On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 13:09 -0600, Stephen J. Smoogen wrote: > Actually the amount of money from RHN at that point would probably > only covered the bandwidth charges.. not the colo costs, and > definately not the costs of developers/testers. While I have no doubt that Stephen is correct here, it is still true that Andrew, hundreds of others, and I were all happy to contribute $60 per machine (for X machines each) simply to help Red Hat, Inc. The company has lost that income, and I still use that bandwidth! Red Hat would be well-advised to think of a way for many of us to keep paying them *something*. I had just convinced my company to pony up for three RHN subscriptions when the service died. Yes, I know that boxed sets were not profitable and that RHN income was marginal. But that is the *point*. I, today, am still using stuff (Fedora) that Red Hat, Inc. paid money to develop... just like I did before with RHL. I still use bandwidth, and every time I convince someone to install Linux we use *more* bandwidth. I ***WANT*** to give Red Hat money, but Red Hat must give me a viable excuse to do so. Give me a service or subscription I can justify to my wife and my boss, and you make at least $200-$500 from me this year, instead of $0. But now the only options I have are RHEL and I cannot afford that. Cheers, -- Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part