<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_22_2139203</id>
	<title>Red Hat Support Continues To Flourish</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1264159980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ruphus13 writes <i>"As the pure-play Open Source companies continue to dwindle, <a href="http://gigaom.com/2010/01/22/how-red-hat-routed-the-recession/">Red Hat has thrived through the recession</a>.  Its support revenues have grown 20+\%, and account for 75+\% of its revenues.  'Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses, as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world, Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts. In the third quarter of last year, support subscriptions accounted for $164 million of its $194 million in revenue, up 21 percent year-over-year. All 25 of the company's largest support subscribers renewed subscriptions, even despite a higher price tag.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>ruphus13 writes " As the pure-play Open Source companies continue to dwindle , Red Hat has thrived through the recession .
Its support revenues have grown 20 + \ % , and account for 75 + \ % of its revenues .
'Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses , as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world , Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts .
In the third quarter of last year , support subscriptions accounted for $ 164 million of its $ 194 million in revenue , up 21 percent year-over-year .
All 25 of the company 's largest support subscribers renewed subscriptions , even despite a higher price tag .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ruphus13 writes "As the pure-play Open Source companies continue to dwindle, Red Hat has thrived through the recession.
Its support revenues have grown 20+\%, and account for 75+\% of its revenues.
'Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses, as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world, Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts.
In the third quarter of last year, support subscriptions accounted for $164 million of its $194 million in revenue, up 21 percent year-over-year.
All 25 of the company's largest support subscribers renewed subscriptions, even despite a higher price tag.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30882872</id>
	<title>big companies had to standardize Linux early</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1264331880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our company standardized on Red Hat because it was out there in year 2000. We dont change OS'es lightly because it costs several hundred thousand dollars to test and release under a new OS, even if everything compiles right away.  All the customers have to switch to the new version software and hardware platform too. Plus we a legally obliged to back support 3-5 years per standard contract in our industry (energy).  Adding and subtracting a platform are major decisions then.  At any given time we support approximately three platforms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our company standardized on Red Hat because it was out there in year 2000 .
We dont change OS'es lightly because it costs several hundred thousand dollars to test and release under a new OS , even if everything compiles right away .
All the customers have to switch to the new version software and hardware platform too .
Plus we a legally obliged to back support 3-5 years per standard contract in our industry ( energy ) .
Adding and subtracting a platform are major decisions then .
At any given time we support approximately three platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our company standardized on Red Hat because it was out there in year 2000.
We dont change OS'es lightly because it costs several hundred thousand dollars to test and release under a new OS, even if everything compiles right away.
All the customers have to switch to the new version software and hardware platform too.
Plus we a legally obliged to back support 3-5 years per standard contract in our industry (energy).
Adding and subtracting a platform are major decisions then.
At any given time we support approximately three platforms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870446</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Rob\_Bryerton</author>
	<datestamp>1264269540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi! I'm Rob, nice to meet you. Now you've met somebody who pays RedHat for support! <br> <br>

Now, I don't personally pay for support, but my employer sure does. Although in the several years I've been administrating our Oracle ERP clusters, I have not once had to call RedHat for support, but I download updates from RedHat every couple months. Can't do that without a contract unless you want to compile it all by hand.<br> <br>

Think of it as an insurance policy: you hope to never have to use it, but it's there for everyone's protection.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi !
I 'm Rob , nice to meet you .
Now you 've met somebody who pays RedHat for support !
Now , I do n't personally pay for support , but my employer sure does .
Although in the several years I 've been administrating our Oracle ERP clusters , I have not once had to call RedHat for support , but I download updates from RedHat every couple months .
Ca n't do that without a contract unless you want to compile it all by hand .
Think of it as an insurance policy : you hope to never have to use it , but it 's there for everyone 's protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi!
I'm Rob, nice to meet you.
Now you've met somebody who pays RedHat for support!
Now, I don't personally pay for support, but my employer sure does.
Although in the several years I've been administrating our Oracle ERP clusters, I have not once had to call RedHat for support, but I download updates from RedHat every couple months.
Can't do that without a contract unless you want to compile it all by hand.
Think of it as an insurance policy: you hope to never have to use it, but it's there for everyone's protection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1264165380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent is not a troll!  He has a fair point.  It is true that the software RHEL is made up of is free (like freedom and beer) and you can use all of that for free, in CentOS.  So you are paying "just" for the support in that sense.  But try getting hold of a copy of RHEL without paying someone - it's not like (AFAIK!) you can download it and optionally buy support later.</p><p>That said, I had heard (uhm, possibly from a RH employee...) that RH were reasonably sensible about support issues.  The particular example I'd brought up, probably on a Xen project mailing list, was that if they only support 4 VMs then they might not support you if you'd been running more than 4 RHEL VMs on your server.  But I was told, at the time, that actually the worst they'd do would be to ask you to have only 4 VMs running whilst they help you fix it - fairly reasonable really.  So in that sense your contract with them really is just constraints on the support, not on how you use the stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent is not a troll !
He has a fair point .
It is true that the software RHEL is made up of is free ( like freedom and beer ) and you can use all of that for free , in CentOS .
So you are paying " just " for the support in that sense .
But try getting hold of a copy of RHEL without paying someone - it 's not like ( AFAIK !
) you can download it and optionally buy support later.That said , I had heard ( uhm , possibly from a RH employee... ) that RH were reasonably sensible about support issues .
The particular example I 'd brought up , probably on a Xen project mailing list , was that if they only support 4 VMs then they might not support you if you 'd been running more than 4 RHEL VMs on your server .
But I was told , at the time , that actually the worst they 'd do would be to ask you to have only 4 VMs running whilst they help you fix it - fairly reasonable really .
So in that sense your contract with them really is just constraints on the support , not on how you use the stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent is not a troll!
He has a fair point.
It is true that the software RHEL is made up of is free (like freedom and beer) and you can use all of that for free, in CentOS.
So you are paying "just" for the support in that sense.
But try getting hold of a copy of RHEL without paying someone - it's not like (AFAIK!
) you can download it and optionally buy support later.That said, I had heard (uhm, possibly from a RH employee...) that RH were reasonably sensible about support issues.
The particular example I'd brought up, probably on a Xen project mailing list, was that if they only support 4 VMs then they might not support you if you'd been running more than 4 RHEL VMs on your server.
But I was told, at the time, that actually the worst they'd do would be to ask you to have only 4 VMs running whilst they help you fix it - fairly reasonable really.
So in that sense your contract with them really is just constraints on the support, not on how you use the stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865438</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>houstonbofh</author>
	<datestamp>1264166280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, there you are. I pay for support. But I'm married, so I guess I'm not a 'single person who pays for support.'</p></div><p>As opposed to a divorced person who pays support?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , there you are .
I pay for support .
But I 'm married , so I guess I 'm not a 'single person who pays for support .
'As opposed to a divorced person who pays support ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, there you are.
I pay for support.
But I'm married, so I guess I'm not a 'single person who pays for support.
'As opposed to a divorced person who pays support?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865302</id>
	<title>Re:How to make a million in FLOSS:</title>
	<author>cyber-vandal</author>
	<datestamp>1264165260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when is proprietary software intrinsically profitable?  If you want to make a living from that you need to convince someone to pay you money too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when is proprietary software intrinsically profitable ?
If you want to make a living from that you need to convince someone to pay you money too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when is proprietary software intrinsically profitable?
If you want to make a living from that you need to convince someone to pay you money too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865288</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>pembo13</author>
	<datestamp>1264165200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers</p><p>Yah, it's not like they pay a large number of Linux developers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; To be fair , Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developersYah , it 's not like they pay a large number of Linux developers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developersYah, it's not like they pay a large number of Linux developers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865152</id>
	<title>Re:I hate when names are pluralized to mean a grou</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264164420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870474</id>
	<title>Re:Not Good</title>
	<author>Rob\_Bryerton</author>
	<datestamp>1264269780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oracle seems to think so!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oracle seems to think so !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oracle seems to think so!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865214</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1264164720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're either small companies or they'll most likely be in deep shit when things do go wrong. A large company can't wait around for someone to search for solutions on the internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're either small companies or they 'll most likely be in deep shit when things do go wrong .
A large company ca n't wait around for someone to search for solutions on the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're either small companies or they'll most likely be in deep shit when things do go wrong.
A large company can't wait around for someone to search for solutions on the internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30869448</id>
	<title>Re:Still a poor business model</title>
	<author>RedK</author>
	<datestamp>1264260240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One flaw about your argument is that Apple makes money on hardware, not software licensing.  Look at their financial reports, software accounts for barely 10\% of their business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One flaw about your argument is that Apple makes money on hardware , not software licensing .
Look at their financial reports , software accounts for barely 10 \ % of their business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One flaw about your argument is that Apple makes money on hardware, not software licensing.
Look at their financial reports, software accounts for barely 10\% of their business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866172</id>
	<title>Re:How to make a million in FLOSS:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264172040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Can someone point out an example showing me that I'm wrong?"</p><p>You won't get any examples.  The standard groupthink on here, especially coming from student, recent grads and lecturers, none of which have had any exposure to the real world, is that your business model should go something such as:<br>1) come up with idea you think might work in the market<br>2) spend lots of time and effort developing idea<br>3) once your product looks like it might be competitive on the market, then some behemoth such as IBM will take notice and start offering support to large corporates<br>4) if you are really lucky then you might get offered a job!  OMGZ a JOB!!!</p><p>4) is considered to be some really great reward.  You see, many on here constantly whinge and whine about the man keeping them down, how the PHB's get all the $ while they work away, how the marketdroids (insert whatever derogatory term) get to go on alcohol fuelled lunches while nobody wants anything to do with them. Yet suggest something such as they should start their own business and you will be mocked "how can you possibly compete with the IBMs etc?".  Well - if your business model is to give the IBMs your software for free and hope they offer you a job then no, you won't make much money from it.  You will keep making your small developer salary still whinging about how the business types make all the $ with your idea.  If these same people had bothered to put some thought into it rather than blindly going "omgz i want to offer teh open source!!!" then they might have made some decent $.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Can someone point out an example showing me that I 'm wrong ?
" You wo n't get any examples .
The standard groupthink on here , especially coming from student , recent grads and lecturers , none of which have had any exposure to the real world , is that your business model should go something such as : 1 ) come up with idea you think might work in the market2 ) spend lots of time and effort developing idea3 ) once your product looks like it might be competitive on the market , then some behemoth such as IBM will take notice and start offering support to large corporates4 ) if you are really lucky then you might get offered a job !
OMGZ a JOB ! !
! 4 ) is considered to be some really great reward .
You see , many on here constantly whinge and whine about the man keeping them down , how the PHB 's get all the $ while they work away , how the marketdroids ( insert whatever derogatory term ) get to go on alcohol fuelled lunches while nobody wants anything to do with them .
Yet suggest something such as they should start their own business and you will be mocked " how can you possibly compete with the IBMs etc ? " .
Well - if your business model is to give the IBMs your software for free and hope they offer you a job then no , you wo n't make much money from it .
You will keep making your small developer salary still whinging about how the business types make all the $ with your idea .
If these same people had bothered to put some thought into it rather than blindly going " omgz i want to offer teh open source ! ! !
" then they might have made some decent $ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Can someone point out an example showing me that I'm wrong?
"You won't get any examples.
The standard groupthink on here, especially coming from student, recent grads and lecturers, none of which have had any exposure to the real world, is that your business model should go something such as:1) come up with idea you think might work in the market2) spend lots of time and effort developing idea3) once your product looks like it might be competitive on the market, then some behemoth such as IBM will take notice and start offering support to large corporates4) if you are really lucky then you might get offered a job!
OMGZ a JOB!!
!4) is considered to be some really great reward.
You see, many on here constantly whinge and whine about the man keeping them down, how the PHB's get all the $ while they work away, how the marketdroids (insert whatever derogatory term) get to go on alcohol fuelled lunches while nobody wants anything to do with them.
Yet suggest something such as they should start their own business and you will be mocked "how can you possibly compete with the IBMs etc?".
Well - if your business model is to give the IBMs your software for free and hope they offer you a job then no, you won't make much money from it.
You will keep making your small developer salary still whinging about how the business types make all the $ with your idea.
If these same people had bothered to put some thought into it rather than blindly going "omgz i want to offer teh open source!!!
" then they might have made some decent $.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867036</id>
	<title>I love Redhat</title>
	<author>kokoko1</author>
	<datestamp>1264181760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I Love RH for all there contribution to Open Source community. I am typing this text from one of there project called "Fedora".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I Love RH for all there contribution to Open Source community .
I am typing this text from one of there project called " Fedora " .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Love RH for all there contribution to Open Source community.
I am typing this text from one of there project called "Fedora".
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30893966</id>
	<title>Red Hat / Fedora is among the best</title>
	<author>apexwm</author>
	<datestamp>1264449900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've used Red Hat Linux since 1997.  It's never let me down.  Today, I continue using Fedora which is still very well done.  It is however cutting edge so it is released every 6 months, so it does have quirks.  However that's where Red Hat Enterprise steps in.  It's rock solid and has been for years.  Red Hat is leading the way with enterprise Linux.  It's no wonder that many are making the move from Windows.  There are a huge list of reasons why, but I think the bad economy has really pushed companies and individuals to start looking at less expensive alternatives like Linux.  How can we forget that just a few years ago, Microsoft actively published reports stating the cost benefit of using Windows.  Now that people have a reason to cut costs, the real everyday truth comes out.  Microsoft will say anything to make the sale, just like a salesman at your front door.  I think more and more are waking up and realizing this.

<a href="http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux" title="apex-internet.com" rel="nofollow">http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux</a> [apex-internet.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Red Hat Linux since 1997 .
It 's never let me down .
Today , I continue using Fedora which is still very well done .
It is however cutting edge so it is released every 6 months , so it does have quirks .
However that 's where Red Hat Enterprise steps in .
It 's rock solid and has been for years .
Red Hat is leading the way with enterprise Linux .
It 's no wonder that many are making the move from Windows .
There are a huge list of reasons why , but I think the bad economy has really pushed companies and individuals to start looking at less expensive alternatives like Linux .
How can we forget that just a few years ago , Microsoft actively published reports stating the cost benefit of using Windows .
Now that people have a reason to cut costs , the real everyday truth comes out .
Microsoft will say anything to make the sale , just like a salesman at your front door .
I think more and more are waking up and realizing this .
http : //members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux [ apex-internet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Red Hat Linux since 1997.
It's never let me down.
Today, I continue using Fedora which is still very well done.
It is however cutting edge so it is released every 6 months, so it does have quirks.
However that's where Red Hat Enterprise steps in.
It's rock solid and has been for years.
Red Hat is leading the way with enterprise Linux.
It's no wonder that many are making the move from Windows.
There are a huge list of reasons why, but I think the bad economy has really pushed companies and individuals to start looking at less expensive alternatives like Linux.
How can we forget that just a few years ago, Microsoft actively published reports stating the cost benefit of using Windows.
Now that people have a reason to cut costs, the real everyday truth comes out.
Microsoft will say anything to make the sale, just like a salesman at your front door.
I think more and more are waking up and realizing this.
http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux [apex-internet.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30871654</id>
	<title>Obligatory xkcd</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1264278420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://xkcd.com/670/" title="xkcd.com">http://xkcd.com/670/</a> [xkcd.com]</p><p>I guess you're saying "Be the smart engineer"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //xkcd.com/670/ [ xkcd.com ] I guess you 're saying " Be the smart engineer " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://xkcd.com/670/ [xkcd.com]I guess you're saying "Be the smart engineer"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865786</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264168680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, you obviously can't even read, so I'm not surprised that the engineers couldn't help you.

<a href="http://www.redhat.com/support/policy/sla/contact/" title="redhat.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.redhat.com/support/policy/sla/contact/</a> [redhat.com]

The 'entire thing' has been outsourced to India?  Huh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you obviously ca n't even read , so I 'm not surprised that the engineers could n't help you .
http : //www.redhat.com/support/policy/sla/contact/ [ redhat.com ] The 'entire thing ' has been outsourced to India ?
Huh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you obviously can't even read, so I'm not surprised that the engineers couldn't help you.
http://www.redhat.com/support/policy/sla/contact/ [redhat.com]

The 'entire thing' has been outsourced to India?
Huh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867946</id>
	<title>Someone answer this please</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264238940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is BitZtream so fucking stupid?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is BitZtream so fucking stupid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is BitZtream so fucking stupid?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868462</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1264247520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't have to use RedHat... All your FOSS code is still available, as is lots of code RedHat wrote and released under open licenses and you are free to download that source and compile it on another distro.</p><p>RedHat is offered as a choice, and large corporations take that choice because they prefer to buy from another large company. They made the choice to spend rather than save, they could have got the exact same software for free with no support or from other sources with varying support terms. Better that they gave their money to RH than MS.</p><p>I see RH as more of a robin hood figure, highly beneficial to the OSS community... They provide legitimacy to those corporates who think that software needs to be paid for and should come with complicated licensing terms, and invest a lot of money in OSS development. Those of us who aren't blinkered by the aforementioned corporate mentality get to benefit from all of their development work for free.</p><p>And no, your not paying, the company you work for is paying... Seeing as you're a developer i'd assume you are technically competent enough that you wouldn't need any of RH's services on your own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't have to use RedHat... All your FOSS code is still available , as is lots of code RedHat wrote and released under open licenses and you are free to download that source and compile it on another distro.RedHat is offered as a choice , and large corporations take that choice because they prefer to buy from another large company .
They made the choice to spend rather than save , they could have got the exact same software for free with no support or from other sources with varying support terms .
Better that they gave their money to RH than MS.I see RH as more of a robin hood figure , highly beneficial to the OSS community... They provide legitimacy to those corporates who think that software needs to be paid for and should come with complicated licensing terms , and invest a lot of money in OSS development .
Those of us who are n't blinkered by the aforementioned corporate mentality get to benefit from all of their development work for free.And no , your not paying , the company you work for is paying... Seeing as you 're a developer i 'd assume you are technically competent enough that you would n't need any of RH 's services on your own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't have to use RedHat... All your FOSS code is still available, as is lots of code RedHat wrote and released under open licenses and you are free to download that source and compile it on another distro.RedHat is offered as a choice, and large corporations take that choice because they prefer to buy from another large company.
They made the choice to spend rather than save, they could have got the exact same software for free with no support or from other sources with varying support terms.
Better that they gave their money to RH than MS.I see RH as more of a robin hood figure, highly beneficial to the OSS community... They provide legitimacy to those corporates who think that software needs to be paid for and should come with complicated licensing terms, and invest a lot of money in OSS development.
Those of us who aren't blinkered by the aforementioned corporate mentality get to benefit from all of their development work for free.And no, your not paying, the company you work for is paying... Seeing as you're a developer i'd assume you are technically competent enough that you wouldn't need any of RH's services on your own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865272</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264165080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, annoying. CentOS is an alternative though, but It does take balls. Redhat probably dont care, centos is redhat in a different guise, but at least it's not a huge competitor (ie suse). Given commercial pressures, production servers should be RHEL(X) to satisfy the top brass, not CentOS. Easy upgrade path ahoy... RedHat can't lose!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , annoying .
CentOS is an alternative though , but It does take balls .
Redhat probably dont care , centos is redhat in a different guise , but at least it 's not a huge competitor ( ie suse ) .
Given commercial pressures , production servers should be RHEL ( X ) to satisfy the top brass , not CentOS .
Easy upgrade path ahoy... RedHat ca n't lose !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, annoying.
CentOS is an alternative though, but It does take balls.
Redhat probably dont care, centos is redhat in a different guise, but at least it's not a huge competitor (ie suse).
Given commercial pressures, production servers should be RHEL(X) to satisfy the top brass, not CentOS.
Easy upgrade path ahoy... RedHat can't lose!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867268</id>
	<title>Not Good</title>
	<author>foo fighter</author>
	<datestamp>1264184760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't this create a perverse incentive to create software that is complicated and requires lots of expensive support?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't this create a perverse incentive to create software that is complicated and requires lots of expensive support ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't this create a perverse incentive to create software that is complicated and requires lots of expensive support?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868088</id>
	<title>Re:Not that impressive</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1264241160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Without a doubt an admirable goal.<br>However, not exactly close.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Without a doubt an admirable goal.However , not exactly close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without a doubt an admirable goal.However, not exactly close.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30884020</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>MrNemesis</author>
	<datestamp>1264339380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hell yes. I've spent 3 years at my company, a windows shop, as "the Linux guy" - not that we used Linux, I came over to the company in an acquisition from a company that did use Linux. I've set up a couple of boxes, mostly Debian, for a few boring housekeeping tasks; team-specific wiki's (people *love* it compared to the fustercluck sharepoint that was previously used), SVN for version control of config files and firewall rules, caching DNS servers for bits of our DMZ. All fine and dandy, and meanwhile I learned the hell out of every windows problem I faced as well as becoming the de facto VMware guy.</p><p>Fast forward to now and we're migrating a load of old Oracle databases from AIX to RHEL; advanced in hardware now allow us to get the same performance from a cluster of x86 hardware and 24 SSD's as we do out of some POWER5's and 36U full of 15k fibre channel discs at a tenth of the hardware and support costs. 60\% and rising of the rest of our wintel boxes are now happy running off a SAN on an ESX cluster.</p><p>RHEL hasn't made any significant inroads into the desktops of any company I know of, but it's cleaning up on the heavy lifting backend. Note we're not even a big company, 2000-ish people, and we've classically been quite Linux-hostile... mainly due to it being too cheap<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell yes .
I 've spent 3 years at my company , a windows shop , as " the Linux guy " - not that we used Linux , I came over to the company in an acquisition from a company that did use Linux .
I 've set up a couple of boxes , mostly Debian , for a few boring housekeeping tasks ; team-specific wiki 's ( people * love * it compared to the fustercluck sharepoint that was previously used ) , SVN for version control of config files and firewall rules , caching DNS servers for bits of our DMZ .
All fine and dandy , and meanwhile I learned the hell out of every windows problem I faced as well as becoming the de facto VMware guy.Fast forward to now and we 're migrating a load of old Oracle databases from AIX to RHEL ; advanced in hardware now allow us to get the same performance from a cluster of x86 hardware and 24 SSD 's as we do out of some POWER5 's and 36U full of 15k fibre channel discs at a tenth of the hardware and support costs .
60 \ % and rising of the rest of our wintel boxes are now happy running off a SAN on an ESX cluster.RHEL has n't made any significant inroads into the desktops of any company I know of , but it 's cleaning up on the heavy lifting backend .
Note we 're not even a big company , 2000-ish people , and we 've classically been quite Linux-hostile... mainly due to it being too cheap : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell yes.
I've spent 3 years at my company, a windows shop, as "the Linux guy" - not that we used Linux, I came over to the company in an acquisition from a company that did use Linux.
I've set up a couple of boxes, mostly Debian, for a few boring housekeeping tasks; team-specific wiki's (people *love* it compared to the fustercluck sharepoint that was previously used), SVN for version control of config files and firewall rules, caching DNS servers for bits of our DMZ.
All fine and dandy, and meanwhile I learned the hell out of every windows problem I faced as well as becoming the de facto VMware guy.Fast forward to now and we're migrating a load of old Oracle databases from AIX to RHEL; advanced in hardware now allow us to get the same performance from a cluster of x86 hardware and 24 SSD's as we do out of some POWER5's and 36U full of 15k fibre channel discs at a tenth of the hardware and support costs.
60\% and rising of the rest of our wintel boxes are now happy running off a SAN on an ESX cluster.RHEL hasn't made any significant inroads into the desktops of any company I know of, but it's cleaning up on the heavy lifting backend.
Note we're not even a big company, 2000-ish people, and we've classically been quite Linux-hostile... mainly due to it being too cheap :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865172</id>
	<title>Support at the basic level...</title>
	<author>adosch</author>
	<datestamp>1264164540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been a RedHat fan-boy since RedHat 4.x days and at my place of employment we have 100+ Redhat subscription/support licenses.  However, even their support at the most basic level (~$350/year) isn't really "great"... the support rivals Microsoft anymore.  If you have a problem, it's either someone else's or if you are already at the current patch level for package-xyz or kernel-abc, you usually get the shrugged shoulder response unless you throw up a real stink.<p>I think RedHat really shines because of the variety of enterprise hardware support they have; places like IBM, Dell, HP, etc. all really work out-of-the-box with Redhat installations (pending some pretty new hardware that you have to use the suppliment CD stuff for), so it's not like it was back in the day when SGI and even Sun (since they broke into the x86 market) where you need your in-house hardware to jive with your in-house operating system.  There's going to be the opposer's that will argue the stability factor that SGI and SUN have/had in regards to their hardware because it was tailored for it and not made to be as bloat as the Linux kernel has gotten in areas to support the mass hardware platforms.  Again, Redhat IMHO should be thanking the enterprise hardware vendors for their posted OS support for RedHat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been a RedHat fan-boy since RedHat 4.x days and at my place of employment we have 100 + Redhat subscription/support licenses .
However , even their support at the most basic level ( ~ $ 350/year ) is n't really " great " ... the support rivals Microsoft anymore .
If you have a problem , it 's either someone else 's or if you are already at the current patch level for package-xyz or kernel-abc , you usually get the shrugged shoulder response unless you throw up a real stink.I think RedHat really shines because of the variety of enterprise hardware support they have ; places like IBM , Dell , HP , etc .
all really work out-of-the-box with Redhat installations ( pending some pretty new hardware that you have to use the suppliment CD stuff for ) , so it 's not like it was back in the day when SGI and even Sun ( since they broke into the x86 market ) where you need your in-house hardware to jive with your in-house operating system .
There 's going to be the opposer 's that will argue the stability factor that SGI and SUN have/had in regards to their hardware because it was tailored for it and not made to be as bloat as the Linux kernel has gotten in areas to support the mass hardware platforms .
Again , Redhat IMHO should be thanking the enterprise hardware vendors for their posted OS support for RedHat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been a RedHat fan-boy since RedHat 4.x days and at my place of employment we have 100+ Redhat subscription/support licenses.
However, even their support at the most basic level (~$350/year) isn't really "great"... the support rivals Microsoft anymore.
If you have a problem, it's either someone else's or if you are already at the current patch level for package-xyz or kernel-abc, you usually get the shrugged shoulder response unless you throw up a real stink.I think RedHat really shines because of the variety of enterprise hardware support they have; places like IBM, Dell, HP, etc.
all really work out-of-the-box with Redhat installations (pending some pretty new hardware that you have to use the suppliment CD stuff for), so it's not like it was back in the day when SGI and even Sun (since they broke into the x86 market) where you need your in-house hardware to jive with your in-house operating system.
There's going to be the opposer's that will argue the stability factor that SGI and SUN have/had in regards to their hardware because it was tailored for it and not made to be as bloat as the Linux kernel has gotten in areas to support the mass hardware platforms.
Again, Redhat IMHO should be thanking the enterprise hardware vendors for their posted OS support for RedHat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868670</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264251360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No they have not outsourced the entire thing.  I am an Australian working for Red Hat, Red Hat has 24/7 support with people working in the area where they are awake.</p><p>All of the support guys are at least RHCE qualified, so I'd like to assume that they understand the most basic of commands, if not more.</p><p>If you'd like, I can hook you up with someone who can take a look at what happened so we can make sure it doesn't happen again.</p><p>wmealing -a-t- guess the domain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No they have not outsourced the entire thing .
I am an Australian working for Red Hat , Red Hat has 24/7 support with people working in the area where they are awake.All of the support guys are at least RHCE qualified , so I 'd like to assume that they understand the most basic of commands , if not more.If you 'd like , I can hook you up with someone who can take a look at what happened so we can make sure it does n't happen again.wmealing -a-t- guess the domain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No they have not outsourced the entire thing.
I am an Australian working for Red Hat, Red Hat has 24/7 support with people working in the area where they are awake.All of the support guys are at least RHCE qualified, so I'd like to assume that they understand the most basic of commands, if not more.If you'd like, I can hook you up with someone who can take a look at what happened so we can make sure it doesn't happen again.wmealing -a-t- guess the domain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866798</id>
	<title>I know lots of people that think you are a douche</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a lot of people that think you are a douche and unlike you, they are correct BitZtream. BitZtream says he "knows a lot of people" that do "XYZ" but you never see any supporting evidences out of his stupid ass. Why don't you post something other than your anecdotal bullcrap for once?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of people that think you are a douche and unlike you , they are correct BitZtream .
BitZtream says he " knows a lot of people " that do " XYZ " but you never see any supporting evidences out of his stupid ass .
Why do n't you post something other than your anecdotal bullcrap for once ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a lot of people that think you are a douche and unlike you, they are correct BitZtream.
BitZtream says he "knows a lot of people" that do "XYZ" but you never see any supporting evidences out of his stupid ass.
Why don't you post something other than your anecdotal bullcrap for once?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866434</id>
	<title>Re:Oracle no threat?</title>
	<author>archermadness</author>
	<datestamp>1264175160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We recently switched to OEL from RedHat, purely for the cost savings. Oracle even provides an 'up2date' package that switches a current RHEL box to OEL, and will give a discount based on current RHEL support licenses.
<p>

Considering that I've been at my current company for over 2 1/2 years, and haven't called Redhat or Oracle for Linux support, I'm not too worried about the quality of support.
</p><p>
In fact, like a lot of people, the only real reason we even pay for support is so that management feels good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We recently switched to OEL from RedHat , purely for the cost savings .
Oracle even provides an 'up2date ' package that switches a current RHEL box to OEL , and will give a discount based on current RHEL support licenses .
Considering that I 've been at my current company for over 2 1/2 years , and have n't called Redhat or Oracle for Linux support , I 'm not too worried about the quality of support .
In fact , like a lot of people , the only real reason we even pay for support is so that management feels good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We recently switched to OEL from RedHat, purely for the cost savings.
Oracle even provides an 'up2date' package that switches a current RHEL box to OEL, and will give a discount based on current RHEL support licenses.
Considering that I've been at my current company for over 2 1/2 years, and haven't called Redhat or Oracle for Linux support, I'm not too worried about the quality of support.
In fact, like a lot of people, the only real reason we even pay for support is so that management feels good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866840</id>
	<title>Like who BitZtream? Enough anecdotal crap ok??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You were rated +2 informative, for what? Anecdotal crap?? Please, give us a break. I'd like to know who. Probably some fly by nite industries dimestore operation that's broke as a joke like you are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You were rated + 2 informative , for what ?
Anecdotal crap ? ?
Please , give us a break .
I 'd like to know who .
Probably some fly by nite industries dimestore operation that 's broke as a joke like you are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You were rated +2 informative, for what?
Anecdotal crap??
Please, give us a break.
I'd like to know who.
Probably some fly by nite industries dimestore operation that's broke as a joke like you are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866100</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>ScytheBlade1</author>
	<datestamp>1264171380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm quite sure that Redhat's "support" model is designed to frustrate and confuse.</p></div><p>
You pay per server per year. That's not exactly confusing. Frustrating only in the sense that... you have to pay for it.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Customer: "I'm a FOSS DEVELOPER! YOU'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE!"</p></div><p>
<a href="http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/" title="redhat.com">http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/</a> [redhat.com] <br>
No they're not. They're selling you binary packages and the ability to call them up at 2:30 AM to get your issues fixed. If you want your code, it is right there for you to download without issue.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.</p> </div><p>
The software is free. If they don't understand what they're purchasing, that's their problem, and only yours if you decide to make it your problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite sure that Redhat 's " support " model is designed to frustrate and confuse .
You pay per server per year .
That 's not exactly confusing .
Frustrating only in the sense that... you have to pay for it.Customer : " I 'm a FOSS DEVELOPER !
YOU 'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE !
" http : //ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/ [ redhat.com ] No they 're not .
They 're selling you binary packages and the ability to call them up at 2 : 30 AM to get your issues fixed .
If you want your code , it is right there for you to download without issue.They can smugly tell me " see , software is n't free ?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $ 1500/year .
The software is free .
If they do n't understand what they 're purchasing , that 's their problem , and only yours if you decide to make it your problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite sure that Redhat's "support" model is designed to frustrate and confuse.
You pay per server per year.
That's not exactly confusing.
Frustrating only in the sense that... you have to pay for it.Customer: "I'm a FOSS DEVELOPER!
YOU'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE!
"
http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/ [redhat.com] 
No they're not.
They're selling you binary packages and the ability to call them up at 2:30 AM to get your issues fixed.
If you want your code, it is right there for you to download without issue.They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.
The software is free.
If they don't understand what they're purchasing, that's their problem, and only yours if you decide to make it your problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</id>
	<title>I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264163940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know  a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and I've not come across a single person who pays anyone for support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and I 've not come across a single person who pays anyone for support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know  a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and I've not come across a single person who pays anyone for support.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867814</id>
	<title>useless numbers make for a useless article.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264279980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like how TFA doesn't really show absolute numbers or put the percentages into context, especially when showing the comparison with Novell, Oracle and Microsoft (n\% of what, exactly? Apparently trying to avoif drawing attention to the fact that a 1\% again for MS or Oracle is roughly the equivalent, in absolute terms of a 100\% if not more, increase for Red Hat) and why the focus on revenues without putting that into the context of what their profits are?</p><p>Red Hat has shown increased revenues, good on them, but there's really no need to try to blow it up to be something more gargantuine than it is, and doing so comes off as desperate. Is commercial Linux really in such a sad, sorry state that this is necessary?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like how TFA does n't really show absolute numbers or put the percentages into context , especially when showing the comparison with Novell , Oracle and Microsoft ( n \ % of what , exactly ?
Apparently trying to avoif drawing attention to the fact that a 1 \ % again for MS or Oracle is roughly the equivalent , in absolute terms of a 100 \ % if not more , increase for Red Hat ) and why the focus on revenues without putting that into the context of what their profits are ? Red Hat has shown increased revenues , good on them , but there 's really no need to try to blow it up to be something more gargantuine than it is , and doing so comes off as desperate .
Is commercial Linux really in such a sad , sorry state that this is necessary ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like how TFA doesn't really show absolute numbers or put the percentages into context, especially when showing the comparison with Novell, Oracle and Microsoft (n\% of what, exactly?
Apparently trying to avoif drawing attention to the fact that a 1\% again for MS or Oracle is roughly the equivalent, in absolute terms of a 100\% if not more, increase for Red Hat) and why the focus on revenues without putting that into the context of what their profits are?Red Hat has shown increased revenues, good on them, but there's really no need to try to blow it up to be something more gargantuine than it is, and doing so comes off as desperate.
Is commercial Linux really in such a sad, sorry state that this is necessary?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122</id>
	<title>How to make a million in FLOSS:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264164300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Upon closer inspection, Rodrigues determined that Red Hat generates the lion&rsquo;s share of the &ldquo;Other Income&rdquo; from conservative fixed-income investments and some equity investments.</p></div><p>OK folks, this is how to make a million with FLOSS: first, get a million dollars. (-Stolen from Steve Martin).</p><p>From what I've been seeing with the FLOSS business model, to make a living (gotta pay for health and auto insurance, food, rent, etc..) you either have to be a coder for the FOSS companies: RedHat, MySQL, and whatever other one out there that actually pays programmers; or IBM. They on the other hand, make their money by selling contracts for services and in RedHat's case also from an investment portfolio.</p><p>So, if you're some guy all by his lonesome self that writes stuff to be released as a FOSS project, unless it becomes HUGELY popular with <i>corporate</i> clients that will pony up for <i>support contracts</i> that give you an income stream (and have a bunch of securities invested helps apparently), you basically have no chance of making a living.</p><p>Can someone point out an example showing me that I'm wrong?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Upon closer inspection , Rodrigues determined that Red Hat generates the lion    s share of the    Other Income    from conservative fixed-income investments and some equity investments.OK folks , this is how to make a million with FLOSS : first , get a million dollars .
( -Stolen from Steve Martin ) .From what I 've been seeing with the FLOSS business model , to make a living ( got ta pay for health and auto insurance , food , rent , etc.. ) you either have to be a coder for the FOSS companies : RedHat , MySQL , and whatever other one out there that actually pays programmers ; or IBM .
They on the other hand , make their money by selling contracts for services and in RedHat 's case also from an investment portfolio.So , if you 're some guy all by his lonesome self that writes stuff to be released as a FOSS project , unless it becomes HUGELY popular with corporate clients that will pony up for support contracts that give you an income stream ( and have a bunch of securities invested helps apparently ) , you basically have no chance of making a living.Can someone point out an example showing me that I 'm wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Upon closer inspection, Rodrigues determined that Red Hat generates the lion’s share of the “Other Income” from conservative fixed-income investments and some equity investments.OK folks, this is how to make a million with FLOSS: first, get a million dollars.
(-Stolen from Steve Martin).From what I've been seeing with the FLOSS business model, to make a living (gotta pay for health and auto insurance, food, rent, etc..) you either have to be a coder for the FOSS companies: RedHat, MySQL, and whatever other one out there that actually pays programmers; or IBM.
They on the other hand, make their money by selling contracts for services and in RedHat's case also from an investment portfolio.So, if you're some guy all by his lonesome self that writes stuff to be released as a FOSS project, unless it becomes HUGELY popular with corporate clients that will pony up for support contracts that give you an income stream (and have a bunch of securities invested helps apparently), you basically have no chance of making a living.Can someone point out an example showing me that I'm wrong?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865136</id>
	<title>Oracle no threat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264164300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen come companies switch to Oracle Enterprise Linux purely because support is cheaper than RHEL, even if they're not using the Oracle DB.</p><p>OEL support seems to stink though, and we've all seen the horrid hacks Oracle does to make their database even install on Linux (RPM's you need to install and then remove!) and odd kernel parameter tweaks.</p><p>Gotta laugh at the OEL public YUM server (http://public-yum.oracle.com/) which is basically the RPM's on the DVD, not any updates or anything, who would want to route over the internet to get something off a DVD?!</p><p>Then of course there's the unscrupulous bastards who use CentOS in the enterprise and pay for one RHEL support contract.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen come companies switch to Oracle Enterprise Linux purely because support is cheaper than RHEL , even if they 're not using the Oracle DB.OEL support seems to stink though , and we 've all seen the horrid hacks Oracle does to make their database even install on Linux ( RPM 's you need to install and then remove !
) and odd kernel parameter tweaks.Got ta laugh at the OEL public YUM server ( http : //public-yum.oracle.com/ ) which is basically the RPM 's on the DVD , not any updates or anything , who would want to route over the internet to get something off a DVD ?
! Then of course there 's the unscrupulous bastards who use CentOS in the enterprise and pay for one RHEL support contract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen come companies switch to Oracle Enterprise Linux purely because support is cheaper than RHEL, even if they're not using the Oracle DB.OEL support seems to stink though, and we've all seen the horrid hacks Oracle does to make their database even install on Linux (RPM's you need to install and then remove!
) and odd kernel parameter tweaks.Gotta laugh at the OEL public YUM server (http://public-yum.oracle.com/) which is basically the RPM's on the DVD, not any updates or anything, who would want to route over the internet to get something off a DVD?
!Then of course there's the unscrupulous bastards who use CentOS in the enterprise and pay for one RHEL support contract.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>antifoidulus</author>
	<datestamp>1264165140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They aren't missing a lot.  They have outsourced the entire thing to India and on the rare occasion I did have a question the "support" I got was totally worthless.  It was apparent that they didn't even understand the most basic of commands.  I opened about 4 tickets and solved all of them on my own.  After that I didn't even bother with it.  Not worth a damn dime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are n't missing a lot .
They have outsourced the entire thing to India and on the rare occasion I did have a question the " support " I got was totally worthless .
It was apparent that they did n't even understand the most basic of commands .
I opened about 4 tickets and solved all of them on my own .
After that I did n't even bother with it .
Not worth a damn dime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They aren't missing a lot.
They have outsourced the entire thing to India and on the rare occasion I did have a question the "support" I got was totally worthless.
It was apparent that they didn't even understand the most basic of commands.
I opened about 4 tickets and solved all of them on my own.
After that I didn't even bother with it.
Not worth a damn dime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865292</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264165200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right. Large companies prefer to pay someone else (in advance) so that they can wait around for someone else to search for solutions on the Internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
Large companies prefer to pay someone else ( in advance ) so that they can wait around for someone else to search for solutions on the Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
Large companies prefer to pay someone else (in advance) so that they can wait around for someone else to search for solutions on the Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867458</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264188120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you do realise that if Red Hat hasn't done this, they'd still be a small time company and would probably have gone under a few times by now.</p><p>So I think the return on investment for most ppl, considering RH develop most of the software in most Linux distros hasn't been that bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you do realise that if Red Hat has n't done this , they 'd still be a small time company and would probably have gone under a few times by now.So I think the return on investment for most ppl , considering RH develop most of the software in most Linux distros has n't been that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you do realise that if Red Hat hasn't done this, they'd still be a small time company and would probably have gone under a few times by now.So I think the return on investment for most ppl, considering RH develop most of the software in most Linux distros hasn't been that bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866772</id>
	<title>FLOSS business model, simplified</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1264179180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't get it on how to make loot with this FLOSS business model stuff. I'm not even a dev and I get it. I will try and 'splain this.</p><p>Here is the example I have used before: Remember hard wired telephones? Once a year way back then you get a free book from the phone company called a telephone directory. Inside the directory are different colored pages, white is residential, blue is government, and yellow is commercial business. Notice they have the full alphabet covered in that "yellow pages" section, businesses A-Z, autos to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..whatever, zoologists. This is 2010, ALL those businesses ALL use computers/software to make money somehow.</p><p>That's how you make money with FLOSS, use it in one of those "other" A-Z businesses. Use it tweak it customize it, then go forth boldly with computer and code in hand and build and sell your widget and service.</p><p>Stand alone software as a business directly makes some people some money, for some people, in some areas, even a few large places, but the rest of the business done on the planet simply <b>dwarfs</b> that, just stomps it flat. There is no comparison.</p><p>example, the article: redhat makes x-dollars supplying clients. Those clients are in OTHER business that makes 1000x. Which looks to be where to head to make the rent and food budget?</p><p>They make so much money, they can afford to pay for software and service and still make a lot of other loot, tons more than what redhat makes. I bet most of their big clients are giants and make billions, compared to what redhat makes, which is low millions.</p><p>Home depot makes money selling tools. The people who buy those tools and materials makes thousands of times more money than home depot building houses and commercial buildings and being plumbers and electricians and landscapers etc.</p><p>Not everyone will work at home depot, but a whole lot of people can work someplace else and just use home depot just as an easy way to stay up with the tools and materials they need to go make some REAL money.</p><p>Now, cooperating on code in general terms, all the floss dudes all over, lets all those guys who are in other businesses stay focused on their real business, and "make money". By sharing code, they all get spiffier tools, for free or real cheap. They then use those tools to go to work doing something useful and make money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't get it on how to make loot with this FLOSS business model stuff .
I 'm not even a dev and I get it .
I will try and 'splain this.Here is the example I have used before : Remember hard wired telephones ?
Once a year way back then you get a free book from the phone company called a telephone directory .
Inside the directory are different colored pages , white is residential , blue is government , and yellow is commercial business .
Notice they have the full alphabet covered in that " yellow pages " section , businesses A-Z , autos to ..whatever , zoologists .
This is 2010 , ALL those businesses ALL use computers/software to make money somehow.That 's how you make money with FLOSS , use it in one of those " other " A-Z businesses .
Use it tweak it customize it , then go forth boldly with computer and code in hand and build and sell your widget and service.Stand alone software as a business directly makes some people some money , for some people , in some areas , even a few large places , but the rest of the business done on the planet simply dwarfs that , just stomps it flat .
There is no comparison.example , the article : redhat makes x-dollars supplying clients .
Those clients are in OTHER business that makes 1000x .
Which looks to be where to head to make the rent and food budget ? They make so much money , they can afford to pay for software and service and still make a lot of other loot , tons more than what redhat makes .
I bet most of their big clients are giants and make billions , compared to what redhat makes , which is low millions.Home depot makes money selling tools .
The people who buy those tools and materials makes thousands of times more money than home depot building houses and commercial buildings and being plumbers and electricians and landscapers etc.Not everyone will work at home depot , but a whole lot of people can work someplace else and just use home depot just as an easy way to stay up with the tools and materials they need to go make some REAL money.Now , cooperating on code in general terms , all the floss dudes all over , lets all those guys who are in other businesses stay focused on their real business , and " make money " .
By sharing code , they all get spiffier tools , for free or real cheap .
They then use those tools to go to work doing something useful and make money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't get it on how to make loot with this FLOSS business model stuff.
I'm not even a dev and I get it.
I will try and 'splain this.Here is the example I have used before: Remember hard wired telephones?
Once a year way back then you get a free book from the phone company called a telephone directory.
Inside the directory are different colored pages, white is residential, blue is government, and yellow is commercial business.
Notice they have the full alphabet covered in that "yellow pages" section, businesses A-Z, autos to ..whatever, zoologists.
This is 2010, ALL those businesses ALL use computers/software to make money somehow.That's how you make money with FLOSS, use it in one of those "other" A-Z businesses.
Use it tweak it customize it, then go forth boldly with computer and code in hand and build and sell your widget and service.Stand alone software as a business directly makes some people some money, for some people, in some areas, even a few large places, but the rest of the business done on the planet simply dwarfs that, just stomps it flat.
There is no comparison.example, the article: redhat makes x-dollars supplying clients.
Those clients are in OTHER business that makes 1000x.
Which looks to be where to head to make the rent and food budget?They make so much money, they can afford to pay for software and service and still make a lot of other loot, tons more than what redhat makes.
I bet most of their big clients are giants and make billions, compared to what redhat makes, which is low millions.Home depot makes money selling tools.
The people who buy those tools and materials makes thousands of times more money than home depot building houses and commercial buildings and being plumbers and electricians and landscapers etc.Not everyone will work at home depot, but a whole lot of people can work someplace else and just use home depot just as an easy way to stay up with the tools and materials they need to go make some REAL money.Now, cooperating on code in general terms, all the floss dudes all over, lets all those guys who are in other businesses stay focused on their real business, and "make money".
By sharing code, they all get spiffier tools, for free or real cheap.
They then use those tools to go to work doing something useful and make money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865620</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously, you don't work for companies which need support for Oracle, DB2 or any other proprietary business-critical application that is unsupported on anything but RedHat, Oracle or Suse Linux (and no, CentOS is not supported).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously , you do n't work for companies which need support for Oracle , DB2 or any other proprietary business-critical application that is unsupported on anything but RedHat , Oracle or Suse Linux ( and no , CentOS is not supported ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously, you don't work for companies which need support for Oracle, DB2 or any other proprietary business-critical application that is unsupported on anything but RedHat, Oracle or Suse Linux (and no, CentOS is not supported).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30869232</id>
	<title>Use Future conversion for Red Hat.</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1264258080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are lot of posts I see here about how the closed source model makes more money than Red Hats biz modal. I think people are missing the point (the one that Wall Street will ultimately care about). The point always has been, and always will be, future revenue growth.</p><p>I believe it is the small companies that in the last 5 years or so have started with CentOS or even other Linux distros, that will be the measure of the success of Red Hat in the years to come.</p><p>How many Small to Medium size businesses out there will be future clients of Red Hat?</p><p>By contrast, how many small to medium size biz are starting out with windows servers sitting in the corner of their office?</p><p>That is where the revenue growth for Red Hat is coming in the next say 5, 10, 20 years.</p><p>For example, I run two CentOS servers plus an all linux shop of desktops. Right now I handle all my support myself, but as we grow and I have better things to do with my time, I can very much see buying support in the future from Red Hat. In fact, I have discussed it with my partner (that has limited computer knowledge), in the event I get hit by bus or whatever as an option to keep things going.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are lot of posts I see here about how the closed source model makes more money than Red Hats biz modal .
I think people are missing the point ( the one that Wall Street will ultimately care about ) .
The point always has been , and always will be , future revenue growth.I believe it is the small companies that in the last 5 years or so have started with CentOS or even other Linux distros , that will be the measure of the success of Red Hat in the years to come.How many Small to Medium size businesses out there will be future clients of Red Hat ? By contrast , how many small to medium size biz are starting out with windows servers sitting in the corner of their office ? That is where the revenue growth for Red Hat is coming in the next say 5 , 10 , 20 years.For example , I run two CentOS servers plus an all linux shop of desktops .
Right now I handle all my support myself , but as we grow and I have better things to do with my time , I can very much see buying support in the future from Red Hat .
In fact , I have discussed it with my partner ( that has limited computer knowledge ) , in the event I get hit by bus or whatever as an option to keep things going .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are lot of posts I see here about how the closed source model makes more money than Red Hats biz modal.
I think people are missing the point (the one that Wall Street will ultimately care about).
The point always has been, and always will be, future revenue growth.I believe it is the small companies that in the last 5 years or so have started with CentOS or even other Linux distros, that will be the measure of the success of Red Hat in the years to come.How many Small to Medium size businesses out there will be future clients of Red Hat?By contrast, how many small to medium size biz are starting out with windows servers sitting in the corner of their office?That is where the revenue growth for Red Hat is coming in the next say 5, 10, 20 years.For example, I run two CentOS servers plus an all linux shop of desktops.
Right now I handle all my support myself, but as we grow and I have better things to do with my time, I can very much see buying support in the future from Red Hat.
In fact, I have discussed it with my partner (that has limited computer knowledge), in the event I get hit by bus or whatever as an option to keep things going.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868796</id>
	<title>Re:Our Guy Was Hit By The Crosstown Bus</title>
	<author>jimicus</author>
	<datestamp>1264252800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You may not always be there.</p><p>But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.</p><p>Your boss doesn't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.</p><p>The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy. His recovery plan.</p></div><p>I personally guarantee you that by the time the average server OS has had all the necessary tweaks set up to bed it down into a company's systems, along with accounting for little things like "can't use this patch because it clashes with this other app we need, so instead we workaround using this, that other server is so critical to the business that we haven't dared patch it in five years (and I don't care how anal you'd like to be, every business with a significant IT department has at least one server like this)" there is nobody on the planet who can support significant issues over the phone.</p><p>It's perhaps less of an issue now than it was 5 or 10 years ago, but it still exists.  It's the reason that paid consultants can make a good living on short-term contracts at short notice and potentially being out of work for three to six months of the year.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You may not always be there.But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.Your boss does n't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy .
His recovery plan.I personally guarantee you that by the time the average server OS has had all the necessary tweaks set up to bed it down into a company 's systems , along with accounting for little things like " ca n't use this patch because it clashes with this other app we need , so instead we workaround using this , that other server is so critical to the business that we have n't dared patch it in five years ( and I do n't care how anal you 'd like to be , every business with a significant IT department has at least one server like this ) " there is nobody on the planet who can support significant issues over the phone.It 's perhaps less of an issue now than it was 5 or 10 years ago , but it still exists .
It 's the reason that paid consultants can make a good living on short-term contracts at short notice and potentially being out of work for three to six months of the year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may not always be there.But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.Your boss doesn't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy.
His recovery plan.I personally guarantee you that by the time the average server OS has had all the necessary tweaks set up to bed it down into a company's systems, along with accounting for little things like "can't use this patch because it clashes with this other app we need, so instead we workaround using this, that other server is so critical to the business that we haven't dared patch it in five years (and I don't care how anal you'd like to be, every business with a significant IT department has at least one server like this)" there is nobody on the planet who can support significant issues over the phone.It's perhaps less of an issue now than it was 5 or 10 years ago, but it still exists.
It's the reason that paid consultants can make a good living on short-term contracts at short notice and potentially being out of work for three to six months of the year.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866488</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264175580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have a clue, you can use CentOS or any other distribution you want. Your company can't tell the difference between CentOS and something off TPB, and they're paying 1500$/year for it. And you blame Red Hat? Sorry but I'd be doing the same thing and ask if your company would need some extended warranty or monster cables with that. As usual, ignorance costs money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have a clue , you can use CentOS or any other distribution you want .
Your company ca n't tell the difference between CentOS and something off TPB , and they 're paying 1500 $ /year for it .
And you blame Red Hat ?
Sorry but I 'd be doing the same thing and ask if your company would need some extended warranty or monster cables with that .
As usual , ignorance costs money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have a clue, you can use CentOS or any other distribution you want.
Your company can't tell the difference between CentOS and something off TPB, and they're paying 1500$/year for it.
And you blame Red Hat?
Sorry but I'd be doing the same thing and ask if your company would need some extended warranty or monster cables with that.
As usual, ignorance costs money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867074</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264182300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have 2 RHEL 5.4 servers (with premium support) and are getting ready to add up to 9 RHEL 5.4 Advanced servers for virtualization, with standard support ($1500 each/year). We would pay more for a Microsoft / VMWare solution, we've already priced it. Support is mandatory for us for certain systems -- our business partners and banks want to know we aren't cowboy-ing around with our stuff.<br> <br>That said, we have a number of Fedora 8 systems and just added a Fedora 12 system in the past 2 weeks. Any of the Fedora systems could go belly-up (as this one did 2 weeks ago; 2 drives failed in a RAID-5 array after numerous power issues) and nothing critical would be lost. I think most companies have multiple levels of server importance. <b>What's troublesome is to have critical processes rely on a server and you can't call anyone for support.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have 2 RHEL 5.4 servers ( with premium support ) and are getting ready to add up to 9 RHEL 5.4 Advanced servers for virtualization , with standard support ( $ 1500 each/year ) .
We would pay more for a Microsoft / VMWare solution , we 've already priced it .
Support is mandatory for us for certain systems -- our business partners and banks want to know we are n't cowboy-ing around with our stuff .
That said , we have a number of Fedora 8 systems and just added a Fedora 12 system in the past 2 weeks .
Any of the Fedora systems could go belly-up ( as this one did 2 weeks ago ; 2 drives failed in a RAID-5 array after numerous power issues ) and nothing critical would be lost .
I think most companies have multiple levels of server importance .
What 's troublesome is to have critical processes rely on a server and you ca n't call anyone for support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have 2 RHEL 5.4 servers (with premium support) and are getting ready to add up to 9 RHEL 5.4 Advanced servers for virtualization, with standard support ($1500 each/year).
We would pay more for a Microsoft / VMWare solution, we've already priced it.
Support is mandatory for us for certain systems -- our business partners and banks want to know we aren't cowboy-ing around with our stuff.
That said, we have a number of Fedora 8 systems and just added a Fedora 12 system in the past 2 weeks.
Any of the Fedora systems could go belly-up (as this one did 2 weeks ago; 2 drives failed in a RAID-5 array after numerous power issues) and nothing critical would be lost.
I think most companies have multiple levels of server importance.
What's troublesome is to have critical processes rely on a server and you can't call anyone for support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865820</id>
	<title>Re:Not that impressive</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1264168920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's a pittance in corporate america.</p></div><p>Remember Bob Young's famous quote that his goal for RedHat was not to grow to the size of Microsoft, rather for Microsoft to shrink to the size of RedHat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a pittance in corporate america.Remember Bob Young 's famous quote that his goal for RedHat was not to grow to the size of Microsoft , rather for Microsoft to shrink to the size of RedHat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a pittance in corporate america.Remember Bob Young's famous quote that his goal for RedHat was not to grow to the size of Microsoft, rather for Microsoft to shrink to the size of RedHat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30869330</id>
	<title>Defense</title>
	<author>gatkinso</author>
	<datestamp>1264259160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Redhat is one of the few (maybe only but I doubt that) Linux distributions accredited to be deployed on classified DOD networks.</p><p>Opinions aside, this alone is a huge revenue stream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Redhat is one of the few ( maybe only but I doubt that ) Linux distributions accredited to be deployed on classified DOD networks.Opinions aside , this alone is a huge revenue stream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Redhat is one of the few (maybe only but I doubt that) Linux distributions accredited to be deployed on classified DOD networks.Opinions aside, this alone is a huge revenue stream.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870492</id>
	<title>Re:Still a poor business model</title>
	<author>Rob\_Bryerton</author>
	<datestamp>1264269900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yet everyone there still receives a paycheck, and a quality product is produced....<br> <br>

Am I missing something?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet everyone there still receives a paycheck , and a quality product is produced... . Am I missing something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet everyone there still receives a paycheck, and a quality product is produced.... 

Am I missing something?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865110</id>
	<title>I hate when names are pluralized to mean a group</title>
	<author>randoms</author>
	<datestamp>1264164240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm curious, what are the "MicrosoftS" and "OracleS" that the OP is referring to? AFAIK there is only one of each of those companies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm curious , what are the " MicrosoftS " and " OracleS " that the OP is referring to ?
AFAIK there is only one of each of those companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm curious, what are the "MicrosoftS" and "OracleS" that the OP is referring to?
AFAIK there is only one of each of those companies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865386</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264165920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be even fairer, Red Hat do employ a large proportion of the kernel and userspace developers for the software they make support income from - they even have a record of open sourcing code that they get from company acquisitions.  But they are very much benefiting from the fact that it's easier to build an OS by co-operating with other companies and individuals than to go toe-to-toe with MS (and Apple, not that they're direct RH competitors in any significant way) on your own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be even fairer , Red Hat do employ a large proportion of the kernel and userspace developers for the software they make support income from - they even have a record of open sourcing code that they get from company acquisitions .
But they are very much benefiting from the fact that it 's easier to build an OS by co-operating with other companies and individuals than to go toe-to-toe with MS ( and Apple , not that they 're direct RH competitors in any significant way ) on your own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be even fairer, Red Hat do employ a large proportion of the kernel and userspace developers for the software they make support income from - they even have a record of open sourcing code that they get from company acquisitions.
But they are very much benefiting from the fact that it's easier to build an OS by co-operating with other companies and individuals than to go toe-to-toe with MS (and Apple, not that they're direct RH competitors in any significant way) on your own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867830</id>
	<title>CentOS also does paid support</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1264280280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tell the powers that be that one can get support from various places, for example, Red Hat, CentOS, Mandriva, Novel or Oracle, for what is essentially the exact same system.  Low cost or free support is similar to Microsoft support and comes in the form of regular updates and web site self-help troubleshooting forums.  If you need phone support or on-site support, then it costs more.

Then I add that since he already hired me with 25 years UNIX experience, the free support is good enough, so we can use CentOS.  If I get run over by a bus, then he may have to change to paid support until he hired another old guy.

I never had a problem following the above explanation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tell the powers that be that one can get support from various places , for example , Red Hat , CentOS , Mandriva , Novel or Oracle , for what is essentially the exact same system .
Low cost or free support is similar to Microsoft support and comes in the form of regular updates and web site self-help troubleshooting forums .
If you need phone support or on-site support , then it costs more .
Then I add that since he already hired me with 25 years UNIX experience , the free support is good enough , so we can use CentOS .
If I get run over by a bus , then he may have to change to paid support until he hired another old guy .
I never had a problem following the above explanation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tell the powers that be that one can get support from various places, for example, Red Hat, CentOS, Mandriva, Novel or Oracle, for what is essentially the exact same system.
Low cost or free support is similar to Microsoft support and comes in the form of regular updates and web site self-help troubleshooting forums.
If you need phone support or on-site support, then it costs more.
Then I add that since he already hired me with 25 years UNIX experience, the free support is good enough, so we can use CentOS.
If I get run over by a bus, then he may have to change to paid support until he hired another old guy.
I never had a problem following the above explanation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1264164720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then you don't know that many people who use Linux in a production environment <i>with management's approval.</i> Here at New Mexico's Child Youth and Family Development Department, we pay for support. We pay Novell for Suse Linux support (we're a Netware legacy shop), we pay Oracle for MySQL support, and we have 'as-needed' support contracts for other important open source software packages like Splunk &amp; OpenNMS.</p><p>So, there you are. I pay for support. But I'm married, so I guess I'm not a 'single person who pays for support.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then you do n't know that many people who use Linux in a production environment with management 's approval .
Here at New Mexico 's Child Youth and Family Development Department , we pay for support .
We pay Novell for Suse Linux support ( we 're a Netware legacy shop ) , we pay Oracle for MySQL support , and we have 'as-needed ' support contracts for other important open source software packages like Splunk &amp; OpenNMS.So , there you are .
I pay for support .
But I 'm married , so I guess I 'm not a 'single person who pays for support .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then you don't know that many people who use Linux in a production environment with management's approval.
Here at New Mexico's Child Youth and Family Development Department, we pay for support.
We pay Novell for Suse Linux support (we're a Netware legacy shop), we pay Oracle for MySQL support, and we have 'as-needed' support contracts for other important open source software packages like Splunk &amp; OpenNMS.So, there you are.
I pay for support.
But I'm married, so I guess I'm not a 'single person who pays for support.
'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866548</id>
	<title>Our Guy Was Hit By The Crosstown Bus</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1264176480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... sadly, explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB.</i> </p><p>You may not always be there.</p><p>But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.</p><p>Your boss doesn't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.</p><p>The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy. His recovery plan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They can smugly tell me " see , software is n't free ?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $ 1500/year .
... sadly , explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB .
You may not always be there.But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.Your boss does n't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy .
His recovery plan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.
... sadly, explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB.
You may not always be there.But the Red Hat support team is a phone call away.Your boss doesn't like being wholly dependent on his resident geek.The support contract and the bog standard enterprise distribution are his insurance policy.
His recovery plan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060</id>
	<title>Not Optional</title>
	<author>mr\_da3m0n</author>
	<datestamp>1264163820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, nevermind the fact that support is <b>not</b> optional with Red Hat products. At all. The update service requires a subscription. So while the software itself is free as in beer, you end up paying a "license" in the form a subscription to get patches, or anything else from Red Hat to make it useable.</p><p>So the fact that people who use the software keep buying support for it is not <i>that</i> impressive. Granted, they could run CentOS if they wanted, but management likes support, and it is not that hard to picture a pointy haired boss refusing to run anything else than Red Hat either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , nevermind the fact that support is not optional with Red Hat products .
At all .
The update service requires a subscription .
So while the software itself is free as in beer , you end up paying a " license " in the form a subscription to get patches , or anything else from Red Hat to make it useable.So the fact that people who use the software keep buying support for it is not that impressive .
Granted , they could run CentOS if they wanted , but management likes support , and it is not that hard to picture a pointy haired boss refusing to run anything else than Red Hat either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, nevermind the fact that support is not optional with Red Hat products.
At all.
The update service requires a subscription.
So while the software itself is free as in beer, you end up paying a "license" in the form a subscription to get patches, or anything else from Red Hat to make it useable.So the fact that people who use the software keep buying support for it is not that impressive.
Granted, they could run CentOS if they wanted, but management likes support, and it is not that hard to picture a pointy haired boss refusing to run anything else than Red Hat either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</id>
	<title>To be fair...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264164300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses, as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world... Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts."
<br> <br>
To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.  They also benefit from the fact that operating systems are complex, tunable, and widely used in business (which has deep pockets).  Easy-to-use software written for consumers (rather than companies who need highly-available systems) can't capitalize very well on the tech-support angle.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses , as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world... Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts .
" To be fair , Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers .
They also benefit from the fact that operating systems are complex , tunable , and widely used in business ( which has deep pockets ) .
Easy-to-use software written for consumers ( rather than companies who need highly-available systems ) ca n't capitalize very well on the tech-support angle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Instead of the traditional strategy of selling expensive proprietary software licenses, as practiced by the Microsofts and Oracles of the world... Red Hat gets the vast majority of its revenues from selling support contracts.
"
 
To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.
They also benefit from the fact that operating systems are complex, tunable, and widely used in business (which has deep pockets).
Easy-to-use software written for consumers (rather than companies who need highly-available systems) can't capitalize very well on the tech-support angle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908</id>
	<title>Still a poor business model</title>
	<author>McBeer</author>
	<datestamp>1264238280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm still not entirely convinced that the free code + support business model works as well as the traditional licensing version.  Here's some financial data from the last year.<p>
Microsoft<br>
employees 93,000<br>
revenue 58.4 billion = 627 956.989 per employee<br>
net income 14.5 billion = 155 913.978 per employee</p><p>
apple<br>
employees 35,000<br>
revenue 32.5 = 922 857.143 per employee<br>
net income 4.9 = 140,000 per employee</p><p>
oracle<br>
employees 73,000<br>
revenue 23.2 billion = 317 808.219  per employee<br>
net income 5.6 billion = 76 712.3288 per employee</p><p>
red hat<br>
employees 2,800<br>
revenue 0.65 billion = 232 142.857 per employee<br>
net income 0.078 billion = 27 857.1429 per employee</p><p>Even when I divide by employee's to account for the size differences, the closed source shops are making way more money then Red Hat</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm still not entirely convinced that the free code + support business model works as well as the traditional licensing version .
Here 's some financial data from the last year .
Microsoft employees 93,000 revenue 58.4 billion = 627 956.989 per employee net income 14.5 billion = 155 913.978 per employee apple employees 35,000 revenue 32.5 = 922 857.143 per employee net income 4.9 = 140,000 per employee oracle employees 73,000 revenue 23.2 billion = 317 808.219 per employee net income 5.6 billion = 76 712.3288 per employee red hat employees 2,800 revenue 0.65 billion = 232 142.857 per employee net income 0.078 billion = 27 857.1429 per employeeEven when I divide by employee 's to account for the size differences , the closed source shops are making way more money then Red Hat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm still not entirely convinced that the free code + support business model works as well as the traditional licensing version.
Here's some financial data from the last year.
Microsoft
employees 93,000
revenue 58.4 billion = 627 956.989 per employee
net income 14.5 billion = 155 913.978 per employee
apple
employees 35,000
revenue 32.5 = 922 857.143 per employee
net income 4.9 = 140,000 per employee
oracle
employees 73,000
revenue 23.2 billion = 317 808.219  per employee
net income 5.6 billion = 76 712.3288 per employee
red hat
employees 2,800
revenue 0.65 billion = 232 142.857 per employee
net income 0.078 billion = 27 857.1429 per employeeEven when I divide by employee's to account for the size differences, the closed source shops are making way more money then Red Hat</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268</id>
	<title>Not that impressive</title>
	<author>Andtalath</author>
	<datestamp>1264165020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I'm glad and all that they are so called flourishing in the recession, they are getting 194 million in revenue.</p><p>That's a pittance in corporate america.</p><p>Even if it wasn't gross income, it wouldn't be that impressive.</p><p>Also, people seeking a cheaper option in a recession?<br>Have we ever heard that before?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I 'm glad and all that they are so called flourishing in the recession , they are getting 194 million in revenue.That 's a pittance in corporate america.Even if it was n't gross income , it would n't be that impressive.Also , people seeking a cheaper option in a recession ? Have we ever heard that before ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I'm glad and all that they are so called flourishing in the recession, they are getting 194 million in revenue.That's a pittance in corporate america.Even if it wasn't gross income, it wouldn't be that impressive.Also, people seeking a cheaper option in a recession?Have we ever heard that before?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865420</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1264166160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.</p> </div><p>Others have noted their contributions, but really, even if they didn't?  Support is supposed to be one of the approved ways to make money from open source software.  Red Hat can make their own changes for their needs, but they can't lock anyone in because those changes must be made available if they distribute modified OSS software, at least with some licenses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers .
Others have noted their contributions , but really , even if they did n't ?
Support is supposed to be one of the approved ways to make money from open source software .
Red Hat can make their own changes for their needs , but they ca n't lock anyone in because those changes must be made available if they distribute modified OSS software , at least with some licenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.
Others have noted their contributions, but really, even if they didn't?
Support is supposed to be one of the approved ways to make money from open source software.
Red Hat can make their own changes for their needs, but they can't lock anyone in because those changes must be made available if they distribute modified OSS software, at least with some licenses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826</id>
	<title>Re:Not Optional</title>
	<author>Dr. Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1264169040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm quite sure that Redhat's "support" model is designed to frustrate and confuse.

</p><p>Before Redhat switched to this model, we could throw up servers right-left and center.  Virtualization around the corner, we could sprout servers like mad.  Pay-per-incident was reasonable, and RHEL certification desirable.

</p><p>Big corps standardized on Redhat as a target distro.  It was the big American Software Company which looked like it was going to stay around for a long time.  People bought in bigtime in development dollars and in the datacenter.

</p><p>Then the model changed.</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>Customer: "redhat.com, oh, why can't I download it?"<br>Redhat: "Buy a support contract and we'll let you"<br>Customer "What's to stop me from copying it? most of it is GPL, BSD, LGPL or compatible licenses"<br>Redhat: "I don't know, why don't you tell me? Although there are MYSTERIOUS trademarked items on the disk, and we don't have to say what exactly..."<br>Customer: "That's BS. I should be able to copy it"<br>Redhat: "Nope. Trademark"<br>Customer: "So if I have hundreds of servers, I have to pay for hundreds of support contracts"<br>Redhat: "Yep"<br>Customer: "Why?"<br>Redhat: "We don't really have to tell you, but remember that when you install something, you're duplicating it"<br>Customer: "I've been a FOSS contributor and proponent since 1995!, WTF am I supposed to tell my boss?!!"<br>Redhat: "$800/year/server"<br>Customer: "But... "<br>Redhat: "oh $350 if you don't want to be able to phone us for help"<br>Customer: "Ugh, WTF... I guess you've got us by the balls. We can't port to Debian now, bait and switch."<br>Redhat: "But we're VALUABLE"<br>Customer: "meh. I guess a quad-core license from MS is wicked expensive too"<br>Redhat: "Quad? sorry, that's not $350"<br>Customer: "Fuck me?"<br>Redhat: "Certinly, $1500/server"<br>Customer: "FUCK?"<br>Redhat: "Yep."<br>Customer: "My boss is going to f-ing fire me for this, WTF?! you guys have totally betrayed FOSS and turned it into a nightmare of licensing approvals no better, no... WORSE than the MS world"<br>Redhat: "We feel that you should support the FOSS community, we do great development work"<br>Customer: "I'm a FOSS DEVELOPER! YOU'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE!"</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>The talk wasn't so colorful, but that was the gist of it.  Redhat made me and other FOSS proponents look like idiots.  I'm not a Redhat fan, I just use it at work.

</p><p>This little stunt took a LOT of steam out of the mainstream adoption of Linux.  I'd really like to see Debian pick up, but Redhat already seems to have had the branding and developer lock-in, and the big name seems to make bosses feel comfortable.  They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.

</p><p>... sadly, explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB.

</p><p>Grr.  The most annoying part is that like I said, Redhat does good work outside their distro... I wish I could hate them.  Doing FOSS advocacy and development and being charged licensing fees is like being a philanthropist being robbed by Robin Hood.  Robin's a real jerk.  We were ALREADY paying and contributing!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite sure that Redhat 's " support " model is designed to frustrate and confuse .
Before Redhat switched to this model , we could throw up servers right-left and center .
Virtualization around the corner , we could sprout servers like mad .
Pay-per-incident was reasonable , and RHEL certification desirable .
Big corps standardized on Redhat as a target distro .
It was the big American Software Company which looked like it was going to stay around for a long time .
People bought in bigtime in development dollars and in the datacenter .
Then the model changed .
Customer : " redhat.com , oh , why ca n't I download it ?
" Redhat : " Buy a support contract and we 'll let you " Customer " What 's to stop me from copying it ?
most of it is GPL , BSD , LGPL or compatible licenses " Redhat : " I do n't know , why do n't you tell me ?
Although there are MYSTERIOUS trademarked items on the disk , and we do n't have to say what exactly... " Customer : " That 's BS .
I should be able to copy it " Redhat : " Nope .
Trademark " Customer : " So if I have hundreds of servers , I have to pay for hundreds of support contracts " Redhat : " Yep " Customer : " Why ?
" Redhat : " We do n't really have to tell you , but remember that when you install something , you 're duplicating it " Customer : " I 've been a FOSS contributor and proponent since 1995 ! , WTF am I supposed to tell my boss ? ! !
" Redhat : " $ 800/year/server " Customer : " But... " Redhat : " oh $ 350 if you do n't want to be able to phone us for help " Customer : " Ugh , WTF... I guess you 've got us by the balls .
We ca n't port to Debian now , bait and switch .
" Redhat : " But we 're VALUABLE " Customer : " meh .
I guess a quad-core license from MS is wicked expensive too " Redhat : " Quad ?
sorry , that 's not $ 350 " Customer : " Fuck me ?
" Redhat : " Certinly , $ 1500/server " Customer : " FUCK ?
" Redhat : " Yep .
" Customer : " My boss is going to f-ing fire me for this , WTF ? !
you guys have totally betrayed FOSS and turned it into a nightmare of licensing approvals no better , no... WORSE than the MS world " Redhat : " We feel that you should support the FOSS community , we do great development work " Customer : " I 'm a FOSS DEVELOPER !
YOU 'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE !
" The talk was n't so colorful , but that was the gist of it .
Redhat made me and other FOSS proponents look like idiots .
I 'm not a Redhat fan , I just use it at work .
This little stunt took a LOT of steam out of the mainstream adoption of Linux .
I 'd really like to see Debian pick up , but Redhat already seems to have had the branding and developer lock-in , and the big name seems to make bosses feel comfortable .
They can smugly tell me " see , software is n't free ?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $ 1500/year .
... sadly , explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB .
Grr. The most annoying part is that like I said , Redhat does good work outside their distro... I wish I could hate them .
Doing FOSS advocacy and development and being charged licensing fees is like being a philanthropist being robbed by Robin Hood .
Robin 's a real jerk .
We were ALREADY paying and contributing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite sure that Redhat's "support" model is designed to frustrate and confuse.
Before Redhat switched to this model, we could throw up servers right-left and center.
Virtualization around the corner, we could sprout servers like mad.
Pay-per-incident was reasonable, and RHEL certification desirable.
Big corps standardized on Redhat as a target distro.
It was the big American Software Company which looked like it was going to stay around for a long time.
People bought in bigtime in development dollars and in the datacenter.
Then the model changed.
Customer: "redhat.com, oh, why can't I download it?
"Redhat: "Buy a support contract and we'll let you"Customer "What's to stop me from copying it?
most of it is GPL, BSD, LGPL or compatible licenses"Redhat: "I don't know, why don't you tell me?
Although there are MYSTERIOUS trademarked items on the disk, and we don't have to say what exactly..."Customer: "That's BS.
I should be able to copy it"Redhat: "Nope.
Trademark"Customer: "So if I have hundreds of servers, I have to pay for hundreds of support contracts"Redhat: "Yep"Customer: "Why?
"Redhat: "We don't really have to tell you, but remember that when you install something, you're duplicating it"Customer: "I've been a FOSS contributor and proponent since 1995!, WTF am I supposed to tell my boss?!!
"Redhat: "$800/year/server"Customer: "But... "Redhat: "oh $350 if you don't want to be able to phone us for help"Customer: "Ugh, WTF... I guess you've got us by the balls.
We can't port to Debian now, bait and switch.
"Redhat: "But we're VALUABLE"Customer: "meh.
I guess a quad-core license from MS is wicked expensive too"Redhat: "Quad?
sorry, that's not $350"Customer: "Fuck me?
"Redhat: "Certinly, $1500/server"Customer: "FUCK?
"Redhat: "Yep.
"Customer: "My boss is going to f-ing fire me for this, WTF?!
you guys have totally betrayed FOSS and turned it into a nightmare of licensing approvals no better, no... WORSE than the MS world"Redhat: "We feel that you should support the FOSS community, we do great development work"Customer: "I'm a FOSS DEVELOPER!
YOU'RE SELLING ME MY OWN CODE!
" The talk wasn't so colorful, but that was the gist of it.
Redhat made me and other FOSS proponents look like idiots.
I'm not a Redhat fan, I just use it at work.
This little stunt took a LOT of steam out of the mainstream adoption of Linux.
I'd really like to see Debian pick up, but Redhat already seems to have had the branding and developer lock-in, and the big name seems to make bosses feel comfortable.
They can smugly tell me "see, software isn't free?
" and feel much more comfortable signing cheques for $1500/year.
... sadly, explaining CentOS to them is like telling them that I sourced Oracle from TPB.
Grr.  The most annoying part is that like I said, Redhat does good work outside their distro... I wish I could hate them.
Doing FOSS advocacy and development and being charged licensing fees is like being a philanthropist being robbed by Robin Hood.
Robin's a real jerk.
We were ALREADY paying and contributing!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865360</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>1729</author>
	<datestamp>1264165620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.</p></div><p>To be <em>even more fair</em>, Red Hat employs many of the prominent Linux developers, and is currently the biggest corporate contributor to the kernel.  In addition, they're heavily involved with GCC and gdb, not to mention MANY other GPL projects.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.To be even more fair , Red Hat employs many of the prominent Linux developers , and is currently the biggest corporate contributor to the kernel .
In addition , they 're heavily involved with GCC and gdb , not to mention MANY other GPL projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, Red Hat is capitalizing on the work of Linux developers.To be even more fair, Red Hat employs many of the prominent Linux developers, and is currently the biggest corporate contributor to the kernel.
In addition, they're heavily involved with GCC and gdb, not to mention MANY other GPL projects.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865934</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>digitalhermit</author>
	<datestamp>1264169820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and the majority of them buy support contracts from RedHat. There are a few Novell and Oracle shops, and some that apparently buy through IBM also.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and the majority of them buy support contracts from RedHat .
There are a few Novell and Oracle shops , and some that apparently buy through IBM also .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a lot of people who use Linux in production environments and the majority of them buy support contracts from RedHat.
There are a few Novell and Oracle shops, and some that apparently buy through IBM also.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865574</id>
	<title>Not everyone is a trolling skimmer like you BitZ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1512306&amp;cid=30785704" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1512306&amp;cid=30785704</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>Utterly hilarious - See BitzTream run in the URL above (after he being caught skimming like the typical troll does).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1512306&amp;cid = 30785704 [ slashdot.org ] Utterly hilarious - See BitzTream run in the URL above ( after he being caught skimming like the typical troll does ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1512306&amp;cid=30785704 [slashdot.org]Utterly hilarious - See BitzTream run in the URL above (after he being caught skimming like the typical troll does).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867224</id>
	<title>I have to say...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264183980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... 2009 was a glorious year to be a Red Hat stockholder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... 2009 was a glorious year to be a Red Hat stockholder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... 2009 was a glorious year to be a Red Hat stockholder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865486</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You've obviously never picked up a phone and called them....  Their web tickets are routed to india sure, but every time I give them a call I usually get someone in America or Australia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 've obviously never picked up a phone and called them.... Their web tickets are routed to india sure , but every time I give them a call I usually get someone in America or Australia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You've obviously never picked up a phone and called them....  Their web tickets are routed to india sure, but every time I give them a call I usually get someone in America or Australia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866336</id>
	<title>Re:Not that impressive</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1264173960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the positive side there isn't enough fat there for a useless playboy CEO like Sol Trujillo to turn up and destroy the thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the positive side there is n't enough fat there for a useless playboy CEO like Sol Trujillo to turn up and destroy the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the positive side there isn't enough fat there for a useless playboy CEO like Sol Trujillo to turn up and destroy the thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865304</id>
	<title>Re:To be fair...</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1264165260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; I'm not sure what you mean by "capitalizing on the work of Linux developers" or if that's intended as a slight against RH.<br>If so, I should point out that a number of the top names in kernel development are or have been RH employees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  I 'm not sure what you mean by " capitalizing on the work of Linux developers " or if that 's intended as a slight against RH.If so , I should point out that a number of the top names in kernel development are or have been RH employees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  I'm not sure what you mean by "capitalizing on the work of Linux developers" or if that's intended as a slight against RH.If so, I should point out that a number of the top names in kernel development are or have been RH employees.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30872410</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>dinomite</author>
	<datestamp>1264240200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know plenty of people who pay for support from Red Hat, Novell, etc., but no one who uses that support.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know plenty of people who pay for support from Red Hat , Novell , etc. , but no one who uses that support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know plenty of people who pay for support from Red Hat, Novell, etc., but no one who uses that support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865130</id>
	<title>Re:I don't buy it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264164300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A large enterprise would almost never deploy something in production without support.  For my small consulting gigs I have never bought support.  I think you can see where this is going...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A large enterprise would almost never deploy something in production without support .
For my small consulting gigs I have never bought support .
I think you can see where this is going.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A large enterprise would almost never deploy something in production without support.
For my small consulting gigs I have never bought support.
I think you can see where this is going...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30871654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868462
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30872410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30884020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30869448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867074
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2139203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865130
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865820
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870474
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865326
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865826
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866548
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868796
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866488
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30871654
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866100
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868462
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867830
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30869448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865110
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865152
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2139203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30867074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30870446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30884020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30866840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30868670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30865574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2139203.30872410
</commentlist>
</conversation>
