Marcel, did you really write all this shit because you can't make autocorrect work in OpenOffice?
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Marcel Rieux <m.z.ri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 6:30 AM, Alan Cox <a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 22:14:07 -0400 >> Marcel Rieux <m.z.ri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Alan Cox <a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> >> wrote: >> > >> > > > Ok, so that's why it's OK if it doesn't work! Windows at $35 (OEM) >> for >> > > 5-7 >> > > > years seems a better alternative though. Red Hat salesmen must be >> really >> > > > competent. I certainly couldn't sell one Red Hat copy for sure. >> > > >> > > If you want to run Windows then do so. >> > >> > >> > Hey, that's exactly the answer I said wouldn't help Red Hat. Great! I'm >> > surprised it comes from a former kernel maintainer. Maybe that's the >> spirit >> > at Red Hat? >> >> I don't work for or speak for Red Hat. >> > > Not anymore, but you certainly were close to Red Hat: > > "Alan was employed by the Linux distributor Red Hat during 1999-2009. He is > as of 2010 employed by Intel." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Cox > > That's not another Aln Cox, is it? > > > > Fedora is a *project* not a product. >> > What's this supposed to mean? That you can escape all problems by >> sending >> > users to Bugzillas? >> >> It's like the difference between watching Germany lose at football, and >> playing football. In the former case you pay money for and it may or may >> not do what you want, in the latter case you are part of making something >> happen. >> > > Do you really believe that the OEMs who use Android will tell their users: > "Buzz off, you don't contribute code" and refer them to some android_this or > that .org that nobody knows who the maintainer really is, that provide false > information for months, if not years? Fedora does this. It lets anybody use > their name, Google won't, unless an OEM puts its name on the product it has > modified. > > This won't happen because whichever OEM treats users like shit will lose > market share. Open Source is a new game. It's not a developers' gizmo > anymore, it's now out in the open world and brings in lots of revenue. Users > problems will have to be taken into consideration. > >> >> > management at Google's? They're people who have one thing in sight: the >> > user. And they succeed. People who have geek "projects" in mind fail. Of >> >> Oh yes - like the iphone where they don't allow users to install software >> they want ? >> > > You really believe I'm an Apple apostle? :) I find Apple's business model > is just horrible. It's a plain rip-off. But they cater to know-nothing > people who are really willing to pay a fortune not to be sent searching all > over the web. It works. Why can't Red Hat develop a business model that is > not a rip-off for desktop users? > > When a site such as fedorafaq.org provides wrong information to install > nvidia drivers, why doesn't Red Hat complain that somebody using its... > subsidiary (see my previous post) name is diffusing wrong info? > > Why should they do this? Maybe they will sell contracts at > $320/year/desktop. Working against Fedora helps Red Hat sell contracts which > are really way too expensive. I would think they don't sell many, though. > > Goldman $... oops & Sachs did a really bad job as a main underwriter for > Red Hat's introduction on the Stock Exchange. Do you remember how shares > went from $14 to ~$300?(1) This certainly made Bob Young and his wife -- you > remember Bob Young, don't you? -- fabulously rich, but it set a money > culture in Red Hat that, in my opinion, won't, in the long run, help Red Hat > stick to the straight and narrow. > > ============ > (1) Someday, when you feel like reading something else than code, learn > more about Goldman & Sachs, see: > > http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64796?FORM=ZZNR3 > > A search on "laddering" is advised. Rolling Stone will certainly tell you > more than the Wall Street Journal, which would see all its revenue dwindle > if they ever published such an article. Mr Taibbi does a really good job! > ====================== > > Now, you can say if Bob Young got hundred of millions for next to nothing, > the present EO's are certainly worth a few millions a year but, meanwhile, > Shuttleworth not only doesn't make a cent, he puts some of his own to > accelerate Canonical development. And whereas all Red Hat offers is > $320/year support contracts, Ubuntu offers its users some music and films. > This makes more sense. How come Red Hat's multi-millionaires *EOs can't > figure this out? They're mighty slow! > > > > course, Red Hat is moving forward but is it at the right pace? Google, > who > > went public five years after Red Hat now has 25x the market > capitalization. > > If your good friend :) Linux Torvalds had to entrust Linux's future to a > > company, which one would it be? > > Actually his name is Linus >> > > Nowadays, it's pretty much Linux Torvalds :) > > > > > > > I strongly believe more attention should be given to users' problems and > > wills. > > So stop just believing and start doing. Ranting on email lists rarely >> changes the world. Fedora is a project - so like the football team, if >> you think you can do better, stop whining from the touch line and start >> playing - and if you don't like the club you can start your own or join >> another one. >> > > Of course, drawing a picture of the present Red Hat situation is just > nothing. No doubt Taibbi shouldn't get paid either, I mean, he doesn't write > code, does he? Do you really believe that a technical know-nothing like > should open a 1000th and one site on how to manage Fedora? There are already > too many! > > Developers, people like you, Rahul Sundaran, Adam Williamson, etc. are well > aware that Fedora has no direction set at the present time. (Please, Rahul, > don't argue... I could reply) In the new Linux world, it's headed nowhere. > You defend Fedora and Red Hat with all kind of arguments that you know don't > stand up, because you think that defending Red Hat whatever happens is the > way to go. > > I DON'T THINK SO. I think it's better to face reality. Developers certainly > have a better insiders' view than me. I KNOW far from all agree with the > direction Fedora is taking. I believe you should get together and voice your > concerns openly. And I believe what I'm writing here could be a good start > for reflection. Believe it or not, Mr kernel maintainer, I believe I'm > contributing right here, now. Did Schmidt ever write a line of code? > >> >> > Your buzz off answer won't solve this kind of problem. It never has and >> > never will. If your spirit is the kind that rules at Red Hat, no doubt >> Red >> > Hat is doomed. >> >> As I said I don't work for Red Hat. I don't work on any Red Hat product >> either. >> >> You seem to be very confused about what Fedora is. The Fedora mission >> statement isn't 'blow Microsoft out of the water' nor is it 'world >> domination' nor 'end user product'. If that is what you are looking for >> you are - as you've been told many times - in the wrong place. >> > > What is Fedora's mission? Despite all its successes, in the long run, it's > clear to me it is headed for failure. Let's wait and see, you will say. No, > this is notpossible. If you don't see forward what the great picture will be > in 5 to 10 years, you're failing. Today. > > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > -- Chris
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
