Re: [SLUG] Support issues with RedHat SuSE, et. al.

From: John Danielson, II (jdii1215@comcast.net)
Date: Sun Jun 16 2002 - 16:03:52 EDT


steve wrote:

>Seing how people are unhappy with distributors for various reasons, I wanted
>to throw in my 2 cents.
>
>Having observed the Linux industry since the early days there's something
>which has always kept me curious, namely Profits to keep me happy and Support
>to keep customers happy.
>
>Lets make a few operating points:
>As a business owner I can say that I like being able to get good s/w for free.
>As a developer I like the idea of my product being in use worldwide. (Let's
>assume my license said it would have to be available for free.)
>As a business owner I like getting paid for all the support I give.
>
>Using the Internet would probably drive in people who would be willing to pay
>for my services in larger volume than just dealing with my geographical area.
>
>Imagine you write one or several programs, or just offer them, for free
>online. Let's say it's REALLY popular. And your phone number/email is listed
>for questions. How will you handle all the dumb and not so dumb questions you
>WILL get?
>
>You would soon not be doing anything but answering questions all day long.
>Your income would dwindle and that would be that. Am I wrong?
>
>So you need to balance it in a way that makes sense. Quality, Tools, Time and
>Cost are four points of development that your customer (in a sound business)
>cannot control. They can pick two (or three in some combinations) but not
>all. What we see is how RedHat, SuSE and all are learning how to balance
>this. RedHat has, in my opinion, the best business know how. (Also the only
>one who's profitable.)
>
>In the past I've said that I don't mind paying for Linux. What's important to
>me is the products I end up with. In the early days we did not even have any
>decent install tool. Today most new Linux users are supposed to be coming
>from the user ranks. So a sweet installer is a must. This takes a great deal
>of effort to produce, support and maintain.
>
>The obvious thing is that we all have to be able to make a profit or an
>exchange for our services. Starting with a free O/S is a great way of driving
>in people but will not hold in the long run with profit. I think that the
>best approach is to offer something which drives in people at little or no
>cost to get familiar with you, and then to offer a main service/product.
>
>We are spoiled of having had ten years of a great O/S for free. Hopefully
>we'll see happy mediums that satisfies all our desires, but most likely we'll
>have to do some tradeoffs.
>
>Thanks for listening!
>
>
And for Linux, paid support seems to be the route to profits, yes.
Program itself free, reasonably economical support that is correctly
staffed for cost plus enough margin for growth of support structure--
which costs, because while it dovetails with dev in pointing out
weaknesses, development might have to be done to fulfill support
agreements. for those very skilled in 4-8 programmignlanguages, it
SHOULD and is free, as they can patch for themselves usually. For
others, who cannot, we need us (user groups) and paid support for those
intricate things that mean companies have to talk with each other at the
dev level and intercooperate-- even communications costs money, much
less taking software engineers and making them stop work to meet and
hash out compromises in coding approach.

Yes, valid points.

John.

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
Registered Linux User #276212, Machine #158988
"Use what works best for your needs, at minimum total cost of ownership."



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 12:44:54 EDT