I guess I'm in minority here in someways. I don't blame AOL for looking for another OS to run on, its hard to sell cars when your competitor builds your engine. Don't understand why any 3rd party today would want to run on a MS platform with the threat of either being copied or bought out or bugged out. I like the idea of AOL on Linux, just for prospect of having Linux more available (i.e. quicker driver support, maybe Dell reintroducing Linux loaded machines). Its sad that they would pick Red Hat, but I can't blame them there either for its one of the best Linux Distros going. smbinyon
-----Original Message----- From: Werner Puschitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 1:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AOL in Negotiations to Buy Red Hat On 19 Jan 2002, Bret Hughes wrote: > On Sat, 2002-01-19 at 10:50, Nick Wilson wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > * On 19-01-02 at 16:16 > > * Dave Ihnat said.... > > > > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 09:09:08AM -0500, Bob Staaf wrote: > > > > AOL/Time Warner buying Red Hat might be great for those who use Linux as a > > > > Desktop workstation but, anyone actually believe they care about competing > > > > in the server market? > > > > > > As a professional in the field, I'm afraid if that happens I'll not > > > only switch myself, I'll actively recommend against the "new" Redhat to > > > my clients. They're just the wrong player in this field. > > > > Here here! > > I'm not against making Linux a more popular alternative but AOL? Jeeez! > > - -- > > > I have never really USED another linux distro. I have installed and > dinked with several. Here are a couple of almost random (meaning not > really thought out) thoughts. > > Several years ago I was at the Linux Expo in Raleigh right after AOL > bought/bailed out Netscape. ( Does anyone think there would be a > netscpae if AOL had not stepped in?). One of the speakers at the expo > was the chief technology officer from netscape and a new AOL employee. > He said one thing that really made me think. I will paraphrase: > > " We have all laughed at AOL's technology and assumed that it was > substandard. Those of use who have run networks with thousands of users > think we are pretty good. Now consider running a network with 15 millon > simultaneous users world wide. Makes you think? AOL has this every day > of every week. These guys know what the are doing." > > It did make me think. I thought the work managment system I worked on > at a meduim sized utility that supported ~1500 users that was integrated > across os2, win 95, and HPUX, all talking to a faily good sized DB2 data > base on MVS through CICS and in turn talked to the inventory management, > customer service, time reporting, and property accounting systems was a > pretty big deal. It was. Now take that and increase it by 4 orders of > magnitude. Not four times butadd four zeros. Holy shit! Maybe those > guys do know what is going on. I remember reading a couple years ago that AOL is using over 20,000 Sparc servers. The number must be much bigger now. Maybe they should think about Linux on a mainframe. Werner _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
