On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 21:43 +0200, nihed mbarek wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: nihed mbarek <nihedmm@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: 29 avr. 2007 10:07 > Subject: Has fedora lost its charm ? ? ? > To: fedora-ambassadors-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > Hi friends, > > Michael Larabel has writing an article about Fedora 7 test 4 > i want to see your opinion > personnely Im waiting for the download of F7T4 because i have a bad > connexion. > http://www.michaellarabel.com/index.php?k=blog&i=188 > > > > > > -- > M'BAREK Med Nihed, > Fedora Ambassador, TUNISIA, Northern Africa > > -- > M'BAREK Med Nihed, > Fedora Ambassador, TUNISIA, Northern Africa > -- > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list > Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list Some people seem to think that the popular Linux distributions are in some kind of struggle for the domination of the Linux desktop. In this light it is good to realise that Canonical and Red Hat have different business models. Canonical tries to have everybody use Ubuntu (which is why they even pay for shipping cds to you), so that the distro becomes some kind of default, and eventually people will choose to pay Canonical to provide them Linux support on their Ubuntu corporate servers and desktops. Red Hat, on the other hand, uses Fedora as the basis for their enterprise Linux product, which you can't even run unless you pay for it. Red Hat's business model is about technologically advanced and innovative software, well implemented security features and rock solid systems. They sell that at good prices with the support they are able to give for it. Canonical doesn't want to sell subscriptions to their software, but support to anyone that happened to decide to run Ubuntu, since that is for free anyway. Companies that sell support by incident are less likely to want to deliver the best possible software. They are likely to support a product that is *good enough* and easy for users to set up, but they won't do their utmost to perfect consistency, kill bugs, harden security. I'm not saying that one of these models is superior (I have my own thoughts, though ;) ), it's just that I wonder why the business model is mentioned only very occasionally when it comes to, for example, Ubuntu, and talking about Linux distributions in general. It's not as if all distributions have the same objectives, reason to exist, or business plan, if any. Ubuntu have done such a great job at marketing and creating a feel-good mood about their distro that people forget there is some real business going on in the Linux world. If Shuttleworth was *just* a philanthropist, and not an entrepreneur at all, he might have just left Debian alone and do something against AIDS, leprosy and/or poverty. After all, you can't go on shipping free cds for the next decades without making some money. Nothing wrong with trying to make a viable business out of a Debian spin-off. Maybe Ubu/Canonical is right about at least one thing: conquer the server (where much of the money is) by means of the desktop. Even Microsoft did that. Red Hat/Fedora can't go there just yet, if at all. Red Hat is not willing to support proprietary wireless/graphics drivers, Flash and other stuff, and patented media codecs. Plus, RH would have to change their business model while their present one is working out very well for them. Franky, I ended up being a very happy Fedora/CentOS user after trying Ubuntu and wanting to just run that. I thought that after Suse I needed something with more of a K.I.S.S. (tm) attitude and I thought Ubuntu offered that. However, there was a bug or two that prevented me from using my printer, SCIM. and something else I forgot. Why do I say all this? I stuck with Fedora/CentOS because I love the system, its quality and consistency, the fact that it comes with real stuff 'under the hood' in stead of just new wallpapers and icons. Yet I never really planned to ever use Fedora because I thought the Ubu/Deb family was good enough for me. I'm not really a 'serious' geek but around me I see that RHEL/CentOS (and, although since CentOS' success to a lesser extent, Fedora) are still very much appreciated for innovation and quality among technically advanced *n*x users. Those users wonder when stuff like SELinux arrives at Ubuntu. And they couldn't care less that Fedora doesn't allow them to click only one button to install gstreamer-plugin-ugly, w32codecs or libdvdcss. Unpack, configure, make, make install is not that complex after all. ;) So I think it is pointless for Fedora to imitate Ubuntu and try to be as 'cool' as that. There's no such way to handle the hype (don't get me wrong, Ubuntu is a good system overall, so the hype is not entirely undeserved). The only way is to be so good on a technological level that a bit more advanced users of, say, Ubuntu would some day check it out and start to like it. Maybe it sounds a bit elitish which is not really what I mean, but to have the users that know what *n*x is about is more beneficial to Fedora than to have all the Windows gamers and script kiddies that want to be cool too and run install Linux to show off Beryl. Where does the marketing list fit in? Simply keep communicating that Fedora is about free (as in..) software. Maybe pointing out that yum/rpm really *does* work just as well as apt-get/dpkg would help too. ;) You see, I'm a bit tired of those claiming that .deb-systems are so superior because they don't have yum/rpm 'which sucks'. I hope enough people will disagree with me completely so that I may hear what 'y'all' think about all this. I mean, maybe many folks believe that to just Ubuntify Fedora is the way to go? regards, herman -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
