I would simply explain that I wanted to be a CEO someday.

Economics does not use Balance Sheets, that would be your Accounting course. Perhaps that is why you failed?

No, I seem to remember having to do something that looked like a balance sheet in my micro-economics class. I remember in accounting doing a different type of balancing. Those numbers always came out correct, though.

'Misc' is your friend!

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481515)

Exactly. Goodwill doesn't mean you have a 'good public image' or something like that. It means you paid more during an acquisition of another firm than the net worth of their assets.

What is a trademark's value called? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481691)

Goodwill only shows up on the balance sheet when an acquisition or some similar event occurs which creates a discrepancy between the purchase amount and the balance sheet of the acquisition.

If "goodwill" is not the right word for the value of intangible assets such as trademarks, what is?

Re:What is a trademark's value called? (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481909)

If "goodwill" is not the right word for the value of intangible assets such as trademarks, what is?

Start by picking some word that doesn't already have a specific alternate meaning in the same context.

Re:What is a trademark's value called? (3, Informative)

profplump (309017) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482041)

"Goodwill" is a specific subset of "intangible assets". Other items such as patents, copyrights, trademarks or other contractually transferable rights or privileges would be in the same category, but are not "goodwill", which has a specific meaning in accounting.

Re:What is a trademark's value called? (2, Informative)

Otter (3800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482077)

That's exactly the sort of thing "goodwill" includes. But, as the OP says, that value has to arise from a transaction. (For example, you spend $100M to buy a company with $80M in assets and book the remaining $20M as goodwill.) You can't just invent a number and apply it to your own balance sheet.

Re:What is a trademark's value called? (5, Informative)

WhiteWolf666 (145211) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482269)

Uh, Goodwill is the correct term.

Has GP looked at GE's balance sheet? [ge.com]

GE claims $4.5 billion in "Licenses, Patents, and Trademarks". While the GP is correct that these values primarily arise as a function of acquisitions or sale of assets, the only time that corporate evaluations really matter is during acquisitions, sale of assets, and other forms of stock/ownership valuations.

Let me put it the way GE puts it (and GE is the *gold standard* when it comes to Goodwill, except for perhaps the Federal Reserve, who has a totally invented balance sheet.) There are 9 companies with triple A credit ratings, and GE's ability to manage accurately manage goodwill is one of the reasons it is a triple A rated company.

Upon closing an acquisition, we estimate the fair values of assets and liabilities acquired and consolidate the acquisition as quickly as possible. Given the time it takes to obtain pertinent information to finalize the acquired companyâ(TM)s balance sheet, then to adjust the acquired companyâ(TM)s accounting policies, procedures, books and records to our standards, it is often several quarters before we are able to finalize those initial fair value estimates. Accordingly, it is not uncommon for our initial estimates to be subsequently revised.
Emphasis added for the benefit of readers.

You *do* just stick those things on your balance sheet; the issue is being able to justify them. If I put my good name on a financial statement to a bank, the bank probably won't take me seriously, unless my name is something like "Warren Buffet". If my name is "GE", and I "give" that name to some business effort, it is a very serious transaction with serious financial consequences, and I can potentially use that to either buy or sell assets, as well as finance offers, and issue debt.

The credibility of the "good will", and the managers who evaluate the relevant values is what determines the financial values of those intangibles. They're only intangible in that they are intellectual concepts, and in many ways are just as "real" as stock or other corporate paper holdings.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481763)

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

But you just said that you do!

 

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481951)

Subtracting the balance sheet value from the purchase price is not "making up". Subtraction is not magic to many people.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

FireStormZ (1315639) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481831)

True it should not be used on an accounting sheet but Goodwill is defiantly something to be considered when setting the buying or selling price of a company. Why do you think it was Lenovo wanted so badly to keep the thinkpad brand name when the took it over from IBM?

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481971)

Goodwill only shows up on the balance sheet when an acquisition or some similar event occurs which creates a discrepancy between the purchase amount and the balance sheet of the acquisition.

You don't just make up a number and add it onto your balance sheet.

Lots of companies do exactly that, but they call it "brand valuation" or something similar.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (1)

saider (177166) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482029)

Goodwill is used to put a value on abstract things like brand loyalty and public perception, which can have an effect on future revenues. It is not tied to anything of real value, but is used to acknowledge how likely a company is to get business based on these concepts.

For example, Apple likely has a significant goodwill listed on their balance sheet to account for the "fanboy effect". Apple pulls exploits this better than Packard Bell, so I would expect Apple's goodwill value to be higher.

*Note: I have not checked their balance sheets.

Re:Uh, Goofy Accounting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482263)

LMFAO. Haha. Better make it 20 billino. Good luck finding anyone who can write code and is willing to work for 75k a year.

Get real. Where does the department of labor get these stats?

Starting salaries for Java developers is 75k with absolutely no experience in the midwest.

Paying programmers by lines of code... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481457)

...is like paying airplane manufacturers by weight.

Re:Paying programmers by lines of code... (1)

OshEcho (971542) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481711)

Mod parent up :)

Erm! (4, Funny)

cosmocain (1060326) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481485)

[...]to build the Linux community distribution Fedora 9 in today's dollars[...]

I'd rather build it in C with a modest compiler.

Re:Erm! (1)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481717)

Yes but it would be much much larger given the size of today's dollar...

Lucky for them people did it for free... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481487)

Otherwise whatever corporation would have created it for 10.8B would have needed to sell it to nearly 200 million people at 50 bucks a pop to have broken even. Most likely they would have folded.

What a ridiculous sum pulled completely out of thin air.

Re:Lucky for them people did it for free... (1, Insightful)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481595)

Otherwise whatever corporation would have created it for 10.8B would have needed to sell it to nearly 200 million people at 50 bucks a pop to have broken even. Most likely they would have folded.

What a ridiculous sum pulled completely out of thin air.

Well its a good initial number. If you would like to refine, go ahead. Yes there are problems with the number. It doesn't take into account the lines of code thrown away, or that you should probably rate lines of code for different programs at different salary levels.

Even using this approach for the Windows code base would have problems. Just the fact that the code was developed over a period of time and subsets were present in older versions of the code. Also, the cost to rewrite it all from scrap might be cheaper.

Re:Lucky for them people did it for free... (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481933)

Otherwise whatever corporation would have created it for 10.8B would have needed to sell it to nearly 200 million people at 50 bucks a pop to have broken even. Most likely they would have folded.

What a ridiculous sum pulled completely out of thin air

It's hardly rediculous. Although it does show the value of Free Software.

Many of us are old Atari or Amiga users are well acquainted with the problems of good products surviving in the marketplace.

I'd rather see... (2, Insightful)

thered2001 (1257950) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481489)

...a similar estimate for the kernel alone. Or, perhaps a more generalized number which would take into account other distros.

Re:I'd rather see... (5, Informative)

mentaldingo (967181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481561)

RTFA. It said $1.4b for the kernel alone.

Re:I'd rather see... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482155)

PWNED!

Wow, goodwill is an asset? (5, Funny)

maillemaker (924053) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481505)

I wonder if I can spend some of my karma down at Taco Bell for a burrito?

Re:Wow, goodwill is an asset? (2, Informative)

qwertphobia (825473) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481761)

Nope... but the Phillies got you a free taco last night!

Re:Wow, goodwill is an asset? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482083)

Actually, the Rays did. Taco Bell gives everyone a taco for a stolen base. It was a Rays player who stole a base last night.

Go Phils!

Re:Wow, goodwill is an asset? (5, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481791)

No, but when you die you will be reborn at Taco Bell *as* a burrito.
That's karma!

Re:Wow, goodwill is an asset? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481959)

Sort of. If you have good will among your friends, they might just cover some food for you, pick up your bar tabs, etc. How this is relevant to a large corporation, I do not know, and even less so for Fedora 9.

Re:Wow, goodwill is an asset? (1)

lattyware (934246) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482247)

If you have a good trading history with a company, that implies you are more likely to get more contracts/sales with them. It's not tangible, but it's a real thing none-the-less.

How much money did MS spend on Vista? (3, Funny)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481523)

According to an Inquirer article, the estimates were about $10 billion [theinquirer.net] .

I would think it would cost more than $10.8 billion to develop FC9 from scratch then...since it's a better OS.

Re:How much money did MS spend on Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481663)

Yeah, and if PulseAudio had worked properly, it would've been worth even more.

Re:How much money did MS spend on Vista? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481773)

At last! We finally live in the days when money throwing money at a project can magically make the results better!

Re:How much money did MS spend on Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482067)

you are forgetting that 80% of the $10 billion for vista went to PHB salaries.

(also, inquirer's numbers based on $200,000 per person, while FC9 numbers based on $75,000 per person)

Re:How much money did MS spend on Vista? (2, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482079)

Your better OS = more expensive rationale does not include the elusive "throw money down a hole" factor of marketing. Gates-meets-Seinfed and I'm-a-PC combined cost $300m, fully 3% of that entire budget.

that'd be one expensive hat (-1, Offtopic)

bornyesterday (888994) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481529)

i didn't realize that the market for felt was so harsh these days

Re:that'd be one expensive hat (1)

mentaldingo (967181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481575)

yeah we should put a cap on that price

Re:that'd be one expensive hat (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481871)

One more pun like that and they'll never find where you were beret'd.

Re:that'd be one expensive hat (1)

bornyesterday (888994) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482007)

i bet it wouldn't be anywhere near bowler, colorado

Only $427.33 on eLance (4, Insightful)

Peter Cooper (660482) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481565)

I bet if you put the specs on eLance, there'd be a company in Romania somewhere bidding to do it for about $427.33, give or take a few dollars :)

Re:Only $427.33 on eLance (3, Funny)

ePlus (1041568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481915)

Well C is the most spoken language in Romania. ;)

Reliable numbers? (3, Interesting)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481579)

I don't mean to sound cynical, but this calculation seems about as contrived as the RIAA's "billions lost to piracy" numbers. $11 billion?

Also, if that's all it cost, why hasn't Microsoft made Linux yet?

Re:Reliable numbers? (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481967)

They don't want to.

Also, they have completely different goals in software development. A MS programmer is doing whatever they have been told to do, and it is intended for use by the somewhat distant consumer.
A Linux programmer is either trying to improve something for himself or for the company he works for. Either way, he is much closer to the end-users for feedback.

And as I've said before.... (1)

Patchw0rk F0g (663145) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481597)

Man, I'm in the wrong business... :0

Re:And as I've said before.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481785)

I'm in this business and I don't make anywhere near 70k / year.

Lines =! quality =! true cost (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481625)

Thats not a fair comparisons of cost.

Especially since you are comparing lines of code in OSS to lines of code in CSS, Its like comparing 2 fruits, they are close, but not the same.

Re:Lines =! quality =! true cost (1)

WDot (1286728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481875)

So what you would be saying, in effect, is that comparing open-source code to closed-source code is like... Comparing apples and oranges? (:

Re:Lines =! quality =! true cost (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482015)

I was trying to avoid that cliche :)

Re:Lines =! quality =! true cost (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482049)

Call it a meme and you can ramble on about it forever and still be modded Funny.

What Linux is worth (1)

PearsSoap (1384741) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481681)

Fedora 9: $10.8B

Linux Ecosystem: $25B [slashdot.org]

Free Software: Priceless.

Imagine... (2, Insightful)

parvenu74 (310712) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481779)

Ten billion for an operating system... am I the only one thinking that the money we spend on military adventures and bailing out Wall Street would be better spent funding the creation and development of open source software?

Re:Imagine... (1)

mR.bRiGhTsId3 (1196765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481897)

Yes,
since the people funding military adventures and bailing out wall street shouldn't really be funding operating system development. Besides, how much money is SELinux worth by these metrics? The NSA funded that.

Re:Imagine... (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481965)

Firefox and the Debian dunc-tank experiment have demonstrated that money does not necessarily make open source projects better.

No (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481991)

If I want to pay for software I'll buy it , I don't want to have to start paying for it through friggin taxes FFS!

Re:Imagine... (4, Insightful)

Siberwulf (921893) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482053)

I'm not in the military, so I'm speaking out of my ass here.

The last time I checked, you couldn't stop a suicide bomber by throwing a copy of Fedora 9 at them.

Re:Imagine... (4, Funny)

lattyware (934246) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482283)

Actually, I tried this last week, turns out he turned into a communist and dropped the religion thing. So, you, sir, are incorrect.

But how much is that per-copy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481801)

It sounds like a lot of money at first, but ten billion dollars divided by infinity is still zero.

BIZNaTCH (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481839)

Getting together to from one folder on dim. Due to the Members all over working on various for 7rolls' of reality. Keep Channel #GNAA on bought the farm... crisco or lube. Towel under the Recruitment, but

Re:BIZNaTCH (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481981)

Dude, fix your bots or turn them the fuck off.

But it wouldn't (3, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481863)

Fedora contains a lot of redundancy. throwing in several text editors makes sense if they're already there and free, but you wouldn't rewrite emacs, joe, Vim and nano. You wouldn't rewrite Epiphany, if you'd rewritten Firefox.

The number's a lot bigger than it needs to be.

Re:But it wouldn't (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481999)

Sure you would have "re-written" things.

Windows has/had 3 major competiting brands of office
productivity software.

Perhaps it wouldn't have all be developed by the same
company, but the products themselves would have been
developed. This just highlights the fact that a Linux
distro is no so much just an analog for a copy of
Windows but it also includes a freeware/commercial
equivalent of a Simtel or Tucows archive DVD.

This also exposes the real problem of competing with
Windows or MS-DOS if you are an alternative OS. You
not only have to compete with the core OS you also
have to compete with all of the 3rd party apps.

I'd be curious what the proposed dollar value of the
entire Ubuntu software repository "multiverse" would
be.

Re:But it wouldn't (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482011)

It was common to have multiple editors in proprietary Unix: ed, ex, vi, pico, etc. In fact, the SUS defines some redundancy, for example, including both sed and awk, when awk could do everything that sed does. When the value of those systems is calculated, they don't reduce the number to account for that redundancy.

New MS business plan (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481883)

Hold Linux distros to ransom for... one billion dollars! Paying off MS is more financially viable than replacing distro, easy call for the world's governments to make.

I think I have to get my eyes checked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481903)

I was reading the rss feed and thought it said $10.88. I thought "Wow that's really cheap!". 8|

"Good will" does not mean what you think it means (2, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#25481923)

> On the balance sheets of Coca Cola and many other huge corporations, you find goodwill
> listed as a major asset.

"Good will" is a specialized accounting term when used on balance sheets.

1400 lines/year??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25481957)

So the average programmer makes 75K/y and it is 10,800,000K that means that they estimage that it would take approx 144,000 programmers 1 year to code 204,500,946 lines of code or 1 programmer 144,000 years to code 204,500,946 lines of code... ... Which means that each programmer delivers and grand total of approximate 1400 lines of code/y. Not very impressive. I would think most programmers could do that in a couple of days.

To me it sounds like someone forgot on or two zeroes somewhere.

Re:1400 lines/year??? (2, Insightful)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482085)

...approximate 1400 lines of code/y. Not very impressive.

You forget all the other parts of a major project. Analyze, design, test. Those take people and hours away from simply pounding out lines of code.

Maybe they should have used gentoo to build it? (1)

soundproofing.noise (849071) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482021)

I heard Gentoo linux has some sort of autobuild tool that builds everything for the system from scratch, I think it's called e merde or something like that(you can google it yourself if your interested).

What's the point of this? (1)

sunking2 (521698) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482099)

I'm not really sure what they are trying to show with this. I'm sure that MS could go and roll up all of there cumulative costs for XP, Vista, or Windows 7 or whatever and show a worthless number that is much more impressive. And they are able to do it as real costs to them and still make a profit, while employing thousands of people. I'm not real sure what this even includes. Are they counting the source to every package that is built into Fedora, ie emacs, all the gnu utils, etc. Are they trying to point out how people are idiots for contributing for free something that Redhat will now tout for their own purpose and profits? Should they advertise it as, people all over the world have saved us billions of dollars to help us profit? What's with the recent posts with really big useless numbers later? Is the Linux community feeling inadequate in a certain area?

Salary (2, Insightful)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482181)

When reading this, I couldn't help but wish _I_ got paid that much money. The figure I get from sloccount ($55K) seems high, but this is even higher than that! Anybody want to make me an offer?

The Biggest Failure of the Times (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25482217)

In many ways, this exorbitant expense represents a terrible failure of the way we do computing. If it would require such an enormous investment just to get our simple digital machines to do something useful, then there is a major problem somewhere.

Computing has gotten far too bloated and wasteful. The typical "desktop" environment is totally unnecessary and its reduction or elimination would allow a much simpler -- and cheaper -- approach. My Linux system is highly minimalistic. (Thankfully Linux does provide that choice.) I don't use either Gnome or KDE, and I shun most GUI front ends, but I can still operate quickly and efficiently for everything that I do.

The basics are cheap. It's the needless accouterments that drive up the overall cost.

10 Billion??! (1)

intothemiddle (1142025) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482253)

In comparison to the M$ license fee it's only marginally cheaper still I guess..

the linux institute number is (1)

nimbius (983462) | more than 5 years ago | (#25482293)

just as useful as the number microsoft gives me for how much TCO is for linux.

give me an independent third party.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...