Ask Robert Young

Yes, that Bob Young. The one who helped endow online information resource ibiblio.org, but is better known for his role as co-founder and Chairman of Red Hat. Ask him anything you want, but please hold it down to one question per post. We'll send 10 of the highest-moderated inquiries to Bob (who is in England this week), and he'll send back his answers just as soon as he can.

Second favorite distribution?

So, what's your second favorite distribution?

Alex Bischoff
---

Red Hat Acquisitions

I noticed that while Red Hat was valued highly, Red Hat used its funding to purchase companies like Cygnus and C2Net. Escpecially with the purchase of Cygnus, you appear to be consildating the infrastructure that makes linux viable commercially. One could conjecture that you are trying to provide developer tools and resources, both as a product and as a way to build into Linux (as in the motto "it is the developers/ISVs stupid!"). Red Hat is currently valued much lower than it was at the top of the hype, but one could argue that these (and other) strategic acquisitions give Red Hat an edge over the competition or the chance at surviving the tech stock maelstrom.

Q: How do you see these acquisitions as helping Red Hat and its position in the market?

Most important decision for RH?

What was the most important decision for Red Hat, through its history, apart from deciding to IPO? Was there a particular partnership, hire, technical call or anything else which defined the future for Red Hat?

Free- and Non-Free Software getting along?

Hiya Bob!

The venerable Richard Stallman has a habit of saying that all software should be free -- he is therefor not interested in making Free Software too interoperable with Commercial, Closed-Source software.

On the other had, the also venerable Linus Torvalds has an opposite view; that free software has it's place and that non-free software also has place, and that all efforts should be made to make them co-exist.

Since you have on foot in each world, as it were, what are your feelings on this? Should Free and Open source software be expected to "play nice" with software from various Evil Empires? Or should it concentrate only on relation with other like software projects, and require the commercial world adapt to cooperating with Free software?

Do you think a recession will help RedHat/Linux?

Bob,

We had an Ask Slashdot a few days ago wondering whether a recession will help Linux or not. Since you're the CEO of RedHat, you probably have a better idea as to what effect a recession will have on RedHat and Linux. So, do you think you will gain more market share during a recession than you would otherwise?

Competing against MacOSX

With MacOSX arriving as a desktop Unix (more or less) backed by a known, (sometimes) respected name, do you consider Apple to be a serious competitor, the same as Microsoft? Would Red Hat ever consider a PPC release to try and steer people away from MacOSX? Or, instead, do you think Apple will remain largely a niche player, but one that adds weight to the all-purpose viability of Unix?

Re:Hey!

Bob, since you are England this week, what can you do to guarantee the sovereignty of Sealand?

Other Dists

Do you think the plethora of distributions hurts Linux as a whole? And do you view alternate distributions as competitors?

Who decides what goes in and how?

I'd like some insight on how the decision is made to include something in Red Hat Linux, how quickly to roll in new releases of software, etc.

For example, I've seen pre-releases of KDE get included and updated in rawhide (and I believe in actual Red Hat releases) rather often, but even the individual GNOME components are almost never updated until well after a full stable release is announced. There are other examples, but that's the main one that comes to mind.

There also still seems to be a lot of 0.x version software in Red Hat to this day. So, I'm just curious how you make these technical decisions are made.

Why invest in RedHat?

RedHat has the biggest name recognition of all the Linux distributions. To many non-tech types Linux == RedHat. And you are now breaking even, yet despite that RedHat's stock went from $80 a share to less than $5 and there doesn't seem to be a sign of that turning around.

What do you say to people who ask why they should invest in RedHat? Also, as a high-tech company I'm sure employees got stock options, how are they dealing with the crash in share prices and how do you convince them their options are still worth something?

Security

Recently we've seen several worms attacking vulnerabilities in the default install of Red Hat Linux. What is being done to make the default installation more newbie-friendly from a security point of view? The average desktop user probably doesn't want or need BIND, do they?

--

Your impressions on the recent MS Interview

Yesterday on Slashdot we got responses from an interview of MS exec Doug Miller and he touched upon some areas of Linux that caused a lot of debate and discussion in the forum. My question to you is, would you skim through the Doug's reponses and provide us with your counterarguments or comments?

Problems with RPM.

As a packager of some products, I have encountered the difficulty that is present packaging for RPM.

First, a small rant. The primary "ideal" source of information for how to package rpm's is of course the book "Maximum RPM".

However, this book is not available online in html format. It is however available in postscript which is easily read in X windows on a redhat machine.

However, *some* of us dont use X windows, and for us select few, we cant view it. I have however, converted it from that format to text, losing much of the styling and formatting.

In the spirit of open source, dont you feel that it is completely BACKWARDS to have a open source tool, where the documentation that allows developers to package using it is proprietary, non-open, and subject to licensing restrictions?!!?

The man page doesnt even *mention* half the creation commandline options, and I think that was on purpose.

Compunding the issue is the fact that the book has not been updated in years, let alone since the coming of rpm4!

As a developer, I would love to hear why you dont want me to package using your system. The reasons outlined above lead me to that conclusion.

Packaging standards

If openpackages [openpackages.org] becomes a defacto standard for *BSD, would your company consider switching from RPM to it, in order to allow the holy grail of "one package for all free/open (definition may vary) systems" ?

This of course presuming that upon reaching that status, it has features that are comparable or better than rpm. (Which the current FreeBSD ports/pkg system CERTAINLY has acheived -- wouldnt you agree?)

Further, have you considered switching to the apt-get/deb system? It is the number one reason most people seem to switch to debian, and in every way I know of seems to be superior technically to rpm.

Hardware support

Unfortunately, most hardware vendors support Microsoft because MS has the largest share of the market and they know it will pay to support MS with drivers.

Linux is not in that state, save for (perhaps) networking devices. Has RedHat considered helping to fund driver development for other forms of hardware? I'm thinking mostly of 3D accelerated video cards (by helping to fund the DRI group), but other items (scanners, USB->IDE interfaces, etc.) would be nice too.

A unified desktop?

In the recent interview with Doug Miller [slashdot.org], he spoke of, or implied, that the lack of a standardized desktop could be keeping commercial developers from creating Linux applications. Do you think it's possible, or desirable, to come up with an 'official' desktop for Linux? If so, what do you feel is the best way to go about it?

Using code from other Linux distributions

Lots of Linux distributions (Mandrake-Linux is an example) have started from a version of RedHat and then added their own features and applications. This is, of course, the benefit of open source software. I'd like do know whether RedHat too has benefited from that by putting some of these enhencements back into RedHat distributions. If so, can you give the most important examples?

Loosening the golden ring from Microsoft's grasp

This is the same question I asked Doug Miller of Microsoft:

When Compaq (later followed by others) loosened the GoldenRing from IBM's grasp by reverse engineering theirproprietary bios, theOpen Hardware PC platform revolution was ignited.Motherboards, memory, adapter cards, etc... could be made byanybody; hardwareinnovation increased at a rapid pace, and prices plummeted.

That left only two proprietary pieces atop the Open HardwarePC: the Intel CPU and the Microsoft OS.

Intel's been losing ground, especially with clone maker AMD(but, AMD still has to pay Intel royalties for every cloneprocessor).

The OS, though, has proven tough to emulate. Not only doesit reach the pinnacle of complexity (where chaos kicks in),but any emulatormust chase Microsoft's tail: the emulation will be worthlesscome Microsoft's next OS patch (i.e. the DRDOS settlement).

In Judge Jackson's findings in the Microsoft Antitrust case, he concluded that Linux is not positioned to overtake Windows, because it isn't Windows compatible.People won't switch because of the training costs and potential for incompatibility with their existing data.

Personally, I believe Open Source is a software revolution, just on a different tangent from the average user. In order to win over the average user: they don't just need a great desktop, they need full Windows compatibility.

How will Open Source lure the average user from Windows?

Mandrake

Linux-Mandrake [linux-mandrake.com] started off simply as basically a copy of Red Hat Linux with KDE installed (which was the most advanced desktop environment at that time). However since 'growing' from Red Hat, it has become a distibution of it's own, with a incredibly simple install, more features/applications (ReiserFS, more intergrated Gnome/KDE menu...), Pentium optimised applications, and generally is more 'bleeding edge'.

How do you feel about the fact that Red Hat Linux was 'the womb' of what would now have to be considerer one of the strongest Linux distros for the desktop, and a major competitior to Red Hat on the desktop with it's claimed "99% Red Hat compatibility"?

Linux Standards Base

Bob-- Given the way the tech market in general and the Linux market in particular have gone over the past year, Red Hat, as the brand leader, is clearly in the catbird seat. In order to give Linux the credibility and reach it deserves, there need to be more end-user applications, and application software vendors want standards. Microsoft is a standard by its sheer dominance; Java is a standard by Sun's grace, but Linux has the opportunity to be a much more open standard. What do you think of the current direction of the Linux Standards Base and where do you see Red Hat fitting in?

Re:Problems with RPM.

It is however available in postscript which is easily read in X windows on a redhat machine... However, *some* of us dont use X windows, and for us select few, we cant view it.

What the hell are you talking about? Why on earth would you need X to read a PostScript document? GhostScript will run on damn near anything.

Not only that, but the book is available in LaTeX source form. That pretty much guarantees that it's available on just about any computer and any operating system that's come out in the last 15 or 20 years. LaTeX is so ubiquitous that if you have a spare IBM PCjr from 1984, an old black and white TV for a monitor, and no hard drive, you can probably use it to format and preview the document. I would also be very suprised if you could find any working printer that could not be used to typeset that book.

You're just trolling here, and you know it.

RedHat and Microsoft .NET

What is your view on the Microsoft .NET and its impact on Linux in general and RedHat in particular?

((Interoperability || Freedom) && Future) == ?

In the recent Doug Miller interview, he speaks a LOT of interoperability. Most of that interoperability he speaks of is over the internet. My worry is of interoperability on the desktop.

For example, we Linux users have a choice of either KDE or Gnome for a desktop. We have a choice of prompts, choice of window managers, choice of MANY different things. For the tech-head, this is great. Freedom in development is great. Though, for the average, ever-elusive novice Linux user, this freedom to choose is complicated and can be very confusing.

How is Red Hat planning on this interoperability/easy user experience without pigeon-holeing(sp?) themselves into one market or another, or splintering into sub-distributions?

The Desktop

What are, if any, Redhat's plans for the enterprise desktop? Has there been any consideration towards working with Ximian?

MS vs. Open Source business model

In a recent Slashdot interview, Doug Miller of Microsoft basically said that the Open Source business model doesn't work. Proprietary code with no source available is the only way for companies to make money on existing open standards.

What is your reaction to this comment, and do you think the current Open Source business model works? Does it need to be changed?

It's the economy, stupid

How do you see free-software companies like RedHat staying viable in an increasingly dot-com-hostile economy, when their main product can be obtained for free?

Standardization

Bob -

Doug Miller, a Microsoft executive, was recently interviewed for Slashdot. Many of the questions posed were regarding the competitiveness of Linux with Windows in the medium-term. To paraphrase, Rob said that there was no viable business model based on Linux, that the lack of standardization (ie. KDE v. Gnome) would be enough of an economic disincentive to commercial application developers to prevent them from venturing into the market.

On the face of it, he seems to have a point. What do you think? Does Linux need to be herded down the path towards a super-majority recognized 'standard' to be successful, or can the type of open-source movement to date provide enough tools and applications to drive Linux to dominance?

Would you really recommend it for desktop use?

I'm a Linux enthusiast and contributor but I still don't see where it's "ready for the desktop" as I would understand that phrase.

Bob, if you had a non-technical friend or relative who currently uses Windows, Quicken, Office, IE and AOL, could you in good conscience tell him it would be in his best interest to use Linux instead? What exactly would be in it for him?

Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.

DMCA a threat to open source?

Do you think that laws such as the DMCA pose a threat to open source software, in that they may lead to the creation of proprietary, encrypted file formats, running only on proprietary operating systems, for media such as films, music and books?

Red Hat Future Desktops

Will you stick with the GNOME environment to feature "killer apps" like Nautilus and Evolution or will you ever switch to KDE now that anti-aliasing support and similar heavy-hitting apps are available, not to mention the GPL'ing of Qt? Do you feel Red Hat made the right choice to go with GNOME?

Question

What do you think of cnnfn.com's recent "Top Ten Tech Stocks to Avoid" article that mentions Red Hat as one of them?

SPARC Platform Edition?

Will we ever see a SPARC platform release of Red Hat again? Red Hat implied that there just wasn't enough customer demand. As someone who has used it, I have to admit - I kind of miss it, especially now that the 2.4 kernel and many heavy advancements have been made to things like GNOME and XFree86, etc.

Where do you see Linux profitable growth areas?

As a shareholder of both Red Hat and Microsoft, among others, it has been gratifying to me to see Red Hat doing so well in becoming profitable.

My question is, where do you see the profitable areas of Linux as being for Red Hat (or other distros)? Is it embedded systems more than servers, or info appliances? And has the introduction of major players such as IBM into the Linux R&D space been a help or a hindrance to Linux growth?

Can the Server Biz Subsidize Desktop Dev?

Let's be optimistic and assume that RedHat will achieve profitability through its support services for businesses running RedHat Linux.

Would it then make sense for RedHat to use some of its resources to help intensify the struggle towards desktop-readiness for Linux?

It seems to me that would be a good thing to do, since it could help expand the RedHat user community, ergo the customer base for RedHat's services... especially if Linux could become a viable desktop OS for larger enterprises, in which case RedHat, as the leading distro brand, would probably get the lion's share of support contracts.

Do you see this happening? Why or why not?

thanx.

- frosty
www.medienkunst.com [medienkunst.com]

Re:The Real Story

A pimp. How appropriate. In other words, a guy who makes a profit by selling something that most people could get for free with a little effort.

Dream Deal?

A lot of CEO's spend a lot of their time trying to "work deals"--partnerships, big contracts, co-branding, etc. A lot of these deals produce nothing, or next to it. But some of these deals are spectacular successes that propel a company into the stratosphere (on more than just paper).

What do you think RedHat's "dream deal" would be?
--