Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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

Thank you!

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

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

Red Hat Listed Among 50 Top Tech Companies

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the fashionable-headware-is-critical-at-parties dept.

Red Hat Software 169

Kelvin Ekston writes " Red Hat is listed among ZDNet Asia's 50 Top Tech companies 2006. It is also one of the fastest growing companies with 210.4% year on year income growth over 4 years. While almost all Linux companies grapple with the perennial question of how they can make money through software subscriptions and services rather than selling packaged boxes, Red Hat finally managed to improve credibly and match the hype with substance and show the way to do business with Linux. That's the way to go!"

cancel ×

169 comments

What a suprise..... (5, Informative)

wpiman (739077) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036592)

The ad sponsors for the link are IBM, EMC and Redhat. Can you guess which three companies are on the list?

Re:What a suprise..... (5, Interesting)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036606)

Beat me to the punch.
Its the same as when people complain that surveys done that show Windows is better than Linux is funded by Microsoft. This should be taken with a large grain (hell, a pinch) of salt.

And I was going to say ... (3, Insightful)

DikSeaCup (767041) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036705)

It seems to me that, as far as Linux distros are concerned, Redhat tends to be the whipping boy of the Linux enthusiasts on Slashdot.

Some days it seems like some folks put them just a step above Microsoft.

Re:And I was going to say ... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036773)


It seems to me that, as far as Linux distros are concerned, Redhat tends to be the whipping boy of the Linux enthusiasts on Slashdot.

Some days it seems like some folks put them just a step above Microsoft.


A lot of people on Slashdot are very anti-corporatist by nature. They'll be suspicious of any company that seems to be making a buck, even if they're selling Linux. To these people the only good Linux distro is a not-for-profit one that's run by a band of diehard enthusiast hackers.

Re:And I was going to say ... (5, Insightful)

talksinmaths (199235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036996)

Redhat tends to be the whipping boy of the Linux enthusiasts on Slashdot

I agree, but one must keep in mind that this says far more about the character and maturity of Linux enthusiasts on Slashdot than it does about the RedHat distro.

Re:What a suprise..... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036707)

But it was not funded by a lot of those companies.

I for one am going to work for Tata Consultancy Services. You cannot go wrong when your services are consulted by Tata's. When you go through one of their consultations, you too will like their services. Maybe one of their services is to help the porn industry decide whether to use HD-DVD or Blu-Ray!

Re:What a suprise..... (5, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036889)

Microsft is on the list too.

Besides, RedHat's 36% annual revenue growth for 4 years is impressive. Sure it's easier for smaller company to score big growth numbers, but $200M in revenue and 36% annual growth seems like a pretty nice place to be.

The nice thing is RedHat's success actually means something to Linux users, even if they're not RedHat customers, because RedHat is quite active in developing OSS.

Any non-independent study (0)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036923)

...requires vast quantities of sodium flouride. That is the primary market for salt mines, now that people are wary of it in food.

Re:Any non-independent study (2, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036943)

That should be sodium chloride. Though if you want to use sodium fluoride on bullshit (or indeed food), I won't stop you. I'll just not eat in the same restraunts.

Re:What a suprise..... (1)

errxn (108621) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036978)

It's not quite the same. Had it been Microsoft, the story would have been loudly trumpeting the fact that MS was an advertiser, and there would have been 250+ posts by now decrying them as Evil.

Ah, yes, the good old /. double standard. Gotta love it...

Ad man doing his job (1)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036696)

Ad man on phone:- Hey IBM/Redhat/EMC, you're featured as a top player. How's about a bit of sponsorship?
IBM/Redhat/EMC Publicity guy:- Hmm, a survey that makes us look good - yes, we'll put out names along side that.

Cause and effect are not always straightforward.

Re:What a suprise..... (2, Funny)

jamesgomez (808411) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036724)

The ad sponsors for the link are IBM, EMC and Redhat.

Ads? You need http://adblock.mozdev.org/ [mozdev.org] my friend.

What about SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14037054)

According to them, owed billions by IBM,

Owed money by Red Hat,

"We are using objective third parties to do comparisons of our UNIX System V source code and Red Hat as an example. We are coming across many instances where our proprietary software has simply been copied and pasted or changed in order to hide the origin of our System V code in Red Hat. This is the kind of thing that we will need to address with many Linux distribution companies at some point."
www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-10_Story02. html

And owner of UNIX... ...the best bits of Linux, AIX and IRIX

"Specifically, Sontag believes the "SCO technologies" which were misappropriated into AIX, IRIX, and the derivative UNIX-alikes (including Linux) are JFS (Journalling File System). NUMA (Non Uniform Memory Access), a SGI/Stanford collaboration. RCU (Read-Copy-Update). SMP (Symmetrical Multi-Processing). "
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=7801/byt1055784622 054/0616_marshall.html [byte.com] ...and in fact all modern operating systems

"So you want royalties from FreeBSD as well?" I asked. Sontag responded that "there may or may not be issues. We believe that UNIX System V provided the basic building blocks for all subsequent computer operating systems, and that they all tend to be derived from UNIX System V (and therefore are claimed as SCO's intellectual property)."
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=7801/byt1055784622 054/0616_marshall.html [byte.com] ...shouldn't they be on the list!

And to see the fruits of their labor... (5, Informative)

TheLevelHeadedOne (700023) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036596)

check out http://www.centos.org/ [centos.org]

The updates aren't that impressive (1)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036985)

But I've found Scientific Linux [scientificlinux.org] (another RHEL rebuild) to be better than Centos, overall. The problem with RHEL-derived distributions is that next to none of the RPM repositories will work with them, because many of the packages are archaic.

Re:The updates aren't that impressive (3, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037055)

really? what you point to is still on RHEL 4.1 while centos is already at 4.2 and I have never had a problem like you described.

Maybe back in the 3.x series they were lagging, but they have a crapload of people working on it now as well as their own yum update repository instead of pointing at redhat's.

No surprise (5, Insightful)

AceyMan (199978) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036610)

Redhat, everyone should agree, is one of the biggest players in a space we all know is growing nicely, and already has a pretty solid presence in the business space.

Cracking the top 50 isn't surprising, or terribly newsworthy.

That said, it's more proof that Linux® is on the radar screen, which is nice.

Re:No surprise (5, Interesting)

DogDude (805747) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036662)

and already has a pretty solid presence in the business space.

Yeah. 2 years of profits. [yahoo.com] That's solid.

That might be considered "solid" in the Open Source industry, but as a business in general, they're still considered a relatively unproven start-up. I want to see at least a solid 5-10 years of profitability before I'd consider investing a dime, personally.

Perhaps a dime or three wouldn't hurt. (4, Interesting)

Vengeance (46019) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036894)

I personally put some money into RedHat last summer. Not enough to bankrupt me or to get rich, you understand, but I'm currently sitting on about 41% equity growth.

Re:Perhaps a dime or three wouldn't hurt. (1)

xziz (643887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037239)

I did the same and am sitting at a 290.15% gain on my investment.

Re:No surprise (5, Informative)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036897)

I want to see at least a solid 5-10 years of profitability before I'd consider investing a dime, personally.

Redhat merged with Cygnus, didn't they? Cygnus have been profitable using an open-source business model since the late 80s/early 90s. And Redhat as a whole have been doing business for 12 years too - although they haven't always been in the black, they have still managed to pay the bills, pay wages, and put out products that people buy for well over a decade. Redhat aren't as unproven as you make out.

Re:No surprise (3, Interesting)

Glock27 (446276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036901)

I want to see at least a solid 5-10 years of profitability before I'd consider investing a dime, personally.

At which point you'll be investing in a mature, proven company...with a lot less growth potential, and hence much lower stock appreciation prospects.

The way to make big money in the stock market is to find small, great companies and ride their coattails to wealth. More risk, but far greater rewards.

Re:No surprise (3, Insightful)

31415926535897 (702314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036946)

I want to see at least a solid 5-10 years of profitability before I'd consider investing a dime, personally.

It all depends on your investment goals, naturally, but doing this as you say is a great way to see your money stagnate. You need to find a company that has a great idea that is undervalued in your opinion. For instance, Microsoft has had many, many years of profitability, but their stock has done nothing interesting in the last year+. I would bet there are a lot of geeks on this board who feel that RedHat is undervalued because the business market doesn't yet understand the power of Linux (especially as a server), and RedHat stands to profit a lot from any growth in that segment. If you were to buy RedHat now, and they became that solid, proven profit-making machine you're looking for in the next 5-10 years, you'll easily double your money. The only way to make money is if you take some risk.

Again, I want to stress that all of this is based on personal opinion (as you said at the end of your post, 'personally'), and I have no idea if RedHat's stock is going to go up or down. To everybody that reads this--do not make any investment or trading decisions based on this post; if you do you're foolish. This is not an offer to buy or sell any security, and you should obviously talk to any investment professional before you make any trading decisions (yada, yada).

Re:No surprise (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037115)

And your returns will be lower. Your threshold of risk is lower than others and that's fine, but the risktakers are the ones who will reap the big rewards (and the cripling defeats)

Redhat's not just an unproven start-up. It's an unproven start-up with a developing track record and posting real profits. Which is a huge improvement over the scam^h^h^h^hcompanies of the dot-com bubble.

Re:No surprise (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037188)

I want to see at least a solid 5-10 years of profitability before I'd consider investing a dime, personally.

Except that a tech company with 10 years of profitability could just as easily be on their way out. There are no guarantees either way, but some people might rather invest in an up-and-commer then a tech company gone stale.

I'm gonna... (-1, Troll)

S. Ballmer (931150) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036612)

fuckin^H^H^H^H^H^H kill Redhat! Oh, and fp... :)

lolz you are teh failure (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036965)

suicide is your only option.

Re:I'm gonna... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036981)

Ballmer would never have the ^H problem. He uses a real, innovative operating system that knows how to handle the backspace key. And no, I don't want fries with that.

Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036615)

I use Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux and think they are the best Linux distributions but come on! The bottom says that Red Hat was a "Silver Sponsor." Of course they are going to be listed in the Top 50.

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (-1, Flamebait)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036644)

I use Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux and think they are the best Linux distributions but come on! These are code words for "don't mod me down as flamebait."

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (1, Interesting)

Rei (128717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036667)

Agreed. I find it amusing that I've found even things like working with apt easier on Fedora than I did on my Debian box (before I converted it over), given that I first learned apt through Debian like many here. Perhaps it's because there are so many well-maintained RPM repositories like Dag, Dries, et al out there.

My whole office at work uses RHEL - works well, although it doesn't have as wide of RPM support as Fedora, and software stays further behind.

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036926)

What I don't get is why they made yum the "preferred" way. Yum is so much slower and more cumbersome than apt.

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (0, Flamebait)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036818)

I use Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux and think they are the best Linux distributions



BAH!!! REDCRAP is the WORST piece of shit I've ever used. We just bought a bunch of RHEL 4 AS licenses, and it has been a freaking nightmare. Support sucks, and takes its own sweet time if it's not something easily found. And they'll ask you to test things out for things that they've confirmed to be issues - WTF? If you FSCKING know it's an issue, you can FSCKING TEST IT OUT YOURSELF, damned lazy bastards.


I also like the way they push things off to others. Oh, disk druid is broken? Use fdisk. Umm, excuse me, but where's fdisk when I'm trying to install? And why aren't you putting in a ticket to engineering to get it fixed?


And I especially love the way everything is bundled together. So, now, my choice is waste 1G of disk space on win2k, or waste 1G of disk space on REDCRAP, when all I'm trying to do is run a freaking web server?!


Oh, oh, lets not even mention the fact that RHEL4 can't even run, out of the box, on platforms that they advertize for!!!! Yeah, go perform a default install of RHEL4 on a dual core opteron, reboot, and watch it hang. Why the fsck do you put in the smp kernel, if it doesn't fucking work?


And of course, the support and registration sites going up and down, and taking more than 24 hours to get my damned registration in.


And lets not talk about how much fun it was doing an up2date to go from RHEL 4 to RHEL 4 U1 and U2. Freaking dependency failures, and killing the box so bad that it can't reboot, and needing a re-install.


And did you know that even though you paid thousands of dollars for that nice RHEL 4 dvd, you can't get an actual working RHEL 4 U2 dvd. They want you to download CD isos. You see, this is because:

  1. it takes too much bandwidth to download a DVD
  2. it the download gets interrupted, you have to re-download the whole thing again
  3. Redhat can't afford to buy some extra drives

I'm not shitting you, those were the exact answers given to me. Of course, the fact that:
  1. downloading 5 CD isos saves you a shitload of bandwidth over one DVD
  2. ftp and http both support resumption of downloads, so if REDCRAP's servers can't support this, this is a REDCRAP issue, isn't it?
  3. "we're an enterprise company, hear us ROAR" but... umm... just don't expect us to be able to afford to buy a couple of extra hard drives...

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14037080)

You're so obviously retarded, I need to work through this one point at a time.

> BAH!!! REDCRAP is the WORST piece of shit I've ever used. We just bought a bunch of
> RHEL 4 AS licenses, and it has been a freaking nightmare. Support sucks, and takes
> it own sweet time if it's not something easily found. And they'll ask you to test things
> out for things that they've confirmed to be issues - WTF? If you FSCKING know it's an
> issue, you can FSCKING TEST IT OUT YOURSELF, damned lazy bastards.

Lazy? Have you any idea how long it could take to *accurately* reproduce a problematic
environment for this kind of work? It may not even be possible. By asking you to help out,
they are helping *YOU* out - FOSS is all about co-operation btw.

> I also like the way they push things off to others. Oh, disk druid is broken? Use fdisk.
> Umm, excuse me, but where's fdisk when I'm trying to install? And why aren't you putting
> in a ticket to engineering to get it fixed?

It's on virtual console 2 (Alt-F2, or Ctrl-Alt-F2 if you're using graphical). Learn to use
the tools in your hands before criticising the help offered by others. Or find out what a
kickstart %pre script is good for.

> And I especially love the way everything is bundled together. So, now, my choice is waste
> 1G of disk space on win2k, or waste 1G of disk space on REDCRAP, when all I'm trying to
> do is run a freaking web server?!

You installed your webserver with a pre-defined package profile? What are you? Fscking crazy?

Learn to do a kickstart like everyone else and have *only* the packages you select.
Oh, wait, you probably don't even know what packages you want or need.

*sharpens the clue-by-four*

> Oh, oh, lets not even mention the fact that RHEL4 can't even run, out of the box, on
> platforms that they advertize for!!!! Yeah, go perform a default install of RHEL4 on a
> dual core opteron, reboot, and watch it hang. Why the fsck do you put in the smp kernel,
> if it doesn't fucking work?

You mean the dual core opterons that weren't even available as engineering samples at the
time RHEL4 was being cut? Ahh, of course, Red Hat should have just used their magic crystal
ball. In the mean time, install update 2 like the rest of the sane world.

Oh, and RHEL doesn't even come in a box. It's a *subscription*. But you knew that right?

> And of course, the support and registration sites going up and down, and taking more than
> 24 hours to get my damned registration in.

Works for me. Perhaps you need to use a working web browser? Or maybe the fault is between
chair and keyboard?

> And lets not talk about how much fun it was doing an up2date to go from RHEL 4 to RHEL 4
> U1 and U2. Freaking dependency failures, and killing the box so bad that it can't reboot,
> and needing a re-install.

OK, now I just don't believe you. Oh, wait, you didn't kill an up2date/RPM process did you?
Or reboot? Bwaahahahahahaaaha HALOF!

> 2. ftp and http both support resumption of downloads, so if REDCRAP's servers can't
> support this, this is a REDCRAP issue, isn't it?

RHN downloads use wget or curl by preference. Please consult the manual pages.

Also, please investigate the carriage return key on your keyboard - it's very useful.

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (0, Flamebait)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037442)

You obviously do not have experience with REDCRAP, but is just a dumb pawn for the fedora crap. If I pay for something, I expect it to work as advertized, even though this is software we are talking about.

>> BAH!!! REDCRAP is the WORST piece of shit I've ever used. We just bought a bunch of
>> RHEL 4 AS licenses, and it has been a freaking nightmare. Support sucks, and takes
>> it own sweet time if it's not something easily found. And they'll ask you to test things
>> out for things that they've confirmed to be issues - WTF? If you FSCKING know it's an
>> issue, you can FSCKING TEST IT OUT YOURSELF, damned lazy bastards.

>Lazy? Have you any idea how long it could take to >*accurately* reproduce a problematic
>environment for this kind of work? It may not even >be possible. By asking you to help out,
>they are helping *YOU* out - FOSS is all about >co-operation btw.

This is NOT about FOSS. This is about REDCRAP's support, which is allegedly what I get, when I pay them shitloads of money for free crap. Further more, if you have had some reading comprehension, you will note that I stated that support had already cnfirmed the bug as something that exists - if it's a known issue, and they want to know more about how it behaves, then they should fscking test it out, and then only go bother the customers.

>> I also like the way they push things off to others. Oh, disk druid is broken? Use fdisk.
>> Umm, excuse me, but where's fdisk when I'm trying to install? And why aren't you putting
>> in a ticket to engineering to get it fixed?

>It's on virtual console 2 (Alt-F2, or Ctrl-Alt-F2 if >you're using graphical). Learn to use
>the tools in your hands before criticising the help >offered by others. Or find out what a
>kickstart %pre script is good for.

Hmm, valid point, I didn't check to see if fdisk actually exist. But neither did support mention this - and the question has been posed to them for more than 2 days now.

>> And I especially love the way everything is bundled together. So, now, my choice is waste
>> 1G of disk space on win2k, or waste 1G of disk space on REDCRAP, when all I'm trying to
>> do is run a freaking web server?!

>You installed your webserver with a pre-defined >package profile? What are you? Fscking crazy?

You have not had a chance to install REDCRAP lately have you? I'm not talking about the pansy ass fedora crap, I'm talking about RHEL 4. *you* show me an install that's under 800Megs.

>Learn to do a kickstart like everyone else and have *only* the packages you select.
>Oh, wait, you probably don't even know what packages you want or need.

Some people obviously like to hear the sound of their own voices. Tell you what, I'll make it easy on you. Go install RHEL4 under 500 megs, with a working apache server, only using standard RHEL4 rpms.

>*sharpens the clue-by-four*

*and accidentally takes off his own hand*

>> Oh, oh, lets not even mention the fact that RHEL4 can't even run, out of the box, on
>> platforms that they advertize for!!!! Yeah, go perform a default install of RHEL4 on a
>> dual core opteron, reboot, and watch it hang. Why the fsck do you put in the smp kernel,
>> if it doesn't fucking work?

>You mean the dual core opterons that weren't even >available as engineering samples at the
>time RHEL4 was being cut?

Oh, you mean they were not telling me the truth? They sold me a defective product?! They lied about a working smp kernel? OK, even if I grant you that they did not have a working smp kernel - WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU INCLUDE IT ON THE FUCKING CD THEN?!

>Ahh, of course, Red Hat should have just used their magic crystal
>ball.

Well, they wouldn't need to, not with fanboys like you around.

>In the mean time, install update 2 like the rest of the sane world.

Right. So, what was I to do with update 2 wasn't out? This would be back in August when I was fucking with rhel4. Maybe you can bring your magic crystal ball and download those rpms from the future for me?

And you didn't address the fuckups between the updates too. Why didn't they have better QC? I mean, it was obvious that they did not even do a test upgrade from a RHEL4 to whatever the fuck updates they had, because a reboot would have shown them something was wrong (like, kernel not booting?)

>Oh, and RHEL doesn't even come in a box. It's a >*subscription*. But you knew that right?

What a moron. Go to pcmall.com and do a search for rhel, why don't you?

>> And of course, the support and registration sites going up and down, and taking more than
>> 24 hours to get my damned registration in.

>Works for me. Perhaps you need to use a working web >browser? Or maybe the fault is between
>chair and keyboard?

What a moron. The complaint was about their site's availability - specifically, the part where you register your subscription and the support. Obviously you do not use it enough to see issues with it. This either means you're so damned good that you do not need their support (in which case I recommend centos), or you do not have any idea which orifice you are speaking out of.

>> And lets not talk about how much fun it was doing an up2date to go from RHEL 4 to RHEL 4
>> U1 and U2. Freaking dependency failures, and killing the box so bad that it can't reboot,
>> and needing a re-install.

>OK, now I just don't believe you. Oh, wait, you >didn't kill an up2date/RPM process did you?

What a fucking moron. It was a standard minimal install. I registered. I ran up2date-nox -u. This would be in early september. It had 100+ updates. Around #105, it would just fucking hang. I actually left one session sitting there overnight, and it would not complete.

However, when I rebuilt the box again, I ran up2date-nox -u on 25 packages at a time. That went through.

You, with your moronic fanboy badge dare sit there and tell me about issues with the keyboard and chair? Fucking anonymous coward.

>Or reboot? Bwaahahahahahaaaha HALOF!

This is typically done when you have to FUCKING UPGRADE THE KERNEL, you fucking moron.

>> 2. ftp and http both support resumption of downloads, so if REDCRAP's servers can't
>> support this, this is a REDCRAP issue, isn't it?

>RHN downloads use wget or curl by preference. Please >consult the manual pages.

What can you expect from a fucking moron? wget and curl both use the ftp and http protocol. Dumbass moronic anonymous coward.

>Also, please investigate the carriage return key on >your keyboard - it's very useful.

You too. Actually, you should visit the darwinawards website. I believe you're a contender, and may actually win a prize there.

FOAD and I'll HAND.

Although (1)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037132)

I would not be willing to agree that Red Hat are bad - they're no worse than any other distro I've tried, and the range of software is good - but I would be willing to agree that their QA isn't impressive (eg: they don't build their Fedora development RPMs when a dependency has changed, breaking updates), the "install everything" states that it includes stuff not listed (which means if you need those components at the very start, you HAVE to install everything), you cannot install using any filesystem other than EXT3 and the installer is not IPv6-compliant.


There is room for a distribution which uses Fedora as a starting point and builds what you really want/need from that - much the same way Slackware grew out of SLS. Remember, nobody has ever assumed Open Source solutions to be perfect, or we'd still be using the MCC distribution, Shoestring for the boot-loader (hey, it was a damn good boot-loader!) and X10 for the GUI. (I dare someone to find a still-running, still-in-use X10 server.)

Re:Although (0, Flamebait)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037530)

Remember, nobody has ever assumed Open Source solutions to be perfect, or we'd still be using the MCC distribution,


JD, the issue is not about opensource, but about a commercial OS that is sold, that is sorely lacking in QA and support.

Complaints about REDCRAP are not complaints about opensource. I use gentoo and openbsd, both personally, and professionally, and I get exactly the kind of support I put back into it. With REDCRAP, all I got was a couple of months of frothing at mouth type issues, because REDCRAP fscked up yet again. This is simply not acceptable in an enterprise environment.

Re:Red Hat cosponsored the survey... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036852)

Don't you get it? It's only deemed Officially Evil(TM) when Microsoft sponsors the surveys! Now get in line and drink the /. double standard Kool-Aid like everyone else.

Easy task (2, Funny)

DogDude (805747) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036634)

It's a relatively easy feat to increase profits from Zero [yahoo.com] just two years ago.

Re:Easy task (1, Insightful)

SocietyoftheFist (316444) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036658)

Lots of companies never make a profit. Do you know what it takes to run a company? I'm going to guess not by that ignorant statment.

Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036663)

Red Hat may have provided an important service in reviving interest in Unix and making servers less expensive ... back in the 1990s. There seems to be an emerging consensus in Slashdot land that Apple and OS X is the future of Unix and the sole legitmate claimaint to the king of the desktop. Apple has replace Linux as the geek favorite.

Let's face it, Red Hat's amaturish "desktop" offerings and lame marketing can't and won't overthrow Micrsoft.

As the future of Unix, Apple is also making strong claims on the server and super computer markets. Apples success with the Virginia Tech supercomputer is proof that Apple is opening up a lead in the top-end of the market.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036740)

There speaks someone who doesn't use OS X in anger. It's woeful and very buggy for server apps. Wait until it actually works before astroturfing eh?

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036749)

Redhat is completely superior than OSX

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (1)

rovingeyes (575063) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036757)

Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche

You made that claim for Apple based on just one version of their server OS? Based on my experience, 10.3 was a nightmare. 10.4 seems more stable, offers better compatibility with Active Directory, and the command line management even though is available since 10.3, seems more useful now. In 10.3, every time I had to manage anything, I had to go to the server room and in Linux, unless there is a need I never am at the terminal. My take, give it some time and then decide, its too early to draw conclusions.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036791)

Apple has replace Linux as the geek favorite.

Somone please mod this +funny. My trolls don't ever make +interesting so I can mod this nonsense down!

AC

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (4, Insightful)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036830)

You have a lot more faith in Apple's business ability than I do. Apple has always managed to survive but has seemed to be the future of the OS for the last twenty years. Apple has never been willing to allow their vertical integration to be broken (even with the move to Intel chips), and thus is always a niche market. For better or worse I don't see this changing.

Now, I have used Linux as my primary desktop at home for six years. In that time, it has improved more than any other desktop solution in terms of look and feel, but it was adequate from a productivity perspective even in 1999. Both Gnome and KDE have similarly improved.

What holds back Linux on the desktop is simply fear of change and fear of a lack of interoperability with MS products. These issues are being delt with quickly and I expect that within a short time both issues will be mitigated sufficiently to allow larger corporations to move quickly to Linux with only a bit more effort than upgrading Windows. With any luck we will be close to that before Vista really starts to become commonplace.

Replying to myself, but (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036991)

It should be noted that Red Hat != Linux. Red Hat today is overhyped, though I still use their projects (Fedora, etc) for a number of customers. Also though they have come through a very painful transition, I think that people expect more from them than they can deliver (look at their P/E ratio for example). And I am not convinced that *despite desktop offerings* like RHEL Desktop, I don't think that they really understand the market beyond the engineer's desktop. Red Hat has been important largely because they did prove the concept of open source business. But I think that soon they may become a victim of their own success.

I do think that Novell is today better positioned to grow, and they have showed that they are genuinely interested in opening up a large number of their products. If they take their strategy to its logical end, they could easily userp Red Hat's position as *the* open source Linux solutions leader. What would be required for them to do this would be opening up their directory services software, and some other things.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (4, Insightful)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036840)

Let's face it, Red Hat's amaturish "desktop" offerings and lame marketing can't and won't overthrow Micrsoft.

Troll.

Red hat do not compete in the desktop space [zdnet.co.uk] . Nice try.

As the future of Unix, Apple is also making strong claims on the server and super computer markets. Apples success with the Virginia Tech supercomputer is proof that Apple is opening up a lead in the top-end of the market.

Troll

You mean the way Linux "rules" Supercomputers [forbes.com] with an estimated 60% of the top 500?

There seems to be an emerging consensus in Slashdot land that Apple and OS X is the future of Unix and the sole legitmate claimaint to the king of the desktop.

*sighs* Troll... modded up to +3 by apple fanboys - how predictable.

If they don't, they should. (1)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037315)

BeOS "didn't compete" with Microsoft on the desktop or in multimedia, to avoid being squished like a bug. Bad mistake. Microsoft squished them anyway and, by having not competed, BeOS wasn't capable of surviving. Netscape also tried to avoid confrontation, but Microsoft "knifed the baby" (their words) with no remorse. No, the way forward isn't to run backwards. The giant WILL step on you, if you try. The best hope for Linux is for vendors to fight for every square inch of market space and mindspace that they can. Microsoft isn't about to "play nice". It doesn't want anyone - anyone at all - to be in the computer software industry. They want to be all, sell all, do all, and want the playing field utterly deserted of all others, even if there is no conflict at this time.


The only way Linux - or any other OS - is going to survive is to play fair but play hard and never, ever give ground to Microsoft. When boundaries are not recognized and courtesy is not respected, the only hope for enduring is to throw caution to the wind and charge.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (2, Interesting)

e40 (448424) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036990)

As the future of Unix, Apple is also making strong claims on the server and super computer markets.
I call bullshit. We run almost every flavor of UNIX available (AIX, Solaris, FreeBSD, various Linux distros, Tru64, HP-UX, Mac OS X, yada, yada, yada), and I can tell you without a doubt: Mac OS X is the least stable and the most difficult OS to deal with.

Look at something like AMD (the automounter, not the chip) and NFS. Wanna lock up your Mac OS X box? Merely access the automount point (/net for us). The finder and AMD don't mix. WTF? It's been this way from 10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and now 10.4. Yes, 10.4 is better. Waaaaay better than just a couple of revs ago. Mature it is not. In 10 years it might have a chance, though remote, of being as stable as Linux and Solaris are today.

In general, when I have some opensource package I need to compile and install on all the UNIX boxes here, what system will make me spend 90% of the time on it? That's right, Mac OS X. Yes, 10.4 is better, but I could waste whole days trying to get crap to compile on 10.3 and before.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (1)

saintp (595331) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037190)

I absolutely agree. Anyone who thinks that OS X currently belongs in a server room has obviously never tried to use it there. After just a year running OS X for our file server, we switched to Linux. Our shop isn't as diverse as yours, but we run Solaris, Tru64, and lots of different Linuces, and I can agree: OS X is *by far* the least stable.

Re:Apple is the future, though. RHAT remains niche (1)

MrJerryNormandinSir (197432) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037532)

Not only that. MacOS/X does not have a true Xserver.
The power of X11 allows you to run from the server/desktop
and display anywhere. You can't do that with macOS/X.

And.. have you ever managed macOS/X hacked version of LDAP?
Try implementing that for 600 users. OpenLDAP is better and easier to manage on an enterprise scale.

redhat schmedhat (3, Interesting)

Xargle (165143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036694)

Sure they grow their income, but by that's flogging training, support and having an underpaid skeletal staff and not actually doing that much?

Ever *used* RH support in a corporate environment? If your query is beyond RTFM it's a constant battle to get anywhere. Plus their QA is terrible given they're competing on the corporate level - we've had hanging kernels (on pretty stock hardware) and endless dodgy packages we've had to replace.

There's this endless love in on messageboards because they're FOSS promoters and actually comply to the GPL, but when it comes to working with them if you're corporate and you don't have a sizeable contract with them (ie. govt or multinational) their product in terms of service is no where near close to what you'd expect from other vendors in the market.

Re:redhat schmedhat (1)

pdpTrojan (454023) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036882)

Man, you either must really suck at your job or have some shitty fucking hardware.

Re:redhat schmedhat (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036899)

Yeah well....

I think that Red Hat is overhyped today.

If I had to look at companies poised to do well in the near future, I would sook to Novell.

Re:redhat schmedhat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036998)

I know that my company had quite a few Linux boxes, and were originally RH, but RH said "24/7 support? How about 16/5 and next day onsite?" We now have quite a few SuSE boxes.

Re:redhat schmedhat (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037075)

Ever *used* RH support in a corporate environment? If your query is beyond RTFM it's a constant battle to get anywhere. Plus their QA is terrible given they're competing on the corporate level - we've had hanging kernels (on pretty stock hardware) and endless dodgy packages we've had to replace.

and this is different form Microsoft or Sun how??? Right now I am fighting the same fight with Windows 2003 advanced server and SQL2000 enterprise on an 8way server that is giving me fits that just happen to coincide with their latest hotfix for SQL2000 enterprise. Their support is useless as well.

Redhat is simply following the standard held up by ALL computer software and OS companies.

Re:redhat schmedhat (1)

obirt (713598) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037214)

Not to mention that RedHat is more of an investment banking company than a software company. The software is already written, they just butcher it and backport incompatible patches to the kernel and break their ABI every time they update something. It's a miracle that anyone actually gets anything to work that hasn't been specifically written for RedHat. (Mind you that RHEL AS 2.1 binaries don't work on RHEL 3 or RHEL 4 in most cases)

Re:redhat schmedhat (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037576)

Red Hat's support wins awards year over year. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The only other company I've ever seen have as good support as Red Hat, is Veritas.
Regards,
Steve

Is Red Hat Linux? (5, Interesting)

FishandChips (695645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036713)

It's interesting to see that they've managed this with less than 1000 employees. Only two others in the list are comparable in this respect. Plenty of other companies on the list have thousands or tens or thousands of employees.

Red Hat's stock is on an astronomical PE ratio, higher even than Google's. It's pretty instructive comparing the PE ratio to, say, Novell's which is about a tenth as high.

So, I guess it's clear the financial market is very much buying the line that "Red Hat is Linux", perhaps much more than was the case a year or two ago. Nice news if you're Red Hat. Not so nice for anyone else.

Re:Is Red Hat Linux? (2, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036842)

It's interesting to see that they've managed this with less than 1000 employees. Only two others in the list are comparable in this respect. Plenty of other companies on the list have thousands or tens or thousands of employees.

OK, but only two others in the list have lower revenues! If you look at revenues/employee, Red Hat is ...lessee... 30th of 50, with Hitachi so far in number 1 (36 times that of #2 Dell) I'm thinking there must be a mistake.

Who was it who was linked here last week saying that table display widgets should be full-featured spreadsheets? I'm all for it!

Re:Is Red Hat Linux? (1)

FishandChips (695645) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037388)

Yes, that's a darn good way of looking at it. Red Hat don't do so badly in terms of net income per employee, though, coming around 16th in the field. I agree that the Hitachi figure looks duff, too.

Re:Is Red Hat Linux? (4, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036847)

One thing that killed their PE was constant dilution via secondary offerings, convertible debentures, and compensation stock options.

If you invested in Red Hat, you really invested in them.. Your money went straight into the companies asset sheet through their extreme dilution.

Red Hat is making good on it now for us long-term investors finally at least. They are buying back the convertible debentures and some of the stock. This should bring their PE down even if the P part stays constant.

It's going to take a while though, Red Hat effectively borrowed billions of dollars from their stockholders and they aren't going to pay it back overnight.

Re:Is Red Hat Linux? (2, Informative)

step.ee (220594) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037212)

... and as you can read form Red Hat Shares Fall on Analyst Downgrade [yahoo.com]

Red Hat Shares Fall on Analyst Downgrade
Tuesday November 15, 12:01 pm ET
Red Hat Shares Fall 5.5 Percent After Analyst Downgrades Stock on Lacking Near-Term Upside

NEW YORK (AP) -- Shares of Red Hat Inc. dropped 5.5 percent trading Tuesday after an analyst cut his rating on the stock, citing concern that he doesn't anticipate any events that can move the stock price up in the near future.

Shares were down $1.34, to $23.02 in midday trading on the Nasdaq.

and so on ...

er, 36% growth? (1)

Zaurus (674150) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036723)

The article says RedHat had 36% revenue growth over 4 years. How does that equal 210% year-over-year growth? Am I missing something?

Never Mind (1)

Zaurus (674150) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036743)

Ok, nevermind. The article with tons of text is confusing. The top-50 chart is where they got the big numbers from.

Re:er, 36% growth? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036777)

This is very possible - just spend some time at a financial site. Growth does not always refer to revenue. For example, revenue and profit are completely different numbers.

List also has MS, Intel, Sony, Fujitsu... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036725)

I don't see any point in the heading...Its worthy that Red Hat made into the list...but franfly its just one amng the list...The entry should have just said 'Top 50 companies' or something like that...

Good stuff -- (1)

meisenst (104896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036726)

Maybe my RHCE certification will land me a job now! *gets hopes up*

Question is, with all of this emerging interest in Red Hat, why hasn't it already gotten me a job? I haven't seen (around here, in Ottawa, anyway) any sharp rise in the number of Linux-related jobs available. So, who's buying all of this support?

Re:Good stuff -- (1)

Xargle (165143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036758)

Proven skill a demonstrable ability get you a job, not certifications.

Re:Good stuff -- (2, Interesting)

meisenst (104896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036802)

Oh, I have nearly 15 years of proven skill. I think what I'm getting at here is, there is a sizeable amount of demand for RH services and/or support -- yet people who are certified with their products seem to find less demand than, say, MCSE.

Re:Good stuff -- (2, Insightful)

mottie (807927) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036920)

Every tech I've ever met that has moved to Vancouver from Ottawa has talked about how far behind in technology the average infrastructure in Ottawa is. They blame it on the fact that Ottawa has a lot of goverment jobs. Based on that (and only that, I've never worked or been to Ottawa) I'd guess that an RHCE wouldn't be as valuable as an MCSE, as the Canadian Gov't hasn't embraced linux yet.

Uhm (1)

kmmatthews (779425) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037361)

Maybe you should start bathing before interviews?

Ethics (2, Insightful)

NumberOneFan (811608) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036776)

Good on Red Hat. How many times has this "business model" failed, continues to fail, or barely makes it? This way of doing business really relies on the scruples of the company. Financially, it isn't in their best interest to keep packages up to date. The longer they drag their feet, the more money they keep making in their subscriptions. It's like Code Sourcery. They port the GNU tool-chain for use on embedded platforms like ARM. They also give out their changes and such like they have to. What's to say what they give out doesn't have a few bugs that were fixed a long time ago but haven't quite made it to the free public version. If you pay them for support maybe you get a less buggy version.

I'm not skeptical of when a person does this for free and just relases the source. That's cool. When a company has to generate money by basically, fixing bugs and/or some customization, I think you need to be skeptical.

Just my paranoid thoughts on it I guess.

Re:Ethics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036883)

Financially, it isn't in their best interest to keep packages up to date. The longer they drag their feet, the more money they keep making in their subscriptions. It's like Code Sourcery. They port the GNU tool-chain for use on embedded platforms like ARM. They also give out their changes and such like they have to. What's to say what they give out doesn't have a few bugs that were fixed a long time ago but haven't quite made it to the free public version. If you pay them for support maybe you get a less buggy version.

That's a very poorly constructed argument, so much so that I'll leave the research into precisely why as an exercise to the curious reader.

Re:Ethics (2, Insightful)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037401)

If you pay them for support maybe you get a less buggy version

Red Hat releases .rpms and .srpms for all their software. So they can't hide "special fixes". But sometimes mainstream developers doesn't want those fixes (and there's no reason why a OSS developer shouldn't be looking at the .srpms and check the patches to see if there's something interesting), or the fixes are not ready to be upstream. For example, redhat backported lots of 2.6 things to 2.4. 2.4 was not going to include those never, the same goes for the fixes for those extra features.

When a company has to generate money by basically, fixing bugs and/or some customization, I think you need to be skeptical

Red Hat generates money by being "red hat", having support, etc. It's not the quality of the software what matters for support, what matters is the fact that if you find a bug redhat will fix it. Once redhat has fixed it, they've no interest in keeping the fix only for them. From what I've seen, they're not interested in having to maintain thousand of extra patches and they try to avoid it as hard as possible.

Redhat also sells because of their customization:

Red Hat who? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036784)

Just out of curiousity, why does anyone care about Red Hat? Their product isn't free. You can't go out and download a copy of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

I'm going to get modded flamebait, but their business model is identical to Microsoft's. The only way to get Red Hat Linux is to buy it from them. If you aren't a paying customer, you mean zero to them.

Sure it's possible to build a system that is mostly the same at no cost, but you aren't running Red Hat and they won't give you any support if you run into problems.

Re:Red Hat who? (2, Informative)

robpoe (578975) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036853)

That's a "Microsoft Answer"(TM).

Sure, you *can* download a RHEL. It's just called Centos. Or WhiteBox.

But you're right .. RedHat won't recognize you then.

Many, many RHEL rebuilds out there (2, Interesting)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037051)

Scientific Linux is another. They're good for stability, but I wouldn't rate them much for performance (the builds are all pretty safe and have no obvious speedups anywhere), extensibility (very few RPM sites provide RHEL RPMs) or progressiveness (you can't update Enterprise-level software that rapidly, but RHEL is getting positively ancient in places).


I'm hoping someone'll put together a "best of" compilation, using what's stable (and what can be made stable) from the RPM repositories - including Fedora - but optimized much more aggressively. I would, but I don't have the bandwidth or the disk space to carry a distro. If someone was interested in hosting, that would be another matter. I'd certainly be willing to compile the code and upload it to a host site.

So why stock down (2, Interesting)

yapplejax (931268) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036787)

If that's the case, then why is RedHat dipping following analyst downgrades [marketwatch.com] ?

Re:So why stock down (1)

The Mayor (6048) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036885)

Why don't you look at a longer duration than 1 day?

Re:So why stock down (2, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036898)

If you still listen to analysts after the very public events of the last 5 years, you deserve what's coming to you.

Re:So why stock down (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037621)

They named a new board member that investors have yet to see proven. This happens everytime any company makes some kind of change like that. Look at their 6 month stock history...they are doing excellent, a lot better than Novell, and most tech companies. Anyone who judges a stock based on one day's values and one downgrade does not understand the stock market...
Regards,
Steve

too bad because red hat is slow (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14036816)

gentoo is fastest!
why would anyone want to use anything but THE FASTEST?!?!?!!

good gamin' rig

% increase in profit should be taken with a grain (2, Informative)

carlcmc (322350) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036866)

... of salt.

going from barely making anything to making just a bit more can be a dramatic % growth but still not necessarily reflect a thriving business model which will generate year over year growth.

Interesting that Google is missing... (4, Interesting)

CptTripps (196901) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036914)

I thought it odd that F5 Networks was there, but Google wasn't...

I DID like that RH made the list with 800 employees...compared to 11,000 for Apple, or 56,000 for M$.

Now to beat RedHat (1)

Sheepdot (211478) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036956)

That's the way to go!

Yes, but unfortunately, Red Hat was there first. Similar models will get the proverbial "but how are you any different than Red Hat?". So just because it worked for them doesn't mean someone can start now to try to copy the same model for open source. Red Hat is so comprehensive with their services that to try to compete now, especially since it would be *against* them, is an effort in futility.

Not that this is a bad thing, I'm glad for them, but to say that there is a model that works and to suggest that now others can emulate them and succeed is a bit presumptuous. After all, if their services were "bad", they probably wouldn't be a successful model.

Re:Now to beat RedHat (1)

flyinwhitey (928430) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037048)

Yeah you know, once McDonalds did that fast food thing, the market was all but closed off to new players...

You have made, quite possibly, the worst argument for anything I have ever seen.

Nicely done.

RedHat blows away the market (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14036976)

http://www.fool.com/news/mft/2005/mft05100301.htm? source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y&bounce=y&b ounce2=y [fool.com]

"Shares surged nearly 30% higher on the news -- and with good reason. The company is experiencing sequential improvement in the current quarter as more corporate customers take a shine to open-source solutions."

RHAT is now at $23.13 a share.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=RHAT&t=5y [yahoo.com]

So what? (2, Interesting)

flyinwhitey (928430) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037081)

Mod me down if you want, but a few years ago, pets.com could have been listed there too.

This may be an indication of great things to come, or it could be the start of the much speculated upon Linux bubble.

Don't jump to conclusions.

Re:So what? (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037642)

Except that Red Hat has been around for 12 years and already had its bubble back during the dotcom. At one point Red Hat was worth around $125 a share. Any company that survived the bubble can survive anything.
Regards,
Steve

slashdot about face? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14037116)

The real interesting thing here is not Red Hat, or Red Hat in Asia.

It's the haters at Slashdot actually posting something nice about Red Hat. This must be a first. Usually, the posts fall into these broad categories:

1) Red Hat, the new microsoft
2) Red Hat, saying desktop still far off: boo!
3) Red Hat, we still don't understand Fedora vs. RHEL, boy was that stupid
4) Red Hat, ignore said (continuing) contributions to free software
5) Red Hat, ingore real commitment to GPL
6) Red Hat, fedora releases slow internet to crawl
7) Red Hat, tool to the NSA
8) Red Hat, anti-LSB when in reality only distro who cared enough to shape it
9) Red Hat, why use when there is another disto iso you can download
10) Red Hat, new proof that the man is them

I've always thought that the slashdot corporate parent was extremely anti-Red Hat, and encouraged this editorial slant in the early days. Rising tide lifts all boats? Not according to VA, err, whatever they call themselves these days, oh I know, just another has-been proprietary software vendor.

Red Hat New Installation (1)

DrCash (800431) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037137)

Just installed Red Hat EL4 on a Dell PC just now. The installation seemed to work well with no problems. So far, runs better than WinBlows! This slashdot article was the first news I found! LOL

Are any of these privately owned? (1)

Lester67 (218549) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037146)

Just curious... at first glance they all look to be publicly held.

google not on the list? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14037163)

So, google isn't on the list of top-50 tech companies? I just looked and didn't see it on there. Am I seeing things?

Its not suprising (1)

radiogeak (642228) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037192)

Its not suprising. I use Ret Hat Enterprise Server 3 all the time at work, and it beats the hell outa any other distro in the business field IMO.

Redhat Did a lot to screw Linux credability too! (1, Informative)

MrJerryNormandinSir (197432) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037331)

I a unix/linux systems engineer. I can tell you Redhat Linux AS 2.1 was anything but advanced. Sure EMC and Oracle supported it. But there was NO LVM! No Support for Extended ACLS! And the infamous low EMEM bug when you are under heavy I/O. If I compiled a fix in Oracle wasn't going to support it. The servers are Dell PowerEdge 6650's with 8GB RAM connected to an EMC SAN via Qlogic HBAs. I managed to tame the beast, but managing the filesystems without an LVM is a pain.

The ERP project has grown, so when the lease is up on the Dell equipment it looks like we are going with the IBM pSeries. Why... basically we need the I/O.

I've achieved 97% uptime but the credit is mine, not Redhat's. Redhat staff is brain dead when it comes to cutting edge solutions. I solved my problems before Redhat was ever on the trail.

I haven't been able to upgrade to Redhat AS 4.0 since according to the usenet groups Oracle RAC and 10g perform poorly with SAN attached storage, 50% of the throughput I have on the heavily patched Redhat AS 2.1

Bottom line, if you are going to roll out Linux throughtout your Enterprise you need engineers like me on your staff, not Redhat. I believe the public will catch on and the Redhat stock will take a nosedive. Unless they hire engineers with experience in the Enterprise.

They need to take a good solid look. What I am personally looking at is licensing from Oracle. I believe the whole Redhat / Oracle Grid deal is to sell as many oracle licenses as you can. Need more horsepower? Add a database node?
An Additional database node means more money for Ellison, and less money in your IT budget. So we are now looking at
running the backend on a IBM p570 or a p590 and host many
databases there. The business decided that Disaster Recovery is more important than HA! Why... 9iRAC takes 4 minutes to failover. Also.. sometimes failovers fail.
Some of the bugs may have been worked out in 10g.

Anyway have your read the latest news at Oracle? Sun is now the preferred Oracle platform of the month again.

That's not goinf to help redhat's stock.

Believe it or not I've been a Linux fan since 1992.
Yggrasill was the release I cut my teeth on.
I've been using it ever since.
I was very dissapointed to see what redhat did.
This is not only going to hurt Redhat. But then again, Linux was never written with the intent to make money.
It has however helped many Computer scientists and professionals improve on thier careers. It helped me stay on top of my game and earn a decent salary.

I would not recommend buying Redhat Stock.

Now that you have to pay for it, is RH any better? (1)

Browzer (17971) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037514)

If Centos' genericization and repackaging of the RH product gives hint of RH's quality, then there leaves something to be desired.

Petty example: on x86_64, compiling the kernel fails due to two typo errors in one of the scripts (yes, there is a fix/patch), and then it fails again due to a problem with the offset?.? file. Does the same thing happen on RH?

where the heck is SAS (0, Offtopic)

frankcow (925500) | more than 8 years ago | (#14037546)

SAS should be on that list for sure. Maybe they should've co-sponsored it...

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14037665)

50 companies make the Asia Top Tech 50 list.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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

Loading...