Why Open Source Doesn't Always Mean Free

Schwartz believes in open source so much that he can open their dying Solaris OS, but he can not see any profit or reason why having Java open would be good. It appears to me that the real fear is that customers would not pay Sun for support of Java, but would find better resources if it were open. Schwartz continues his double talk by claiming Red Hat forces clients to pay $2000 a box. That once you have Red Hat you can't use another Linux. This is the biggest load of FUD I've ever heard. I've used Red Hat, SuSe, Slackware and several others. There's not one product for setting up a server or desktop that I can't use on any one of those distributions. I'm sure he'd like you to believe that the administrator that's got to figure out how to use the products needs to know different install/management methods. This is another fog that companies like Sun want you to believe. Linux distributions are not like the Unix derivatives. The nightmares of remembering how to do some thing from AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, AT&T Unix and SCO. Yes, there were similarities, but there were also differences. In the end I hope Red Hat stops partnering with Sun, as well as Novell. Better to boycott than deal with some one stabbing you in the back.

Schwartz points to http://www.distrowatch.com/ for his evidence that Red Hat is the major player in Enterprise servers. The top ten are as follows:

1 Mandrakelinux 1405 2 Fedora 1005 3 Knoppix 937 4 Debian 753 5 SUSE 696 6 Gentoo 648 7 Slackware 580 8 PCLinuxOS 518 9 MEPIS 453 10 Red Hat 393

Since I know Mandrake speaks of it's distro as a server and desktop it looks to me like they are pretty high on the list. Also SUSE makes a highly popular business package as well. They also beat Red Hat in the list. It appears to me that Schwartz just wants to fan the flames of people that don't like Red Hat.