Re: Pay for MS anti-malware service!

"NoStop" <nostop@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6zMhe.1358143$Xk.212215@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>
>> "NoStop" <nostop@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:4jKhe.1360006$6l.499038@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Kerry Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Selling services has been going on a long time. Isn't the Redhat
>>>> business model built on selling services.
>>>
>>> Yes, Redhat bases its business model on selling services, the same way
>>> that
>>> Mandriva does, SuSE and others. BUT, the big difference is that they
>>> aren't
>>> also selling the OS and on top of that charging for services like M$ is
>>> proposing to do.
>>
>> I just searched redhat.com trying to download the redhat enterprise
>> distro
>> for free. I couldn't find it. Please point me to a link where I can
>> download it for free (not a trial version). I could well be wrong but I
>> couldn't find it.
>>
> Sure, get the free version (no Redhat support) here ...
>
> http://linuxiso.org/distro.php?distro=64
>

That's Fedora. I have that. I like it and am considering offering a
workstation based on it to my customers. I'm trying to decide what packages
they will need so I can reasonably support it for them. My understanding is
that Fedora is a test bed for Redhat and may or may not include all the
packages in Redhat Enterprise. In order to support Redhat Enterprise they
must have a stable, known configuration/version. They charge for that and
then sell related services. Other than the scale of the business and
percentage markup charged how is that different from most other software
companies including Microsoft? In a free enterprise society shouldn't the
price be based on what the market will pay? To say you have to charge a set
markup is socialism. The argument that Microsoft has a monopoly is specious.
Netware used to have a "monopoly" in the server market. Digital Research
used to have a "monopoly" in the small computer OS market. These
"monopolies" disintegrated when a better marketing program came along. The
satellite TV industry used to use the same argument that the cable companies
had a monopoly and they couldn't compete. Over time they improved their
marketing and in some markets they now have more installs than cable. It has
happened and will happen again in the software industry as well. That is
what the free market is all about. Please don't think I am bashing linux or
supporting Microsoft. I am just pro free enterprise. I admire what Microsoft
has achieved business wise. I think Windows XP as an OS is quite a bit less
secure and inherently less stable than linux. Server 2003 is a very good
server OS, the equal to linux, and in it's default configuration very
secure. Netware is better than both as a server OS. The marketplace has
dictated which ones I sell and work with every day. Ford Rangers with 4.0
ltr motors break down a lot. Does the repair shop tell the customer to buy a
new better vehicle because this one is piece of s&*t or do they explain the
problem and fix the vehicle for them? We have to live with reality and
today's reality is Windows is installed on most computers. The OP to this
thread was a broad anti-Microsoft statement that didn't offer any facts to
back up the statement. The poster seemed misinformed about the reality of
how business works. My posts have been towards rectifying that objectively.

Kerry



>
>
> --
> -=[ *Usenet FAQ* ]=-
> A. Yes it is. It's called "Top Posting" and frowned on by the Usenet
> community.
> Q. But isn't that backasswards?
> A. If their reply comes BEFORE what they are quoting, they probably use
> Outlook Express under Windoze.
> Q. How can I tell what OS a Usenet poster runs?
>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: My Migrations
    ... particular model with "Windows, Linux, or BeOS" they lose a million ... If a competitor looks like gaining market share they simply buy them, ... MS wanted a share of the entertainment business, ... monopolies. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Pay for MS anti-malware service!
    ... get the free version (no Redhat support) here ... ... > include all the packages in Redhat Enterprise. ... > shouldn't the price be based on what the market will pay? ... These "monopolies" disintegrated when a better marketing ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: A newbie - What are differences between Red Hat Linux 9 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux?
    ... just a quick follow-up question - I have checked Redhat ... Since I am a business student, ... To me that means he is not interested in learning linux to be a sysadmin for a company. ... Scroll all the way to the end of the options and check 'Install ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: Fedora
    ... > licenses I was trying to avoid by moving servers to Red Hat. ... > all a market which, in large part, simply cannot or will not afford WS, ... You know that RedHat is bound by economic realities. ... What exactly is it that Fedora does _not_ provide ...
    (RedHat)
  • Re: The answers to these "Death of RedHat threads"..
    ... >> used Redhat distros on our servers. ... >> So, even if Fedora is all you say it will be, the problem is this new ... > support and will probably be more loyal to your business as a result.. ... business customers minds no matter how well it goes. ...
    (linux.redhat)
Loading