On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 21:11, Chris Gehlker wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2004, at 8:16 PM, Craig White wrote:
> 
> > In fairness to Derek? I guess I want to see what you write when you
> > decide not to be fair.
> 
> I meant that in the sense that Bruce Parens has been a reliable and 
> unbiased source of information in the past so when he takes a very 
> strong anti-Red Hat stand, lumping them with SCO and accusing them of 
> 'attacking' the values of linux, violating the spirit of open source 
> licenses and scheming to "depart from the ethos of Open Source with 
> lock-in plays" one may be excused from taking Bruce's word.
> 
> It's just that when you look at the evidence that Bruce presents for 
> all of this evil doing it consists of such items as the aforementioned 
> requirement that customers not pass on service bulletins. Somehow the 
> fact that third party commercial vendors like Oracle endorse Red Hat is 
> also presented as evidence that RH is the great satan.
> 
> I honestly don't have any particular fondness for Red Hat or antipathy 
> toward UserLinux. I just think that when someone who has a clear stake 
> in one distro makes disparaging remarks about a competitor, he ought to 
> present some evidence.
> 
> The other thing that bothers me a little is that after hearing for 
> years how 'freedom' wasn't about dollar cost or 'free as in beer' it's 
> disconcerting that so many open source advocates seem so upset simply 
> because Red Hat is now charging real money. I guess 'free' was about 
> price after all.
---
It is Bruce Perens and not Parens right? Seems to me that Bruce Perens
has found many niche's to make a very nice living off open source and I
don't think that we'll need to pass around a collection plate for him
anytime soon.

You seem intent on fanning the flames.

I have not and likely will not dissect what Bruce Perens says...just
like I don't want to dissect everything that Eric Raymond says, or
Charles Barkley says or whomever. Opinions are like assholes and
everyone has one of them - myself included.

Some real facts remain...People don't understand the concept of FOSS.
Businesses are used to paying for software and cannot comprehend how
they can get something for free from one company and it costs real money
from another company. They think that someone is screwing the pooch.

I read the following article in a magazine that is sent to me...Optimize
<http://www.optimizemag.com/issue/027/law.htm>

I cannot believe the FUD that is so pervasive. 

Anyway, businesses need something that they can trust. If/when a better
software package comes around, businesses will figure it out. Red Hat
isn't doing anything that any other packager can't do too, probably
better and more affordable for the end user. It is after all, just one
of many, many choices in the marketplace.

Craig