AOL in Negotiations to Acquire Red Hat

CDale cdale@techmonkeys.net
Mon, 21 Jan 2002 13:55:08 -0600 (CST)


Aw man, don't apologize!!!  TW, JB, someone teach this boy something.  (:

On 21 Jan 2002, Luis Villa wrote:

> I apologize... I didn't mean to flame quite so badly, or respond so
> rapid fire. This one in particular serves me right for mailing the list
> at 3am after a long weekend. FWIW, I recommend Evolution as an excellent
> threaded mailer ;)
> Luis
> 
> On Mon, 2002-01-21 at 14:19, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > so FoRK is now a pale imitation of Slashdot?
> > bummer. must've missed the press release.
> > 
> > time to go find myself a threaded mailreader... (bye bye Pine, hello... Mutt?)
> > 
> > danbri
> > 
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, CDale wrote:
> > 
> > > First of all, what crawled up your ass?  Since you wanna be such a prick
> > > and read stuff into what I typed, I guess I'll have to take time out of my
> > > busy career to set you straight.  -snicker-
> > >
> > >
> > >  On 20 Jan 2002, Luis Villa wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 2002-01-20 at 05:46, CDale wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > How did I miss the beginning of this thread?  Forever, Red Hat has been
> > > > > called the AOL of Linux.
> > > >
> > > > No offense, but the people who call RH the AOL or MS of Linux are
> > > > uninformed, immature, or both. Period. There is/was no way to call it
> > > > that otherwise.
> > >
> > > I always hate it when people say "No offense, but..." and then attempt to
> > > offend me.  Actually, I don't really hate it as much as I find it to be a
> > > silly attempt to use extra words that add seeming content to what usually
> > > ends up being content-less anyhow.  Anyhow, there are lots of "ways" to
> > > call it that.  It was called that, and it stuck, so obviously some people
> > > agreed that it was/is a good analogy.  As immature and uninformed as you
> > > may think it is, RH has worked hard to make Linux user friendly, and if I
> > > can site the #1 answer to my question to all the folks I've encountered
> > > who use AOL, which is, "Why do you use it?" it is "Because it's easy to
> > > use."  I would say that most folks who use MS feel the same.  So the
> > > comparison isn't that far off base, no matter how it may bother you.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > I called it that when I was a Slacker, and had
> > > > > it slung at me while wearing that Red Hat.
> > > >
> > > > See the above: if you had it slung at you, and cared, then you're
> > > > clearly missing a big part of the picture.
> > > >
> > >
> > > "Cared" is a big word.  What I care about is the operating system itself,
> > > not about how it's rolled or distributed.  Therefore, I don't CARE what
> > > anyone does with or calls any of the distributions.  I only care that I
> > > have choices, and that, bottom line, if I don't like any of them, FINE,
> > > I'll roll my own.  (:
> > >
> > > > > It's a sad, sad thing, but
> > > > > living at that place (remember when working at a startup meant living
> > > > > there?) and watching the suits and suit sluts come in and do the
> > > > > corporation of the thing was an ugly affair.  If anyone enjoyed it, it was
> > > > > Mark, who walked out, stiff and tense in his expensive suit, the one he
> > > > > wore with a stiff back and a frown, and he didn't enjoy it till way after
> > > > > that, I'm sure.  But of course there was Bob there, on the board, to make
> > > > > sure that things would be OK.
> > > >
> > > > Having spoken very briefly with Mark not to long ago, he doesn't really
> > > > seem to enjoy it even now. Bob seems to have actually transitioned more
> > > > easily into the role of corporate tycoon, though he does a lot of really
> > > > great stuff with his money. [see
> > > > http://www.centerforthepublicdomain.org/ ]
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sorry to hear that about Mark. and Bob.  Last I heard Mark was a happy
> > > father who'd shed those suits that he never quite looked right in.  But this is all
> > > gossip anyhow.  (:  I guess what I was trying to say is that RH, the way
> > > it's run now, certainly isn't in any way less "evil" than AOL is.  I do
> > > feel sorry for the folks who have to train a whole bunch of new people
> > > about what Linux is and isn't, after having done this with a whole crew of
> > > overpaid idiots during/after the IPO.
> > >
> > > > As for the rest of these accusations, I still know personally (and work
> > > > with, through GNOME) a lot of RH guys who are awfully non-corporate and
> > > > care a huge amount about Free Software and the GPL. Yeah, they've got
> > > > management whose priorities are a little wacky, but they generally feel
> > > > like they're pretty well treated and they cite fairly minimal reasons
> > > > for grumbling. And most of them still pretty much live at RH, if that
> > > > really means all that much to you.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sure, I know those guys too, and still talk to them quite a bit, and,
> > > having the kind of background I have with them, I hear a lot more of the
> > > griping than you ever would.  And yep, I know they still pretty much live
> > > there, and that that devotion is still unrecognized.  The only reason this
> > > means -anything- to me is because some of these people are very close
> > > friends, and one thing I did hope when I left RH was that things would get
> > > better for them in the long run.  Oh well.  It's their choice to stay
> > > there, and if that works for them, that's their business.  As far as this
> > > being an "accusation," you seem to be a bit defensive there, pal.  (:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > We Slackers, years ago, thought that RH would sink itself with all
> > > > > it's readiness to make things proprietary,and, in a way it has,
> > > >
> > > > ? Exactly /what/ proprietary stuff are you talking about? Last I
> > > > checked, there is exactly /one/ piece of RH software that's proprietary,
> > > > and that's the RHN /server/, and there are at least two GPL projects to
> > > > replace that that I'm aware of.
> > >
> > > One?  LOL  I supported the SWS for over a year.  Let's see, sure wish I
> > > could get the code for that u2d server.  (:  And, before you get your
> > > panties in a wad for onlygodknowswhatreason, please read what I say
> > > before you respond vapidly to it.  "it's readiness to make things
> > > proprietary" is what I said, and the only thing that's wrong with that is
> > > that apostrophe that isn't supposed to be there.  If you don't believe
> > > me, ask one of your RH buddies about explaining to Billy Marshall "No, we
> > > can't sell that, no we can't charge for that, no, that is GPL'd, nonoNO
> > > Billy, this is LINUX GODDAMMIT."  (:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm honestly surprised that someone who claims to have worked at RH
> > > > would have bought all the 1337 hax0r propaganda crap about RH as the
> > > > _____ of Linux.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Buying into what?  When did I say anything about hacking or 31337ness?
> > > Spelling things with numbers has nothing to do with analogies in this
> > > particular situation.  Anyhow, my whole point was: "So what?"  AOL
> > > will either totally fuck it up, at which point many RH users will switch,
> > > or they won't, at which point noone will give a damn who owns RHI.  That's
> > > all I really wanted to say, so if you wanna argue that, go for it.  I'll
> > > be over here in my Crown Vic racing spunky little military guys down Hwy
> > > 90.  (:  (Geege, does 8 cylinders make you as hot as it makes me?  LOL)
> > > Cindy
> > >
> > > > Luis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> 
> 
> 
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> 

-- 
"My theology, briefly, is that the universe was dictated but not
          signed."  (Christopher Morley)