RedHat attitude - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Jean-Michel POURE |
---|---|
Subject | RedHat attitude |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200212151322.45717.jm.poure@freesurf.fr Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Version Numbering ("Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Responses |
Re: RedHat attitude
Enterprise Solutions Centre |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
Le Samedi 14 Décembre 2002 21:21, Josh Berkus a écrit : > I don't agree with the Red-Hat-bashing sentiment expressed in this and > elsewhere. Sure, RH did rename their PostgreSQL version *for branding > and marketing reasons*. However, they are employing at least one > full-time PostgreSQL hacker, and their "value-add" administration tools > have, at this point, all been contributed to the community. Red Hat, > regardless of their *marketing* decisions on what versions and > alterations of OSS software they distribute, have *always* made the > source available to their Linux products. IMHO, RedHat is missing basic economical concepts : 1) The question asked is the notion of brand. What is brand, what is it for and what does it represent? * RedHat answer is "nothing", a brand is a "sticker on a box". This is far away from PostgreSQL notion of excellence. * People are looking for original brands, not copies. RedHat distribution is an "original concept" because they invented rpm and worked together thousands of software packages. On the converse, RedHat database is not an original concept, but a pure copy of existing software. * RedHat do not seem to understand that PostgreSQL is here to stay and probably for a long time. Like the Rolling Stones, PostgreSQL developpers will probably be here in 20 years. How long can RedHat stick to a silly name like "RedHat database" ? IMHO, their invesment in the "RedHat database" brand is a whaste of time and money, because it is deemed to disappear on the long run. 2) Also, the question asked is the notion of "fairness", "written-unwritten" rules and ultimately "violence" : * Marketing a product which took XXXX man-year, only paying for one developper salary, is a gift from the PostgreSQL community to RedHat. Employing a PostgreSQL developper does not prevent them from being fair. * The notion of fair/unfair is an unwritten rule. When you meet a Greatbridge employee, who comes a long way by car, and annouce the same day that RedHat will release a "RedHat database", without telling this Human Being that you decided to do "Eye in the Eye", you also break the rule. * Their attitude shows that RedHat management is probably violent. For those who worked in severeal companies, you know what I mean : some companies are violent, others are not. * The problem with violence is that you never know when it is going to stop. RedHat breaking the rules will probably end in a disaster for them if new contrib software is released under the pgAdmin license. Candidates? 3) Ultimately, there is a chance that Redhat is not a violent company, but simply have stupid marketing staff. There are some signs that RedHat database marketing team is stupid : * RedHat database is marketed like a food product, probably by non-technicians, who employs "marketing recipies" without understanding the underlying economical rules. * There is a real problem with price. You cannot market an empty concept like RedHat database at that price. When users understand they have been robbed, this destroys the image of RedHat. * RedHat does not have a real service offer (like database migration, software engineering, etc...) and only concentrates on pushing (empty) boxes. Cheers, Jean-Michel
pgsql-advocacy by date: