Beta
×

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!

Interview with Mandrake's Head Honchos

Hemos posted more than 10 years ago | from the talking-with-the-men dept.

Mandriva 130

Shipud writes "Newsforge has an interview with MandrakeSoft CEO François Bancilhon, and Mandrakelinux co-founders Jacques Le Marois and Gaël Duval. Among the issues discussed are a the business model for a GPL-based public company, Mandrakesoft's shares, the role of user subscription in funding, the bankruptcy, Xfree 4.4's new non-GPL license, and more."

cancel ×

130 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Thoughts? (0, Troll)

Ads are broken (718513) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455862)

washingtonpost.com Bush Reasserts Hussein-Al Qaeda Link President Draws Distinction Between Involvement in 9/11 Attacks, Other Contact By Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, June 17, 2004; 3:00 PM President Bush insisted today that "numerous contacts" between the ousted government of Saddam Hussein and the al Qaeda terrorist network showed that the former Iraqi leader was a threat to the United States, despite a report by the Sept. 11 commission that found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda. "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters after a Cabinet meeting at the White House. Bush said the contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda provided proof of a relationship. The report, issued yesterday by the bipartisan commission investigating the 2001 terrorist attack on the United States, said that all relevant classified information that it reviewed showed that the contacts that took place between Iraq and al Qaeda officials never led to actual cooperation. In yesterday's hearing of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding. The report challenged one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq. Along with the contention that Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. Earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming." Asked about the commission's findings on an Iraq-al Qaeda link, Bush said, "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with bin Laden, the head of al Qaeda, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two." Bush said he had called Saddam Hussein a threat "because he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He was a threat because he was a sworn enemy to the United States of America, just like al Qaeda. Now, he was a threat because he had terrorist connections, not only al Qaeda connections but other connections to terrorist organizations." Commission Chairman Thomas H. Kean, asked at a news conference about Bush's comments, said the panel did not dispute that there were contacts between Hussein's government and al Qaeda. But Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, said the panel's staff found "that there is no credible evidence that we can discover, after a long investigation, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein were in any way part of the attack on the United States." Vice chairman Lee H. Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman, said, "I must say, I have trouble understanding the flap over this." The commission's position, he said, is that "we don't have any evidence of a cooperative . . . relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and these al Qaeda operatives with regard to the attacks on the United States." The commission's staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." The finding challenges a belief held by large numbers of Americans about al Qaeda's ties to Hussein. According to a Harris poll in late April, a plurality of Americans, 49 percent to 36 percent, believe "clear evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda has been found." As recently as Monday, Cheney said in a speech that Hussein "had long-established ties with al Qaeda." Bush, asked on Tuesday to verify or qualify that claim, defended it by pointing to Abu Musab Zarqawi, who has taken credit for a wave of attacks in Iraq. In his remarks today, Bush again mentioned Zarqawi, a Palestinian born in Jordan who runs the al Tawhid terrorist network. Bush said Hussein had "provided safe haven for a terrorist like Zarqawi, who is still killing innocents inside of Iraq." Bush also cited Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, whose Fatah Revolutionary Council was active in the 1970s and 1980s, as another example of Hussein's terrorist ties. Nidal died under mysterious circumstances in Baghdad a few months before the Iraq war. Bush's Democratic challenger, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), sought to profit from the commission's finding. "The administration misled America, and the administration reached too far," Kerry told Michigan Public Radio yesterday. "I believe that the 9/11 report, the early evidence, is that they're going to indicate that we didn't have the kind of terrorists links that this administration was asserting. I think that's a very, very serious finding." A Bush campaign spokesman countered that Kerry himself has said Hussein "supported and harbored terrorist groups." And Cheney's spokesman pointed to a 2002 letter written by CIA Director George J. Tenet stating that "we have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade" and "credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression." Cheney's office also pointed to a 2003 Tenet statement calling Zarqawi "a senior al Qaeda terrorist associate." White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the commission finding of long-standing high-level contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq justified the administration's earlier assertions. "We stand behind what was said publicly," he said. Bush, speaking to troops in Tampa yesterday, did not mention an Iraq-al Qaeda link, saying only that Iraq "sheltered terrorist groups." That was a significantly milder version of the allegations administration officials have made since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. In late 2001, Cheney said it was "pretty well confirmed" that Sept. 11 mastermind Mohamed Atta met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official before the attacks, in April 2000 in Prague; Cheney later said the meeting could not be proved or disproved. Bush, in his speech aboard an aircraft carrier on May 1, 2003, asserted: "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda and cut off a source of terrorist funding." In September, Cheney said on NBC's "Meet the Press": "If we're successful in Iraq . . . then we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Speaking about Iraq's alleged links to al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks, Cheney connected Iraq to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by saying that newly found Iraqi intelligence files in Baghdad showed that a participant in the bombing returned to Iraq and "probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven." He added: "The Iraqi government or the Iraqi intelligence service had a relationship with al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s." Shortly after Cheney asserted these links, Bush contradicted him, saying: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th." But Bush added: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties." In January, Cheney repeated his view that Iraq was tied to al Qaeda, saying that "there's overwhelming evidence" of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection. He said he was "very confident there was an established relationship there." The commission staff, in yesterday's report, said that while bin Laden was in Sudan between 1991 and 1996, a senior Iraqi intelligence officer made three visits to Sudan, and that he had a meeting with bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden was reported to have sought training camps and assistance in getting weapons, "but Iraq never responded," the staff said. The report said that bin Laden "at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan." As for the Atta meeting in Prague mentioned by Cheney, the commission staff concluded: "We do not believe that such a meeting occurred." It cited FBI photographic and telephone evidence, along with Czech and U.S. investigations, as well as reports from detainees, including the Iraqi official with whom Atta was alleged to have met. On the 1993 trade center bombing, the staff found "substantial uncertainty" about whether bin Laden and al Qaeda were involved. At yesterday's hearing, commissioner Fred F. Fielding questioned the staff's finding of no apparent cooperation between bin Laden and Hussein. He pointed to a sentence in the first sealed indictment in 2001 of the al Qaeda members accused of the bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; that sentence said al Qaeda reached an understanding with Iraq that they would not work against each other and would cooperate on acquiring arms. Patrick J. Fitzgerald, now a U.S. attorney in Illinois, who oversaw the African bombing case, told the commission that reference was dropped in a superceding indictment because investigators could not confirm al Qaeda's relationship with Iraq as they had done with its ties to Iran, Sudan and Hezbollah. The original material came from an al Qaeda defector who told prosecutors that what he had heard was secondhand. The staff report on Iraq was brief. Though not confirming any Iraqi collaboration with al Qaeda, it did not specifically address two of the other pieces of evidence the administration has offered to link Iraq to al Qaeda: Zarqawi's al Tawhid organization and the Ansar al-Islam group. In October 2002, Bush described Zarqawi as "one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks." Zarqawi wrote a January 2003 letter to bin Laden's lieutenants, intercepted at the Iraqi border, saying that if al Qaeda adopted his approach in Iraq, he would swear "fealty to you [bin Laden] publicly and in the news media." In March, in a statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Tenet described Zarqawi's network as among groups having "links" to al Qaeda but with its own "autonomous leadership . . . own targets [and] they plan their own attacks." Although Zarqawi may have cooperated with al Qaeda in the past, officials said it is increasingly clear that he has been operating independently of bin Laden's group and has his own network of operatives. The other group, Ansar al-Islam, began in 2001 among Kurdish Sunni Islamic fundamentalists in northern Iraq, fighting against the two secular Kurdish groups that operated under the protection of the United States. At one point, bin Laden supported Ansar, as did Zarqawi, who is believed to have visited their area more than once. Tenet referred to Ansar as one of the Sunni groups that had benefited from al Qaeda links. © 2004 The Washington Post Company

Sorry (FP Rush) (1)

Ads are broken (718513) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455910)

washingtonpost.com

Bush Reasserts Hussein-Al Qaeda Link
President Draws Distinction Between Involvement in 9/11 Attacks, Other Contact

By Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, June 17, 2004; 3:00 PM

President Bush insisted today that "numerous contacts" between the ousted government of Saddam Hussein and the al Qaeda terrorist network showed that the former Iraqi leader was a threat to the United States, despite a report by the Sept. 11 commission that found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda.

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters after a Cabinet meeting at the White House.

Bush said the contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda provided proof of a relationship.

The report, issued yesterday by the bipartisan commission investigating the 2001 terrorist attack on the United States, said that all relevant classified information that it reviewed showed that the contacts that took place between Iraq and al Qaeda officials never led to actual cooperation.

In yesterday's hearing of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding.

The report challenged one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq. Along with the contention that Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. Earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."

Asked about the commission's findings on an Iraq-al Qaeda link, Bush said, "This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers met with bin Laden, the head of al Qaeda, in the Sudan. There's numerous contacts between the two."

Bush said he had called Saddam Hussein a threat "because he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He was a threat because he was a sworn enemy to the United States of America, just like al Qaeda. Now, he was a threat because he had terrorist connections, not only al Qaeda connections but other connections to terrorist organizations."

Commission Chairman Thomas H. Kean, asked at a news conference about Bush's comments, said the panel did not dispute that there were contacts between Hussein's government and al Qaeda. But Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, said the panel's staff found "that there is no credible evidence that we can discover, after a long investigation, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein were in any way part of the attack on the United States."

Vice chairman Lee H. Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman, said, "I must say, I have trouble understanding the flap over this." The commission's position, he said, is that "we don't have any evidence of a cooperative . . . relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and these al Qaeda operatives with regard to the attacks on the United States."

The commission's staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

The finding challenges a belief held by large numbers of Americans about al Qaeda's ties to Hussein. According to a Harris poll in late April, a plurality of Americans, 49 percent to 36 percent, believe "clear evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda has been found."

As recently as Monday, Cheney said in a speech that Hussein "had long-established ties with al Qaeda." Bush, asked on Tuesday to verify or qualify that claim, defended it by pointing to Abu Musab Zarqawi, who has taken credit for a wave of attacks in Iraq.

In his remarks today, Bush again mentioned Zarqawi, a Palestinian born in Jordan who runs the al Tawhid terrorist network. Bush said Hussein had "provided safe haven for a terrorist like Zarqawi, who is still killing innocents inside of Iraq."

Bush also cited Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, whose Fatah Revolutionary Council was active in the 1970s and 1980s, as another example of Hussein's terrorist ties. Nidal died under mysterious circumstances in Baghdad a few months before the Iraq war.

Bush's Democratic challenger, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), sought to profit from the commission's finding. "The administration misled America, and the administration reached too far," Kerry told Michigan Public Radio yesterday. "I believe that the 9/11 report, the early evidence, is that they're going to indicate that we didn't have the kind of terrorists links that this administration was asserting. I think that's a very, very serious finding."

A Bush campaign spokesman countered that Kerry himself has said Hussein "supported and harbored terrorist groups." And Cheney's spokesman pointed to a 2002 letter written by CIA Director George J. Tenet stating that "we have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade" and "credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression." Cheney's office also pointed to a 2003 Tenet statement calling Zarqawi "a senior al Qaeda terrorist associate."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the commission finding of long-standing high-level contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq justified the administration's earlier assertions. "We stand behind what was said publicly," he said.

Bush, speaking to troops in Tampa yesterday, did not mention an Iraq-al Qaeda link, saying only that Iraq "sheltered terrorist groups." That was a significantly milder version of the allegations administration officials have made since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

In late 2001, Cheney said it was "pretty well confirmed" that Sept. 11 mastermind Mohamed Atta met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official before the attacks, in April 2000 in Prague; Cheney later said the meeting could not be proved or disproved.

Bush, in his speech aboard an aircraft carrier on May 1, 2003, asserted: "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda and cut off a source of terrorist funding."

In September, Cheney said on NBC's "Meet the Press": "If we're successful in Iraq . . . then we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Speaking about Iraq's alleged links to al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks, Cheney connected Iraq to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by saying that newly found Iraqi intelligence files in Baghdad showed that a participant in the bombing returned to Iraq and "probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven." He added: "The Iraqi government or the Iraqi intelligence service had a relationship with al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s."

Shortly after Cheney asserted these links, Bush contradicted him, saying: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th." But Bush added: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties."

In January, Cheney repeated his view that Iraq was tied to al Qaeda, saying that "there's overwhelming evidence" of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection. He said he was "very confident there was an established relationship there."

The commission staff, in yesterday's report, said that while bin Laden was in Sudan between 1991 and 1996, a senior Iraqi intelligence officer made three visits to Sudan, and that he had a meeting with bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden was reported to have sought training camps and assistance in getting weapons, "but Iraq never responded," the staff said. The report said that bin Laden "at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan."

As for the Atta meeting in Prague mentioned by Cheney, the commission staff concluded: "We do not believe that such a meeting occurred." It cited FBI photographic and telephone evidence, along with Czech and U.S. investigations, as well as reports from detainees, including the Iraqi official with whom Atta was alleged to have met. On the 1993 trade center bombing, the staff found "substantial uncertainty" about whether bin Laden and al Qaeda were involved.

At yesterday's hearing, commissioner Fred F. Fielding questioned the staff's finding of no apparent cooperation between bin Laden and Hussein. He pointed to a sentence in the first sealed indictment in 2001 of the al Qaeda members accused of the bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; that sentence said al Qaeda reached an understanding with Iraq that they would not work against each other and would cooperate on acquiring arms.

Patrick J. Fitzgerald, now a U.S. attorney in Illinois, who oversaw the African bombing case, told the commission that reference was dropped in a superceding indictment because investigators could not confirm al Qaeda's relationship with Iraq as they had done with its ties to Iran, Sudan and Hezbollah. The original material came from an al Qaeda defector who told prosecutors that what he had heard was secondhand.

The staff report on Iraq was brief. Though not confirming any Iraqi collaboration with al Qaeda, it did not specifically address two of the other pieces of evidence the administration has offered to link Iraq to al Qaeda: Zarqawi's al Tawhid organization and the Ansar al-Islam group.

In October 2002, Bush described Zarqawi as "one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks."

Zarqawi wrote a January 2003 letter to bin Laden's lieutenants, intercepted at the Iraqi border, saying that if al Qaeda adopted his approach in Iraq, he would swear "fealty to you [bin Laden] publicly and in the news media."

In March, in a statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Tenet described Zarqawi's network as among groups having "links" to al Qaeda but with its own "autonomous leadership . . . own targets [and] they plan their own attacks."

Although Zarqawi may have cooperated with al Qaeda in the past, officials said it is increasingly clear that he has been operating independently of bin Laden's group and has his own network of operatives.

The other group, Ansar al-Islam, began in 2001 among Kurdish Sunni Islamic fundamentalists in northern Iraq, fighting against the two secular Kurdish groups that operated under the protection of the United States. At one point, bin Laden supported Ansar, as did Zarqawi, who is believed to have visited their area more than once. Tenet referred to Ansar as one of the Sunni groups that had benefited from al Qaeda links.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9455866)

I think that Furries should be shot.

FP (-1, Offtopic)

packeteer (566398) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455868)

First 10.0 post

Mandrake (-1, Offtopic)

JBdH (613927) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455893)

Mandrake, mandrake? That was a guy in the Dr. Strangelove movie, right?

Interesting read (0, Flamebait)

RucasRiot (773111) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455894)

The decision to make Mandrake based on Redhat instead of Slackware has always bugged me, but it seems to have worked well for them.

courtesy of LinuxWorld... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9455897)

...you can hear [linuxworld.com] Francois too if you like :)

It's a good interview

Re:courtesy of LinuxWorld... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9455940)

wasn't there also a /. thread [slashdot.org] about good tech interview available as sound files?

Old interview. (2, Informative)

tkittel (619119) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455933)

It is an interesting interview, but it was published more than a month ago on may 12th.

(and I think it was also covered on /. back then).

Re:Old interview. (1)

calethix (537786) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456508)

That's a relief, I thought I was going to have to wait until next year to get Mandrake 10.

from the interview...
"Mandrake10 Official boxed sets will be shipped out on about May 10"

Re:Old interview. (2, Informative)

matthewn (91381) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456777)

Yeah -- this interview is already out of date in at least two respects. For one, cooker now includes the x.org server. For another, their distribution deal with O'Reilly is now a matter of public record.

Re:Old interview. (1)

Shipud (685171) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456935)

I am the poster, and you are right, it's over a month old. However, I only got wind of this now, and it seemed still relevant & interesting. As far as I know, this was not covered previously on /.

Re:Old interview. (1)

tkittel (619119) | more than 10 years ago | (#9457407)

It appears you are right, a search on /. old stories on "mandrake" didn't turn up anything.

I probably read it at linux weekly news then or somewhere else...

sc0wned! (5, Interesting)

astrokid (779104) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455961)

I thought it was funny:

A GPL-based business isn't the easiest model to be successful at; what makes it successful?

FB: A GPL-based business has lots of advantages, such as benefiting from a huge contributor team who help develop and improve our products, and also communicate.

JLM: If you look to the history of Linux distributions, you will see that the fastest growing are the ones which follow the Open Source rules. Most of the proprietary ones have completely failed. Caldera/SCO is a good example.

Re:sc0wned! (3, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456583)

OpenLinux being an example of a badly assembled distribution had nothing to do with it...

At least Slackware, even with its problems has a long history and has an avid base of followers. Debian has ease post-install administration and maintains a good place with their different versions. Gentoo has a lot of fans of the "bleeding edge". RedHat and SuSE both have good corporate and community support for those who want something pretty right out of the box.

I didn't see Caldera OpenLinux having any of these, and there were forces resistant to fully accept the GPL as well. The only surprise is that they lasted long enough to turn into SCOX.

Re:sc0wned! (1)

sp0rk173 (609022) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458259)

Just wanted to point out - some Gentoo followers also use it for it's ease of "post-install administration."

for gods sake (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9455965)

*yawn*

does anybody else get sick and tired of useless linux stuff. just because we like linux and its free, better than windows or whatever else, doesnt mean we should cough up every damn story about it we can find, cos quite frankly, its pissin me off now.

Bigger than that (4, Insightful)

wombatmobile (623057) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456098)

I think the value of the tale goes significantly beyond Linux. It's a business story with some template lessons for how to manage venture funding (and how not to).

Easy lessons. Hard to learn.

Pitfall of VC (4, Interesting)

wombatmobile (623057) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455966)

GD: Besides not having cut costs enough and early enough, I think that the core of the problem was certainly to consider venture cash as revenues, and thus growing the MandrakeSoft structure artificially.

Yes. Worth remembering, that one.

Re:Pitfall of VC (1)

twstdr00t (78288) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456656)

venture cash... revenue? last i check revenue was something earned.

MandrakeSoft (2, Interesting)

xenostar (746407) | more than 10 years ago | (#9455970)

It seems that an OSS-based company has to struggle for survival at all times. They are doing a great job, though, and eventhough I personally don't use Mandrake, I respect all the work they've done with it. Hope they come up with a solid business model and start making real money.

Re:MandrakeSoft (2, Informative)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458495)

Hope they come up with a solid business model and start making real money.

I'm going to have to make a copy of this comment so I don't have to write it yet again the next time this comes up. Mandrake's Linux business has always done well, although I don't know what you mean by "real money". They got into trouble during the dotbomb era when they were saddled with a "world class management" who did what CxOs are supposed to do and looted the company while plunging it into debt. To Mandrake's credit, they've returned to their core Linux business and worked their way back to solvency after tossing the overpaid management overboard. There are a lot of American companies that need to do exactly the same thing.

Re:MandrakeSoft (1)

dot-magnon (730521) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458561)

I use it, though. Mandrake is a great distribution, newbies and power users alike. It has a good set of tools, and often ducks up polished as a "future looking" type of Linux distribution.

Now, they're a bit independent in the whole distro mess, I think they might be the biggest still not-so-extremely commercial distribution while still maintaining a working business model.

I congratulate Mandrake with exiting bankruptcy, and I hope to see a lot of this distribution in the future. It has a good one, I have no doubt ;)

They're french? (4, Funny)

Irvu (248207) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456004)

Well, you know what that means, that means we can't allow this so called "Mandrake" software to be used in the U.S. Nor any other Linux distro that might have "Parisian leanings". We should follow the lead of the Congressional Lunchroom and ban the use of all francophile software in the U.S. of A.

From now on all linux users will be forced to switch to Microsoft's FreedomOS! which does most, ok some of the things that other stuff does but without all the pacifism.

Microsoft's FreedomOS, yours for on $799 and up.
Because the best way to guarantee freedom is to take away your choices.

Re:They're french? (1)

dr-suess-fan (210327) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456142)

Perhaps someone can explain to me the slight or not-so-slight bias against the French in the US I keep hearing about

Is it just good natured ribbing. What's the source ?

If 'The patriot' is any accurate indication of US history, I would've expected quite the opposite.

And yes, I realize this is off-topic.

Re:They're french? (1, Informative)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456195)

France was opposed to the US invasion of Iraq, and since then, they have been declared "unamerican".

Re:They're french? (5, Funny)

yamla (136560) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456515)

France was opposed to the US invasion of Iraq, and since then, they have been declared "unamerican".


Strangely enough, the only people in the world who think this is an insult are Americans.

Dont Insult Americans (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9457453)

Dont Insult the Americans , There is a reason the
Etats-Unians call themself Americans when they are in fact The US of A and not CANADA
( C ourageous A merican , N oble A merican , D efender of A merica )

There ashame of who they truely are so they try to make them self look bigger by saying where from that continent and not from that country.

Re:They're french? (1)

MoronGames (632186) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456573)

Which is okay, because, as far as I know, they're not American anways.

Re:They're french? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456655)

France was opposed to the US invasion of Iraq, and since then, they have been declared "unamerican".

Which is okay, because, as far as I know, they're not American anway


Yes, but that comes as a huge shock to some Americans.

I'm joking, of course, but only in part. Americans are particularly good at assuming that people in other countries think just like they do. This probably has something to do with the relative lack of other countries nearby compared to much of the world. In the U.S. one can live hundreds of miles (600? 800?) from the nearest foreign nation. Very little of their media gets into the U.S. either (the BBC and Telemundo are about it). And of course, foreign language (and thus foreign cultural) education are not emphasized in schools here in the U.S. In other words, there's a lack of experience with that sort of thing.

No you Mean Etat-unians (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9458253)

You mean an Etats-unians , American include People from Canada to Argentina who live on the american continent. Dont insult them by bringing them down to the same level as to the majority of stupid people living in the United states.

Thats why there country is called United-States "OF America".

But to sum it up, go to any country and you will find some morons who hates another country due to its own stupidity alone , no real reason is needed.

As far as other influence , your fact base is wrong , but what people watch the most on TV is Reality tv, simpson and other Internationnal show, or something similar.

Re:No you Mean Etat-unians (1)

FunkSoulBrother (140893) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458614)

People from the Central African Republic call themselves Central Africans, despite the fact that there are many countries in Central Africa.

Why don't people ever bitch about that?

more than just opposed (3, Insightful)

asv108 (141455) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456966)

The main French government action that caused the Bush administration and others on the far right to promote anti-french behavior was the French government's opposition to a second UN resolution, authorizing the use of force in Iraq. There were plenty of other countries that were against the resolution, but France was the only member of the UN security counsel that said it would veto any attempt at a second resolution outright.

Personally, I think what France did was a brave a noble act that should be applauded.

Re:more than just opposed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9457435)

technically the french did it for the OIL.

thats right, it was a nonwar for oil

go read up on the french oil company (govt owned) and all the business they were doing, illegally with iraq.

There not going to destroy what they created (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9458325)

No the United States "OF America" whas called irelevant , stupid and above all else "UNAMERICAN".

EVERYONE and EVERY Country whas oposed to the war in Irak exept the cureent leader of the United States GWB. Who purposely Lied , cohearsed and fabricated false intel to bring a number of other country ( Britain , Spain , etc ... ) to join them in this "ILLEGAL" ( all war are illegal , but the one sanctionned by the UN are at least legally based and on moral ground) war.

But the Stupid Etats-Unians ( real name of the people of the United States ) always see the French as someone to pick on because the French And Canada , who whas a colony at the time Helped Create the United States. And for that they are ashame of.

Re:There not going to destroy what they created (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9459083)

Kid, stop playing hooky and go back to school. Your spelling sucks, your grammar sucks, your French sucks (here's a hint, the French have a specific word to describe someone from the US), your arguments are less than worthwhile, and you can't even figure out what to capitalize and what not to.

Mais, je suppose qu'il est trop difficile pour vous.

Re:They're french? (0, Flamebait)

strictnein (318940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456308)

Perhaps someone can explain to me the slight or not-so-slight bias against the French in the US I keep hearing about

France is in a power play right now and are using the UN/EU/NATO to achieve its goals. It wants to try and regain some of the its past power. The results of this have been to use their power in those orginizations to rebut much of what the US has been trying to do.

But even before that France and America haven't always gotten along. To them we're crazy gun-toting uncultured right wing Christian criminals (even though our gun related crime has been decreasing [usdoj.gov] and theirs has been increasing greatly due to a huge, uncontrollable black market for guns in Europe, flooding in from Eastern Europre). To Americans the French are snobby, elitist, socialist, and godless people who are morally bankrupt.

If 'The patriot' is any accurate indication of US history

No movies coming out of America should be assumed to be anywhere near truthful or accurate. Even our "documentaries" are fictional [imdb.com] .

Re:They're french? (0)

_Neurotic (39687) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456456)

Most recent example [newsmax.com]

Re:They're french? (4, Interesting)

Tarantolato (760537) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456487)

Perhaps someone can explain to me the slight or not-so-slight bias against the French in the US I keep hearing about

1. Your language is different[1].
2. Your popular press is as prejudiced against us as ours is against you[2].
3. French foreign policy has a long history of getting in the way of American - I don't just mean the recent stuff either; it goes back at least as far as de Gaulle refusing to endorse the Normandy invasion.
4. American tourists who come back feeling that the French have been rude to them[3].
5. Slightly different economic models, and the feeling on each side that the other's is insane.
6. Historical attraction of American women to foreign men.
7. Blue-assed baboon syndrome: it's easy to hate the losing side in any important struggle.
8. Inheritance from British anti-Americanism.
9. Instinctive dislike of anything that reeks of "high culture".

[1] Easier to dislike people you don't understand.
[2] e.g. frequent use of "cowboy" as an insult. or adulation of Michael Moore coupled with the lack of similarly hyper-harsh criticism of Chirac.
[3] Usually they only go to Paris. Which is a bit like going to New York and then forming judgements about Iowa, New Hampshire and Mississippi based on that.

Re:They're french? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456748)

> Historical attraction of American women to foreign men.

America, the only place in the world where my gut doesn't stand in the way of getting pussy (for free). Thank you BritSpeak!

ps: I love Linux.

They're French?! (1, Funny)

code_monkey_steve (651206) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456380)

Does that mean we need to rename Mandrake to "Freedom Linux"?

Re:They're French?! (2, Informative)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458279)

Does that mean we need to rename Mandrake to "Freedom Linux"?

Sounds like a good name to me, especially since they lost the court fight to use the name "Mandrake". Seriously. Apparently the syndicate that has the rights to "Mandrake the Magician" took exception, and the French courts agreed. And yes, I use Mandrake . . . or whatever it's going to be called.

Re:They're french? (1)

KnacTheMife (779539) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456537)

I'm sure there's a joke in there about competition between Mandrake and SuSE but I haven't found it yet...

I ordred the box set.... (3, Interesting)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456073)

Over two weeks ago and still haven't received it. So ask me to support them, but now two weekends (the time I have to play with linux) are gone for good while I could have ordred cheapbytes CDs and had them last week.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456284)

seems like a personal problem...

This happens all the time and not just with Software companies.

I took the easy route - I downloaded the community edition. Nice to see the article. I think I'll wait an hour or two to ignore the /. effect.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458379)

I took the easy route - I downloaded the community edition.

Why would you do that? The official edition is available on the FTP servers and by bittorrent. You do not want to deal with the bugs in 10.0 Community, if the first ISO will even boot. Go download 10.0 Official. The rest of us took the hits for you - take advantage of it.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (2, Informative)

grqb (410789) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456405)

I ordered the powerpack cds and it took about 2.5 weeks to deliver to Canada. I'm not sure why it takes so long to hand over a small box of 6 cds to UPS. It only took UPS 3 days to deliver.

Maybe this is a sign that Linux really is on the rise? Orders that are overloading Mandrake? ...I doubt it...It also takes forever for Mandrake to reply to emails too.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458110)

No, I just think it's incompetence, because the box was sitting on my porch when I arrived home, and I opened it to discover one of the discs missing.

For anyone considering Mandrake, download it or get it from cheapbytes. If you want to support them, then go ahead and order it, but if you actually want it in a timely manner, you'll have to do it yourself.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456407)


George Bush never claimed there was a link between 9/11 and Iraq.

No, he just used them in the same sentence over and over again. Facts are a bitch for you neo-cons, eh? Don't you get tired of being wrong?

Re:I ordred the box set.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456686)

George Bush never claimed there was a link between 9/11 and Iraq.

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and Al Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda" -- President Bush, as reported by the NY Times today, here [nytimes.com] .

Re:I ordred the box set.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456719)

Of course, you're going to say that Al Qaeda doesn't necessarily mean 9/11, but it's obvious that that is the conclusion drawn by the public. If Bush and co. hadn't kept trying to try Al Qaeda and Iraq together, the majority of the public wouldn't have been misled like that...

Re:I ordred the box set.... (0, Offtopic)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 10 years ago | (#9457071)

Actually, Bush has said on a number of occasions, quite clearly, before we invaded Iraq, that there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11.

Not only wasn't it a justification, he specifically stated there was no evidence of a connection. I'm just annoyed at the media today, I simply can't believe the bias. When there's so much to complain about, they still have to make things up just to bash Bush.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9457558)

Apparently he has changed his mind according to CNN [cnn.com]

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458037)

Damn ass loser anonymous coward, it serves me right for responding to AC's against my personal policy. The article you linked to clearly says EXACTLY what I said. BUSH NEVER CLAIMED A LINK BETWEEN IRAQ AND 9/11.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (2, Interesting)

clontzman (325677) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458713)

What about this?

[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

--President Bush, in a letter to Congress outlining the legal justification for commencing war against Iraq, March 18, 2003

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#9459116)

[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.


include ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-kld)
tr.v. included, including, includes

1) To take in as a part, element, or member.
2) To contain as a secondary or subordinate element.
3) To consider with or place into a group, class, or total: thanked the host for including us.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

sp0rk173 (609022) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458299)

What? Media is biased? Cable TV has commercials? The President is funded by terrorist corporations? I have a dog? Your mom? What?!?!

Re:I ordred the box set.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9458032)

Did they charge you, like others, 100 times the actual box amount, then feign ignorance over the place they claim does their transaction procesing? What a crock of shit.

Re:I ordred the box set.... (1)

violajack (749427) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458159)

Wow, when I ordered my 9.2 DVD (no box, just the DVD from the Mandrake website) it came 2 day air. The FedEx guy came to place 3 times in one day to make sure it got there on the second day. Either it's harder to ship the box, or things with shipping have gone downhill since 9.2 came out. I also never expected something so cool from FedEx, but I have to give the guy credit, he came by 3 times in the same day. Maybe I just got lucky. I'm sorry waiting for the box is tainting your experience. Mandrake 9.2 was the first linux I actually bought, and I'm glad it was such a good experience. It makes me highly likely to continue supporting Mandrake in the future.

Success may be coming for them (2, Informative)

tarp (95957) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456107)

Kudos to Mandrakesoft for getting out of their bankruptcy situation. They certainly have the possibility of becoming a leader in Linux distributions, since Red Hat has dropped the ball to focus on enterprise linux. Does anyone remember the days when Mandrake was little more than a relabelled RedHat with some slight modifications? I would never have guessed they'd still be around.

Ya listening, Apple? (2, Interesting)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456116)

GD: Adopt a business model that is in harmony with Open Source Software; do not try to do proprietary with Open Source Software. And if you don't believe in OSS, don't do OSS!

There, you've been told by a frenchman!

I thought the principle of Open Source was anyone can use it however the hell they please.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456163)

No, "stratjakt", that would be Public Domain. The principle of Open Source is more Wicca than Crowley.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456256)

The principle of Open Source is more Wicca than Crowley

That's it, I'm boycotting open source forever!

Bahlasti! Ompehda! I fucking hate Wiccans.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456984)

The principle of Open Source is more Wicca than Crowley.

Oh wait, I get it. You mean:

Wicca:An ye harm none, do as ye will.
Crowley:Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

That's a shitty analogy.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456385)

Which Open Source? Anyway, it's all in the license. BSD, you can take, modify and keep. GPL, you can take, modify, and keep only if you don't release it to anyone. You must give back your contributions if you release them. So, Apple is sticking to the license terms of the BSD software they use, and more. Their contributions back are strictly from their good will.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (1)

KJE (640748) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456410)

Um, you conviniently left out the question that he was answering:

What advice would you offer to someone who is contemplating starting a GPL-based business?

Is Apple's a GPL-based business? Nope. Hell, the biggest OSS part of Apple's business would be their use of BSD in Darwin, which, isn't exactly under the GPL now is it? And gimme a break with the frenchman line, jeez.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (1)

Turmio (29215) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456836)

I thought the principle of Open Source was anyone can use it however the hell they please.
I guess you could (over)simplify that this is the spirit of Open Source. However, this certainly is not the spirit of Free Software where free software must remain free.

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9457747)

actually, it is. You can use GPL software any way you want. You can just not redistribute it without meeting some requirements....

Re:Ya listening, Apple? (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458613)

I thought the principle of Open Source was anyone can use it however the hell they please.

Then you haven't read the GPL. That is why Mandrake has several versions. Some contain non-OSS material, while the download version is strictly OSS. They follow the rules. What's your point - or gripe?

I can't help but wonder (2, Interesting)

bool morpheus() (689231) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456224)

With as much success as a company like Mandrake is having, can't companies like Microsoft see that the days of charging $400 for you OS are gone?

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

bool morpheus() (689231) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456259)

Of course, by success I mean pulling themselves out of bankruptcy and whatnot.

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456301)

And by pulling themselves out of bankruptcy you mean by begging for donations from their "fanbase", or zealots, or followers, disciples, etc..

Yeah, I'm sure the whine and beg business model will be all the rage on Wall St this time next year, those Europeans are always ahead on the fashions!

Re:I can't help but wonder (3, Interesting)

bool morpheus() (689231) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456341)

I'd say that for the amount of financial trouble they were in, the "whine and beg" was kept pretty quiet. It wasn't like something came up every 30 minutes saying, "Give us money!".

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

KnacTheMife (779539) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456585)

1) it seems to have worked somewhat... 2) At least the power visibly rests with the consumers, unlike other business models where consumers are treated like junkies

Re:I can't help but wonder (3, Interesting)

calethix (537786) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456867)

Normally I find the majority of your posts to be pretty entertaining but I don't think I would put Mandrake in the 'begging' category.
So they have a bunch of stuff on the download page asking you to donate, big deal. It's not like every so often, you run a program and it reminds you to donate in the same fashion as some shareware.

Personally, I would much sooner make a donation to Mandrake based on how they treat their customers than buy Microsoft software. I'm lucky enough to get the professional versions of Windows and Office through my school if I wish. On the rare ocassion that I was working on a relative's PC with the home edition of something, I found product activation to be quite annoying.

Besides, getting out of bankruptcty wasn't just about getting more donations. They had to take a look at their business and cut out what was wasteful to survive. That by itself should be a lesson to other companies which think the only way out of a problem is to gouge their customers a little more instead of looking for internal problems.

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458839)

And by pulling themselves out of bankruptcy you mean by begging for donations from their "fanbase", or zealots, or followers, disciples, etc..

What pushed your hot button on this topic? You can make yourself feel superior by calling Linux users zealots and disciples if you want, but it won't change the tide. The fact is that Mandrake offered privileges to those users willing to pay for them. We get first access to downloads and discounts on the commercial (yes, commercial) packages as well as other perks you could see by visiting the Mandrakeclub site (but you won't).

Even if Mandrake didn't offer the perks, I'd still support them with donations because I like the easily-installed distro, and, annualized, it's far less than I'd have to pay M$ for their inferior product. It is in my best interests to keep Mandrake in business because they have a product I want. Seems like a pretty normal business model to me. No doubt you think all those MS "disciples" who paid through the nose for Licensing 6.0 and received no upgrades got a good deal.

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456524)

I couldn't agree more. The largest, most profitable, arguably most successful company in history should definitely follow the shining example set by a bankrupt startup.

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

Mad_Rain (674268) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458515)

...I like the underlying sarcasm there, but how many times did Microsoft have a brush with bankruptcy in their beginnings? They did have to compete with IBM at one point...

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

110010001000 (697113) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458662)

Never. Microsoft was very successful from their beginnings. They did compete with IBM, but it was their licensing deal with IBM that made the company take off.

Re:I can't help but wonder (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458881)

I couldn't agree more. The largest, most profitable, arguably most successful company in history should definitely follow the shining example set by a bankrupt startup.

That would be better than having Mandrake follow the example of the morally bankrupt "arguably most successful company in history". Some things are more important than money, but I don't expect you to believe that.

Debian all the way (1)

damballah (691477) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456233)

If you hang out on the Cooker mailing list, you'll see that these guys favor the Debian way of doing things. You can see that with their new release model

Bankrupcy stories (1)

dotz (683519) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456260)

Mandrake's luckily not dead, but it's always worth to read a story, how other people didn't manage or had trouble leading business - so we can learn from their faults. You can IMO learn more from them, than from reading success stories. For example, check this one [gamespot.com] !

OSDN Notice? (0, Offtopic)

ProudClod (752352) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456286)

This is the first time I've seen a link to Newsforge without the "Slashdot and Newsforge both part of OSDN" disclaimer.

Is this an unintentional omission?

mandrake WW2 version (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456288)

It is known that the upcomming new version of mandrake called WW2 has a surrender option that retreats the installation of mandrake from the hard drive if Germany's Suse modules are installed or intentions of downloading detected.

hahahaha (1)

Luke727 (547923) | more than 10 years ago | (#9457557)

This is the funniest thing I've read all day. Mod parent up!

Speaking of which, did you know today (or was it yesterday?) was the 64th anniversary of France surrending to Germany?

This just in (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456419)

Mandrakelinux has decided to change their name to White Flag Linux.

Mandrake makes Linux look gay (1)

pdpTrojan (454023) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456428)

The purple colors and stars everywhere really give Mandrake Linux the feeling of being branded as the "Linux for Faggots". Does anybody else feel this way?

Xfree Discussed? (1)

xthor (625227) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456479)

Among the issues discussed are... Xfree 4.4's new non-GPL license...

I guess this is a discussion?
FB: Yes. We disagree with the new license with regards to the GPL.

More of a "mention." (1)

OmniGeek (72743) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456762)

I guess the news that Mandrake is planning to join the massive shift to X.org with the next Cooker version is more recent than this interview. Guess there's not much of an issue there any more.

This story's a month old! (2)

Dano (2872) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456499)

This story is a MONTH old! Stop posting crusty news!

FB (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9456631)

I used to work for a company ran by FB...didnot do so well. Spent way more money then they had a chanc e of earning. Hes a good guy...but hes started up 4 internet companies, only 1 of which was sucessful AFAIK. He was fond of outsourcing to India before it was popular too

Club membership... (2, Insightful)

linuxlover (40375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9456998)

I have been a Mandrake Club member for last 2 years. My membership expires in a few days and I am re-thinking my committment.

One thing I was dissappointed was the 'rpm voting of members'. When KDE 3.2 was released, there were no MDK packages any where in MDK website (or I couldn't find with thier search). Not even in club area. In the voting area, there were numerous requests for KDe3.2-mdk.rpms for MDK 9.2. But weeks went by without no response from MDK team. Finally I was so sick of waiting and installed through 'konstruct' (what a nice piece of software!).

So now that MDK is making some money and they are not as 'needy' as they were couple of years back, I'll probably skip renewing my membership.

Are there any other 'tangible' benefits for club members that I am not aware of?

Re:Club membership... (1)

Stevyn (691306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458380)

http://richardlinux.net/

I just discovered this one tonight. He already has the KDE 3.2.2 rpms. The 3.2.3 are comming soon apparently. It would be nice if mandrake was faster and actually released these, but I'm a poor college student and I didn't pay so I can't complain. Mandrake 10 is the easiest distro I've ever used. I'd recommend it to anyone trying linux out for the first time. I'll eventually grow up a little and switch to gentoo because of the portage system, but it's great to get your feet wet with.

Re:Club membership... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9458767)

And what the hell does the portage system give you?

Seriously. Source optimizations do not led to tangible real and noticeable efficiencies.

I am tired of Gentoo folks jumping on every thread.

And then there is the Apple line "What every Linux distribution should be". Says who? I don't want proprietary software on top of propietary hardware. When OS X runs on a few architectures and is free software, call me. Apple's prettyness will not last forever. Give us a two years and report...

Re:Club membership... (2, Informative)

Stevyn (691306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458820)

Fair question. Before I used it I got annoyed by gentoo zealots puffing it like it was the next savior.

So I'll make it easy and explain it. Typing "emerge " downloads the (usually) most current version, all of it's dependencies, and installs it. I've gone crazy playing cat and mouse with compiling packages from scratch to satisfy the dependencies.

I use mandrake and their packages become out of date quickly and it's gets aggrivating. True, gentoo by default compiles everything. You can get binary packages for the big ones so you won't be compiling kde for a few days. The smaller packages don't take that long so it's not a big deal. As for the speed increase, I don't know if it's noticable.

I hope that explains it clearly. I don't like gentoo just because a bunch of nerds on slashdot worship it. I've used it and many other distros and I've come to that conclusion on my own.

tqac0 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9457771)

BSD aadicts, Flame downward spiral. In Around are in need declined in market

Tone of interview (2, Insightful)

Laxitive (10360) | more than 10 years ago | (#9458220)

This interview was actually very refreshing, a large part due to the way in which the questions were answered:

The bankruptcy issue loomed over MandrakeSoft for a long time. What led to the bankruptcy filing?
FB: At the time, we had to seek protection for a simple reason: There was no more cash in bank, and our revenues were still lower than our expenses. It was a matter of a few months, but it was needed.

Short answer: "we were broke". No doubletalk, no spin.

MandrakeSoft made posting asking the community to help them with their financial woes. Some have said that MandrakeSoft essentially begged for money. Any truth to that?
FB: Yes, the community of Mandrakelinux users helped us, but they get something in return: We're still here, we improved much, and we keep on providing products that fit their needs.

Translation: yeah, we begged, but we had to, and it paid off in the end. Now we're stronger for it.

What about the problems with NTFS in the Community Edition?
FB: This was something that never should have made it into the CE. This should have been caught in our developmental process. We have some definite improving to do.

I'm not pulling these quotes out to make fun of Mandrake or anything. The thing is, it's easy for companies and representatives to talk straight when they're speaking about their successes. What's hard is to acknowledge failures, and acknowledge them directly. The fact that the responders didn't try to beat around the bush, and actually answered the questions posed is extremely promising. I'm not a Mandrake user, but the fact that these guys seem to talk straight makes me trust them quite a bit more than other companies.

If I ever have to choose a distribution to recommend to someone who is not too familiar with Linux, I think I have a pretty good idea of who I'll go with now.

-Laxitive

Disagree (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9458801)

I don't think we should use Mandrake anymore. This is a French product and they didn't support us in the war against the Communists in Iraq.

I think we should pass a law to make use of Mandrake illegal. Then we can petition Chaney to petition Halliburton to buy up Mandrake and we can call it 'FreedomSoft' and even RMS will like that.

But until then, I think we should boycott the French. They are not our friends. And I think we should be consistent here.

1. The Statue of Liberty is a gift from the French. Give it back.

2. Make sure all KFCs, McDonalds, everyone starts calling those potatoes 'American Fries' or just 'Fries'. After all the French didn't invent the hamburger, no matter what they think.

3. Sticking your tongue down your partner's throat is hereafter referred to as 'tongue kissing' and nothing else.

4. French postcards are replaced by 'foreign postcards' or 'exotic postcards'.

5. The language itself is hereafter referred to only as 'Gallic' as this period in the country's history is likely earlier than Mitterand, Chirac, and deGaulle.

We can win, my friends, we can win, but we must all stick together. And God Bless Mississippi.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?