First off let me say there is no "standard" for linux...There is a tiny
group of people pushing for standards to define "compatible" linux
distros....Will it ever happen? Probably not. Why? Because basically right
now there are basically 4 standards which all other distros are based on or
around: Debian and Red Hat being the biggest, and then Slackware and SuSe
basically doing thier own thing for their own distro. Why is stuff built
specifically for red hat? Well its the old thing that people want someone
to sue when something goes wrong. That makes Red Hat which is one of the
most visible and biggest linux companies, the most popular for enterprise
level applications. Then you add in the fact that you have mandrake- one of
the easiest distros for newbies- which was originally based ON red hat and
now is compatible with red hat. Will the standards that the tiny group is
pushing for ever make it? Nope....Why not? Because each of the 4 competing
groups believe that they ARE the standard and everyone sould do as they do.
That kind of thinking sound familiar, maybe similiar to M$? Well thats
human nature folks....everyone wants to be the best.
Just my two cents,
Todd
> It's ironic that we can still have vendor specific software, even though
> it's all open source. I think RedHat is on to something here. In other
> words, "So what if it's open source?" Too many people don't know enough
> about code to be able to make changes to make it compatible, anyway.
> Then there's the versions (a la RedHat) that aren't 'standard,' which
> once again creates a problem for the average user/admin. They have to
> keep up with what RedHat is doing. And then they have to buy from
> RedHat. Kinda like some other company we know. The only difference here
> is that once RedHat makes a release, you are only bound to buy one copy
> then you can sell it for less. But what if you're a big company that has
> a contract with RH? Are you still forced to "upgrade?" What would the
> contract be for, anyway? Service and support? Could you just buy a
> support contract from RH, but not the software? Would they support you
> if you bought a "non-official" version of the same thing RH was selling?
> (In other words, once RH makes their release official, someone buys a
> copy, then, because of the GPL, sells it to you for less, or free, but
> it didn't come directly from RH's CD factory) Interestingly, the GPL
> does support this sort of behavior, IMHO. It is very capitalistic. OTOH,
> this sort of behaviour flies in the face of the GPL, because the GPL was
> supposed to take some of the power away from the "Mages" (who kept code,
> and therefor power, a secret) and put it in the hands of everybody.
>
> Russell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:06:35 EDT