[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: USENIX Association Upcoming Events (fwd)
On 27 Jan 1998, Alexander L. Belikoff wrote:
> "Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a. Frodo" <frodo@sharat.co.il> writes:
>
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Peter L. Peres wrote:
> >
> > Well, I was also offered Compaq x86 with Solaris. I really don't think
> > they are so silly as to enter catholic marriage with any OS and refuse all
> > others. They'll take anything that sells. If Linux will sell good -
>
> As a matter of fact, Linux does not. It's a free product - everybody
> can just download and install it. What will happen is that they'll
> sell machines with NT pre-installed. So, for most users it'll be
> extremely difficult to justify erasing the ready-to-use "solution" and
> installing Linux instead.
I agree. Linux is not something you charge money for, excepting the media
price and packing etc. The concept of 'free operating system' with sources
in the PD is understood very little by most players. The paradigm suits
those best, who do not make OSes, but software and hardware.
It is like this: Most companies that have to do with software do not sell
operating systems. They sell products that run on another party's
operating systems. They depend on that party for a consistent and stable
interface. If the maker of that platform, the OS, is volatile, a single
source that dictates prices, and on top of it all competes directly with
these businesses by making software itself, then all these businesses have
a solid interest to look for anything that looks like an OS and is NOT
made by that party, and does not depend on it.
If, additionally, that party indulges in illegal business practices, such
as withholding certain inside information required to make certain things
work, from the customer software company, such that its products are
undermined by concurrence from the OS maker, to the point where it may go
bankrupt, then it is in the interest of the software company to look for
something else. And if the number of laid precedents is as large as it
is known to be, then it has to do the looking fast. Like, yesterday.
> Therefore, even if you buy a Compaq machine to run Linux, you'll put
> another $200 into Gates's pocket.
Yes, but they MUST not do that. A $2000 Compaq machine, with the mentioned
appendix, can be sold for $2020 or less with an additional penguin
installed, or $1820 with penguin and without appendix. That is almost 10%
off. If someone would list the prices that way, then many things would
start changing soon.
And if they MUST do it for some reason, and do not want to, then the
Department of Justice might help them, as the MUST is completely in line
with certain investigations under way now in more than one country.
> > they'll support Linux (as many h/w vendors chose to do, when they saw
> > that it can add them revenue).
> > Certainly, no one expects them to support Linux on altruistic values. But
> > when they hear "oh well, so Linux won't run on your improved Alpha?
> > Then I go buy at your competitors'", they'll adjust themselves. If they
>
> Compaq won't care. Their primary business is (and will always be)
> Intel-based.
Often with Novell on it. Who owns Novell now, and who is going to own it
soon ? Did their shares jump too ?
> BTW, for those who don't know, DEC shares jumped up $10 yesterday...
>
> --
> Alexander L. Belikoff
> Berger Financial Research Ltd.
> abel@bfr.co.il
>
Peter (plp)