×

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!

In Your Face, Critics! Red Hat Passes $1 Billion In Revenue

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the flash-in-the-pan-I-tell-you dept.

Red Hat Software 227

head_dunce writes "Now that Red Hat has officially posted more than a billion dollars in revenue, ($1.13 billion to be exact), the company's PR department sent this funny list of quotes predicting doom. For instance, 'We think of Linux as a competitor in the student and hobbyist market but I really don't think in the commercial market we'll see it in any significant way.' Bill Gates, 2001."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

227 comments

Red Hat? (5, Funny)

itsmilesdavis (985700) | about 2 years ago | (#39507953)

More like Green Hat! WOOOOO!

Re:Red Hat? (2)

Nin10doman (897603) | about 2 years ago | (#39508215)

Or maybe...Black Hat? Black ink is used for positive numbers in accounting--that's why the big shopping day in the US is called "Black Friday."

Re:Red Hat? (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39508431)

Wasn't always that way
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(shopping)#Origin_of_the_term [wikipedia.org]

It's a good thing US money is still mostly green (unlike other countries that use a variety of colors for different bills) or else it might be confused with gay hat pride.

Re:Red Hat? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508503)

Are you homophobic? What do you have against lesbians for example? Long live to gay pride... dumb4ss...

Re:Red Hat? (2)

Ihmhi (1206036) | about 2 years ago | (#39508867)

If Red Hat had a sense of humor, they would make a new promotional video using a certain ABBA song.

~funky bass line~
[Morgan Freeman]: In 2001 Bill Gates said Linux won't be in the commercial market in [touch of sarcasm] "any significant way".
[ABBA]: Money money money mooooooooooneeeeeeeeeeey~
[Morgan Freeman]: I don't know about you...
[ABBA]: Mooooooooneeeeeeyy! Money money money moooonnneeeeeeeeey~
[Morgan Freeman]: But I'd call 1 billion dollars of revenue pretty signficant.
[ABBA]: Mooooooooooooneyy!
[Morgan Freeman]: Make the smart choice. Make the significant choice. Red Hat.

Re:Red Hat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39509425)

I like the O'Jays tune better. It works just as well.

But you know what, $1B aint what it used to be. Call me when they get to $10B.

Good for them (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39507983)

Redhat contributes a TON to open source projects, and a lot of the time I find their online documentation to be the best available. I am very glad they're doing well.

And now, for the rest of the story... (-1, Troll)

DerekLyons (302214) | about 2 years ago | (#39508011)

How about quotes from the same era about Linux on the desktop? Or quotes from every year since about how this year will be the long heralded Year Of Linux on the desktop?

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (4, Insightful)

tomhath (637240) | about 2 years ago | (#39508121)

Did you post that from a tablet computer by chance?

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#39508911)

If he did, it's odds on it was running Unix variant, not Linux.

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | about 2 years ago | (#39509231)

Barely.

The 2011 Q4 stats from IDC show a 56.1 per cent increase in overall slab sales to 28.2 million units; up from the 15.8 million that punters splashed out on in Q3.
In three months Android's percentage of the tablet market has shot up - Android was loaded on 44.6 per cent of tablets sold in Q4, up from 32.3 per cent in Q3.
WebOS and BlackBerry have been practically crushed into the ground: WebOS had zilch and BlackBerry clocked a 0.7 per cent. Windows didn't make a showing. But while iOS is top, it won't be top forever.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/14/ipad_market_share_slips/ [theregister.co.uk]

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 years ago | (#39508153)

Desktop Linux is slowly but steadily making progress and getting more polished every day. Who knows if at some point we pass the critical mark.

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (4, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#39508433)

Progress like Gnome 3 and Unity?

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508745)

Yeah, those are fine examples. You may want the linux desktop to forever be a clone of Windows XP (getting asymptotically closer but always staying an inferior replica) or just want no changes to the status quo, whatever it is. Others are happy about actual innovation (a pre-requisite of progress) even if that means some growing pains.

Personally I'm not a fan of Unity and I'm sad of the further fragmentation that it represents on this field but I'm happy that Canonical is willing and able to make bold moves in this area. I love GNOME 3 however: 3.2 was already a more productive environment for me than GNOME 2 and I expect it to get better considerably faster than the previous version did. The more focused approach -- while obviously painful for the people who depended on features that are now hidden -- has enabled the GNOME team to concentrate on polishing the bits that they actually support in the core system.

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (1)

pscottdv (676889) | about 2 years ago | (#39509127)

I've been using Gnome 3 exclusively for nearly a year now. I love it.

All four of my daughters have been using it. They love it.

My wife uses it. She loves it.

The only tweak I made was to reinstate the minimize button because I like it for a very specific workflow situation.

I haven't tried unity, though, only Gnome shell

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508765)

Yeah, in 10 years it's gone from .8% marketshare to 1.1%. great success!

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (3, Interesting)

LandoCalrizzian (887264) | about 2 years ago | (#39508203)

How about quotes from the same era about Linux on the desktop? Or quotes from every year since about how this year will be the long heralded Year Of Linux on the desktop?

It started as media hype but this is the era of mobile computing and I would say that Linux has done extremely well in that market. Apple is still #1, Android is #2 but Microsoft is 4th when there is a huge gap between 2nd and 3rd. Android is still a consolation prize until they can start running neck and neck with the iPad and when that happens, you'll have more PR hype asking "Is this the year the [mainstream] desktop dies?" It's all part of the plan for Linux world dominance. Bow down to your root overlords!

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508439)

Android is #1, iOS is #2 [techcrunch.com] . You have to be very careful of weasel words from Apple supporters: they'll make claims like "Apple is the largest single mobile vendor!", but of course all of the Android vendors put together still outnumber Apple. So Android market share is larger than iOS.

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508293)

For every media story proclaiming the "year of the linux desktop" there are half a dozen "linux on the desktop is dead" stories. Go ahead and try to prove me wrong, but you know that Linux on the desktop has been shat on by the industry press for at least a decade now and yet it has continued to grow.

Re:And now, for the rest of the story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508391)

Everyone (except maybe the techie /. crowd) uses smartphones and tablets, not desktops, as their primary computing resource. Linux has won that battle.

"I saw it on the internet" - Julius Caesar (1)

Lyrata (1900038) | about 2 years ago | (#39508019)

Was that Bill Gates quote from 2001, or 1999, as a Google search suggests? I'm a little wary about its authenticity when I see people, especially on /., think that he actually said "640k is enough for anybody" when that is definitely not the case.

Maybe I should use Bing! ;)

Re:"I saw it on the internet" - Julius Caesar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508199)

Well, he probably did say it in all likelihood, even if nobody who was there will fess up to it.

But the context is important. When deciding the memory split between RAM and BIOS/firmware, of the 1024K addressable memory in the 808x, 640K for RAM was enough.

Compared to the competition at the time, e.g. Apple ][s and Commodore 64s that had 64K or 128K max, 640K was a lot of memory.

More (1)

headhot (137860) | about 2 years ago | (#39508035)

I wonder how much more they would have made if Oracle didn't rip them off. I dont count CentOS though. The vast majority of people using CentOS either can't afford Redhat or will move up when they can.

Re:More (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508363)

Oracle didn't "rip them off". You can't tout the benefits of open source software and then claim you got ripped off when someone uses your source code.

Re:More (5, Interesting)

Red Storm (4772) | about 2 years ago | (#39508535)

While technically true, this argument does fall apart when a company such as Oracle rebrands RHEL into OEL, then goes on the offensive against RHEL/Red Hat when they don't have much of a team of developers to continue developing OEL should the hypothetical, but very unlikely, situation of Red Hat going away. In a situation such as that it's kind of like Oracle is biting the hand that feeds it.... CentOS on the other hand rebrands RHEL, but does not try to present themselves as the main proprietor of the distribution. In addition the CentOS community does try to push bug reports upstream when possible.

Re:More (1)

0racle (667029) | about 2 years ago | (#39508403)

Does anyone other then the most diehard Oracle customers even use Unbreakable Linux? I doubt Oracle's offering has had much effect on Red Hat's sales.

Re:More (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 2 years ago | (#39508893)

!!Anecdotal Disclaimer!!

We're by no means a "diehard Oracle customer" (in fact, I can't stand Oracle), but we do use OEL for our Oracle database nodes, if for no other reason than to avoid a finger-pointing circle-jerk when Oracle determines a problem lies with the underlaying OS.

Re:More (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | about 2 years ago | (#39509187)

Does anyone other then the most diehard Oracle customers even use Unbreakable Linux? I doubt Oracle's offering has had much effect on Red Hat's sales.

Actually a fairly high percentage do, because Oracle licensing makes it MUCH more expensive on other OSes particularly on visualized environments.

Re:More (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | about 2 years ago | (#39508473)

I really wish Redhat had some much cheaper, "updates only" version of their software.. When I worked in Education, we had a version that was $50/year.. I would love something like that for my own personal use.. and maybe a $100/y version for companies.. You know.. Like Oracle Does with their clone of redhat..

Re:More (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#39508507)

Isn't the point of Red Hat the support they provide? If you're not buying the support, why run Red Hat at all? Debian can do anything Red Hat can, and it's completely free.

Re:More (3, Informative)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 2 years ago | (#39509055)

Isn't the point of Red Hat the support they provide? If you're not buying the support, why run Red Hat at all? Debian can do anything Red Hat can, and it's completely free.

There are cases when you need to run a RHEL-compatible system, but don't want/need the expensive support contract from Red Hat (like when you have to have support for expensive, enterprise-level software where the vendor only supplies drivers in the form of a RHEL-compatible RPM). This is why projects such as CentOS exist.

Re:More (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508539)

Use Fedora. http://fedoraproject.org/

Re:More (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508575)

I really wish Redhat had some much cheaper, "updates only" version of their software..

Your requirement appears to be fulfilled by CentOS, or possibly Scientific Linux - what's wrong with these options?

Re:More (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 2 years ago | (#39508923)

I really wish Redhat had some much cheaper, "updates only" version of their software...

Assuming you're not in need of software support, such a distribution does exist, it's called CentOS.

Re:More (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#39508805)

I wonder how much more they would have made if Oracle didn't rip them off. I dont count CentOS though. The vast majority of people using CentOS either can't afford Redhat or will move up when they can.

Or don't need the redhat support, or keep redhat on one machine for support and use CentOS on the other 3000 servers.

CentOS to RHEL isn't a move up, it's binary compatible sameness except for a little artwork.

In your face? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508041)

Since when did Jesse Cox start using Linux?

Red Hat also announced some donations (5, Informative)

Red Storm (4772) | about 2 years ago | (#39508051)

Red Hat also announced that they will be donating $100,000 to each of the following organizations; Creative Commons, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Software Freedom Law Center and UNICEF Innovation Labs. http://www.redhat.com/about/news/archive/2012/3/A-billion-thanks-to-the-open-source-community-from-Red-Hat

Re:Red Hat also announced some donations (2, Informative)

Logic and Reason (952833) | about 2 years ago | (#39508691)

The way I read that announcement, Red Hat is donating $100,000 total, divided in some unspecified way among those four beneficiaries. Still a nice gesture, though.

NBA Jerseys,NFL Jerseys (-1, Offtopic)

Ramoutarsdfs (2606295) | about 2 years ago | (#39508053)

NBA Jerseys NFL Jerseys from http://www.nfljerseycheapshop.com/ [nfljerseycheapshop.com] http://www.nfljerseycheapshop.com/NFL-Jerseys-c-31.html [nfljerseycheapshop.com] Our NFL Jerseys are of high quality of elastic fabric. The price are of grat edges compared with others'. we use soft materials to highlights the comfort point of NFL Jerseys . They are very suitable to wear in and they are sweat absorb too.With rich and various style and colors to choose, we assure you that the Cheap NFL Jerseys will be your first choice. It is not smart to wait. Having the NFL Jerseys is now considered to be a kind of Loose leisure, you definitely need a fashion Jerseys now. The are becoming more and more fashionable.don't you wanna in? Don't be hesitate just have a try. You will find that Cheap NFL Jerseys are really a good choice. It will Will prove to be of great worthy. If you have any thing curious don't be hesitate just contacts us . We are ready for anything you need.

Honestly, now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508081)

... when Bill Gates made that comment, which I don't have trouble believing he might have at some point, it was a different era.

There's no comparison between the ease of use between many of today's Linux distros and what was available around that time. Clearly the open source community has made great strides in hardware support, software efficiency, and overall user-friendliness.

C'mon, Slashdot. We don't have to add a few additional lines of bashing to posts to make them interesting. Red Hat earning over 1 Billion in revenue is sensational enough!

Re:Honestly, now... (2)

Sique (173459) | about 2 years ago | (#39508435)

When Bill Gates made that comment, Linux was already the most deployed HTTP server plattform, in our datacenter there were lots of customers running large deployments of 1 HU linux servers and Linux was encroaching the embedded market with lots of appliances being built on top of a linux base installation.

Re:Honestly, now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508957)

I clearly recall the "640K will be enough for anyone" jokes from the era of the first Rube Goldberg extended/expanded memory kludges. That was circa 1985 - 1989, before Linux was around. In fact, it was in The Age Before Windows.

Now I do not remember the differences between expanded memory and extended memory, but at the time those differences were very significant.

Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (0)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 2 years ago | (#39508083)

1% of Apple:

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/aapl/financials [marketwatch.com]

and, total revenue = 1/7th of Microsoft's 2010-2011 growth:

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/msft/financials [marketwatch.com]

I love Linux (lowercase l), and RedHat does good things - worthy of being a going-growing concern. "Winning the war", they are not.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about 2 years ago | (#39508145)

Why do they need to "win the war"? We don't need software monoculture. We need interoperability. Redhat is successful and doing well in a market where others are also doing well.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (1)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 2 years ago | (#39508191)

Yeah, it's easy to make a lot of money when you trade the freedom of your users for cash in your pocket.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (2)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#39508231)

Well It isn't the same war.
Red Hat has distance itself from its consumer business. So they are not competing with Apple who has distance itself from its Server Business.

For Microsoft how much of their business is in B2B sales. That would probably give a closer number.

I like Apple, I like Linux and I like Microsoft (Lately). They seem to fill different Niches.

Apple - Has gotten really strong on Mobile. While I have been dishearten with OS X and Macs Apples mobile Offerings are still top of the industry.
Microsoft - They finally got Windows 7 to do what they promised us for Windows 95. And I find it a good Desktop OS, even better then Macs, or Linux.
Linux - If I have a back end server. I want it to be a Linux server. Linux can be stripped down to the basics and do what it needs to do and do it well without all the touch and freely stuff Microsoft gives us.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (4, Insightful)

Red Storm (4772) | about 2 years ago | (#39508281)

I love Linux (lowercase l), and RedHat does good things - worthy of being a going-growing concern. "Winning the war", they are not.

Red Hat has a poster in almost every office quoting Ghandi:
First they ignore You
Then they laugh at you
They they fight you
Then you win.

That quote permeates most of Red Hat Culture.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508689)

First they ignore you
Then they laugh at you
They they fight you
Then you win.

  -- Gandhi

First they march you through hundreds of miles of jungle without food or water
Then they shoot you
They they disembowel you
Then you lose.

  -- Gandhi, had the Japs won WW2

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | about 2 years ago | (#39508813)

How many other failed Linux distros had the same poster hanging in their offices ? It's great to hear Red Hat is doing well for themselves but it's not like there's a vibrant market out there for Linux. Few companies are left standing, and most of those are struggling, Novell, Mandriva, ... Even the successful Red Hat at 1 billion in revenue is making a 14th of what Sun was doing just before they were acquired. In that sense Gates was right: Linux hasn't turned out to be the competitor that would sweep everything away in its path like optimists at the time predicted. Instead there's one company left standing enjoying moderate success, nothing Microsoft has to worry about.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (1)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#39508305)

I think they mean winning the war on perception. Plus, their business model is markedly different. Apple is a hardware vendor (with some software thrown in) dedicated to consumer grade equipment (mac pro being the exception, and the now defunct xserve line). Microsoft is like GE where they have their hands in 80 million different pies, consumer and enterprise. Red Hat essentially offers support and maintains an extremely stable distribution (with a ton of kernel development thrown in) - and they're only in the enterprise market - and they're growing. I'm pretty sure that their install base across the world is higher than both OSX and and Windows in their chosen market (though the latest releases from windows do have some nice teeth).

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39509197)

Good points. Within the market segment Red Hat serves, there is Red Hat, and IBM. Once there was also Hewlett-Packard, Wang, DEC, and a few others, but they fell by the wayside. I think mostly for failing to have the corporate vision to jump on a Linux horse when their own could no longer keep up the pace.

I suppose Oracle should also be included as an enterprise service provider. Maybe. They sell into that market, but their business model is so different from the others (a little heavy on the patent lawyer division, etc) that I'm not sure whether they are competitive or simply bottom feeding off companies that don't know how to swim in the new waters.

Re:Let's hear it for the 1%ers! (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#39508905)

..."Soaking the most cash from the consumer", they are not...

If you want a server you can spend a pile of cash on windows and it will run ok-ish if you take a lot of care setting it up or you can get better security, performance, and flexibility without the lock-in and at a lower cost from RedHat.

Looks like RedHat isn't winning the war, they have already won it. The only thing they are not so good at it is using that leverage to collect massive amounts of cash from their customers and from people who are not their customers via dodgy bulk licensing deals.

Awesome.. but some perspective (4, Informative)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#39508087)

That's great that RH finally passed that mark... that's on top of the good news they've been announcing for the past few years.. from their revenue growth through the recession (thanks to the subscription model), to their entry into the fortune 500 [redhat.com] .

But does anyone here think Bill Gates or Microsoft stays awake worried about RH? They pulled in 72x more revenue, 159x more profits, and have 63x more cash on hand (50.69b vs 808m) than Red Hat. Microsoft even has a better profit margin than RH (32.5% vs 13.3%).

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=msft [yahoo.com]
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=RHT+Key+Statistics [yahoo.com]

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508181)

... They pulled in 72x more revenue, 159x more profits ...

Thats just two orders of magnitude -- which is little when you assume exponential change (which one should here -- or at least prefer it over the assumption of linear change).

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (4, Interesting)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#39508337)

If Microsoft stopped growing today.. and RH kept growing at the rate they did last year (23% revenue growth)... it will be 21 years before they reach Microsoft's size.

I wouldn't call that "little"... 20 years is an eternity in software.

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (2)

kungfugleek (1314949) | about 2 years ago | (#39508313)

And at one point, IBM was that much bigger than Microsoft.

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508493)

How much time Apple needed to come back from the verge of death?

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (2)

wwbbs (60205) | about 2 years ago | (#39508649)

MS is a Mature Company. They are having a hell of time milking their Cash Cows right now. MS Office and MS Server both have significantly declining sales. Everything else they have touched has been a loss leader (xbox, bing, win mobile etc) This is an attempt to capture market share before falling completely into the toilet. Red Hat inc on the other hand has grown from the ether into a profitable company despite a product portfolio significantly smaller than M$. Where Red Hat Shines is the offer the best of the best when it comes to support of their software. Enterprise Red Hat Linux is significantly cheaper when you factor in the level of support you get. Do not forget that even companies as large as IBM outsource or licence Enterprise Red Hat Linux as it feels a niche market that if AIX were to support it would cause a significant profit decline based on AIX market share. I personally have paid for many Domino/Lotus Notes server's installation/migrations from Windows to RedHat as it far more cost effective based on 5-7year hardware cycles. (Which in some government agencies is a short life span. I've seen RS/6000 and IBM PL300's have uptime's measured in thousands of days and life cycles approaching 15years)

Re:Awesome.. but some perspective (1)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#39509083)

I agree with much of what you posted.. but even in 1990, when Microsoft passed $1B in revenue, they had a profit margin 2x of RH: 337 million vs 144 million
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/26/business/microsoft-net-increases-76.2.html [nytimes.com]

The S&P 500 is *not* the Fortune 500 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39509455)

... to their entry into the fortune 500 [redhat.com] .

The S&P 500 is *not* the same thing as the Fortune 500.
Redhat would need 40X their current revenue to have a crack at the Fortune 500.

Perhaps... (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#39508093)

Perhaps there is a billion dollars worth of revenue from the hobbyist and Student Market?

What Red Hat did which was shift away from trying to compete on the Desktop Market (Microsoft bread and butter) and focus more on the Server Market where Microsoft while a major player has more of an equal footing. Where they had a lot of legacy Unix shops that wanted to get off Unix Platforms but still keep the Unixy goodness.

In general most Novel Shops went to Windows, most Unix Shops went to Linux. By "most" meaning there are exceptions, and plenty of anecdotal stories. As moving to the other platform was much easier for the company.

For new companies. They would split across Microsoft and Linux (With Red Hat offering enterprise level support) Some would go with Microsoft and Other with Linux...

So in a competive market I am not supprised that Red Hat made money. They played smart business and they made money.

I'd imagine ... (1)

Rambo Tribble (1273454) | about 2 years ago | (#39508097)

... King George III probably said that those rebellious colonists in America would never amount to anything, either. Freedom rules.

Re:I'd imagine ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508359)

Supposedly George III wrote in his diary on July 4, 1776: "Nothing of interest happened today."

Obviously there's no way he could have known what was going on across the ocean, but it's still amusing.

Umm (4, Interesting)

Psychotria (953670) | about 2 years ago | (#39508127)

To a large extent, Red Hat is cashing in on a much broader community effort that has developed Linux and sold it as a viable platform to software developers, says George Weiss, an analyst with the Gartner technology research firm. But Red had a hand in this. “Give credit to Red Hat for fashioning a business model that created value from subscription support,” he adds.

Emphasis mine. I don't think that the success of Red Hat depended on Linux being a viable platform for software developers. Rather, it depended on Linux being a viable platform for servers (I'm not meaning to under-emphasise the desktop users, or the developers, here; all I'm trying to say is that the success of Red Hat probably has little to do with Linux being "developer friendly" and more to do with the server market [and all that entails]).

Re:Umm (2)

sunderland56 (621843) | about 2 years ago | (#39508169)

The success of Red Hat does not depend on them selling anything at all. That $1 billion is for services and support - the product itself is free.

Re:Umm (1)

Psychotria (953670) | about 2 years ago | (#39508259)

The success of Red Hat does not depend on them selling anything at all. That $1 billion is for services and support - the product itself is free.

I bet you 5 gold pieces that I can split a hair finer than you! ;-)

Re:Umm (1)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#39508517)

He's right though, and it's not splitting hairs.

When you buy Server 2008, you buy a license and 5 CALs (minimum). For a grand. That's it. That's all you get.

Support is completely separate with Microsoft, and have your credit card ready because it ain't cheap.

--
BMO

Re:Umm (2, Informative)

Red Storm (4772) | about 2 years ago | (#39508369)

Not quite....

Technically, Red Hat's "product" is a compiled copy the Linux kernel and associated Open Source Packages required to create a working operating system. Yes the source is free, and Red Hat does follow through on the GPL obligations, but on it's own the source is useless, you can't actually use it without you or someone else spending the time and effort to compile it first. Thus Red Hat is "selling" a compiled and packaged form of the associated source code, however it's sold in the form of a subscription which includes access to software updates and some level of support.

How could they not be successful? (5, Interesting)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about 2 years ago | (#39508155)

I'm a developer (on RHEL 5/6) in a company on the same size order as MS that deploys RH or the CentOS derivative on the high tens-of-thousands of nodes scale.

Congratulations and all, but how could you not be successful when providing such a superior product to your competition. RHEL beats MS server variants in every way for ease of development (integrating dozens of nodes is a breeze, IA is consistent and well documented), cost, features, and support (we can call up RHEL developers at any time to request they investigate problems and push out fixes on timely schedules).

They are a great company, and don't make you feel dirty for using their product.

Re:How could they not be successful? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508269)

If only RHEL was in the same cost ball park. They're very nice about licensing (one entity within our org had a site license; RedHat went on record as saying, don't bother coming back for more licenses until you exceede your license by 10x) but even then, Microsoft gives us a better deal. Sure we're huge so we get very nice discounts, but at the end of the day it made it hard to explain to people why we had to pay for licenses.

Re:How could they not be successful? (2)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#39509071)

You are talking nonsense. Redhat don't even sell licenses.

I've always found RHEL cheaper than windows as well as faster and more stable. Plus RHEL don't use support to push more product the way I've seen MS do. Got a problem? Any problem? Buy more domain controllers. Yeah right.

Inner pain (-1, Offtopic)

Ramoutarsdfs (2606295) | about 2 years ago | (#39508187)

This world nothing is impossible. I also don't know what to do, how to think, always wanted to earn money. Always sleep well, but god has been with me on. Every time I want to send to when they give me a pledge against. To my pain not the desire living. I have no way to have mercy on anyone. I should well think about their lives. If you want to see more information please enter www.cheaphatsunglasses.com

what they don' tell you (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508193)

is that 99% of that revenue is from merchandise.

no complaints, though. hat looks *great*.

Interesting... (3, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#39508225)

What I find impressive about Redhat is not Linux volume per se(woah, you mean that a world with a zillion cheap webservers wants an x86 unix for free? I never would have guessed); but that they've continued to sustain demand for paid offerings in the face of free-if-you-bring-your-own-expert stuff(which is unattractive at a small scale; but becomes economic if you are big enough) and various 'appliance-ized' Redhat clones put out by the vendors of the software designed to run on top of them(eg. Oracle's database + I can't believe it's not Redhat offering)...

It seems totally unsurprising that much of the internet hosting going on today wouldn't even be economically possible if they were paying a tithe to Redmond, and it is similarly unsurprising that vendors of expensive applications would really rather that you pay for their software, not for the OS it happens to run on. Much more interesting that there is a place for Redhat in all this...

$40 billion more to go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508239)

If they earn $40 billion more next year, they could make the bottom of the Fortune 500 list.
I won't argue with their success and I'm happy that they're happy, but in the grander scheme of things, they have a long way to go.

Re:$40 billion more to go (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#39509189)

If they earn $40 billion more next year, they could make the bottom of the Fortune 500 list.
I won't argue with their success and I'm happy that they're happy, but in the grander scheme of things, they have a long way to go.

Depends on what war we want them to win. MS are brilliant at extracting money from customers and even non-customers who buy computer hardware, that's not the kind of company I'd like to deal with as a customer.

Great News! (2)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#39508267)

Congratulations Bob and Marc! To this day RHEL is probably my favorite distro (not trying to start a distro war), and I've been using RH it since apollo. They were cool guys then, and I can only imagine they've stayed the same.

What's so ironic about Glyn Moody's quote? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508331)

From Red Hat's list of quotes:

“Indeed, I would go so far as to say that very few open source startups will ever get anywhere near to $1 billion...” – Glyn Moody, 2010.

From the end of the article:

... Red Hat is now the first (and only) $1 billion open source company ...

So Moody's prediction is so far so good? Or are there several others encroaching on the billion dollar mark?

I think this must be another case of people mocking what they read, rather than what the other person wrote. I see that a lot.

We're migrating away from Redhat.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508465)

...why keep paying them for support when we never use it? We have already started migrating all servers to Centos 6.

Not a Gates "prediction", still only 1% size of MS (3, Insightful)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 2 years ago | (#39508483)

Two things:

>> "'We think of Linux as a competitor in the student and hobbyist market but I really don't think in the commercial market we'll see it in any significant way.' Bill Gates, 2001."

#1: That wasn't a "prediction." That was a positioning statement, meant for the ears of commercial buyers and software channels, that Microsoft will remove its good graces from anyone who tries to interfere with Microsoft's business operating system sales.

#2: Microsoft revenues in Q1 2012 were $20B, or about 60 times Red Hat's. If anything, Microsoft is probably thrilled to have a relatively tiny, but still growing competitor in the market to keep the anti-trust folks at bay. (Remember those guys from about 10 years ago?)

Niche market (1, Interesting)

magamiako1 (1026318) | about 2 years ago | (#39508523)

The point being that Red Hat is not competing against Microsoft but rather they are filling a different market than Microsoft. Make no mistake that Red Hat software is cheap. The TCO is fairly high since Linux Admins tend to command a much higher salary, generally don't crossover as much (I know plenty of Windows guys that do all around IT and fewer Linux guys that know Windows....far-fewer), and require much more manual care than a Windows environment.

I've found completely different purposes for Windows and Linux environments most of the time, they solve different goals. I prefer IIS/MSSQL/Windows over most stuff in the enterprise but put in Linux when it fills a void in either licensing or application compatibility.

Re:Niche market (1)

Tsunayoshi (789351) | about 2 years ago | (#39509075)

The TCO is fairly high since Linux Admins tend to command a much higher salary, generally don't crossover as much (I know plenty of Windows guys that do all around IT and fewer Linux guys that know Windows....far-fewer)

Really? I've found it the complete opposite in my 12+ years of being a sysadmin...the people who started off from a linux background are generally good at being jacks of all trades, but the ones who started off from a Windows background aren't quite as well rounded. While I primarily do linux/unix work, my resume is also heavy into Windows stuff, so much that I went to a job interview once where the CIO/linux architect and his windows guru grilled me up and down on the stuff listed on my resume and at the end the Windows guy commented that I could probably do his job better than he could...then the CIO mentioned that they didn't really have an opening, they just wanted to interview this guy who had an "obviously bullshit resume" and were surprised that it wasn't BS...still didn't get me a job offer though (small company).

The contractor currently working for me now is a massive exception, I was originally leery about his linux skill set since he came from a strong Windows environment with very little linux before coming to work for us, but his troubleshooting skills are godly impressive and there hasn't been anything he hasn't been able to figure out yet.

Well (1)

ledow (319597) | about 2 years ago | (#39508531)

Just goes to show that nobody can predict the future with any accuracy, eh? Which makes you wonder why companies would listen to them in the first place.

Who would have guessed that a cheap, ad-supported Worms rip-off (which itself was a Scorched-Earth rip-off, etc.) would get 10m downloads in the first day of the release of its... what... fifth title? And make an awful lot of money. While the Worms sequels tended towards the dire themselves?

Who would have thought that the idea of a Linux smartphone would be a success? Who would have thought that just indexing the web and running statistics on the whole damn thing would make a better search engine than anyone else had ever made and create one of the most powerful companies in the world? Who would have thought that tablets wouldn't be successful until, well, Windows Tablet Edition's were dead and buried?

Who would have thought that IBM would be sued by a dead shell of a company and it get drawn out to a multi-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit? Who would have though that just changing the screen type could make people buy MILLIONS of a popular e-book device?

Things happen. And the WORST people to listen to are a) critics, b) "industry experts" that post popular columns in papers and journals and c) potential competitors about how those things would never happen.

Microsoft keep trying to tell me that the cloud is the next thing I should buy into. Car manufacturers keep telling me that they'll make a fast, practical, environmentally-friendly car that I can afford. Solar / wind / wave power enthusiasts keep telling me that we'll all be running the country off them soon.

The shock here is not that Red Hat made $1bn (and some of those comments were made only in 2010, which I would have considered stupid and short-sighted back then), but that people still think that their opinion matters when they are talking about a competitor, or that people base decisions on what Gartner and similar tell them as if they were the Oracle.

The BIGGEST companies and successes in the world come about by surprise to even their owners. Who would have thought that the richest man in the world would be the one who wrote a BASIC interpreter?

You cannot make predictions like that, and trying just makes you look stupid.

Red Hat is growing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508845)

...wait a minute, has it been confirmed by Netcraft yet?

Year Of Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508875)

So does this mean it's FINALLY The Year Of Linux?

Who let... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39508921)

the freetard cunt be a journalist?

Why is Gly Moody's Quote Included? (1)

pscottdv (676889) | about 2 years ago | (#39509281)

“Indeed, I would go so far as to say that very few open source startups will ever get anywhere near to $1 billion. Not because they are incompetent, or because open source will ‘fail’ in any sense. But because the economics of open source software – and therefore the business dynamics – are so different from those of traditional software that it simply won’t be possible in most markets.” – Glyn Moody

There have been, in fact, very few open source startups to get to $1 billion. His quote seems right on.

And before I get flamed, I and my family use Linux exclusively. I sold a mildly-successful, Linux-based business a few years ago.

Of course, if you include any business for which open-source software is critical to its operations, like Google, Facebook or Amazon, then yeah, the quote is nonsense.

Proud to be a stockholder! (1)

bbbaldie (935205) | about 2 years ago | (#39509293)

Albeit a modest one. I went to a week of Redhat server administration training back in 2005 and promptly went out and bought some stock which is now worth over twice what it was then.
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...