On 16/05/07, Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 22:37 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote:
> > One problem I have is that whenever corporate gets their minds around
> > products, they start to associate revenue streams with them. OpenSolaris
> > should not be thought of in that regard, and more to the point, Sun
> > should focus their marketing and revenue streams around Solaris which is
> > their product. This is similar to the relation between RHES and Fedora
> > for Red Hat, and I see Ubuntu being much different than Fedora in that
> > regard, isn't Ubuntu a business/company?
>
> There's absolutely nothing stopping Sun (or any other vendor) from potentially
> taking an OpenSolaris release and offering support for it.
Will Indiana distro continue to re-distribute non-redistributable
binaries as SXCR does? Only Sun so far has rights to do that.
Which ones are you talking about? Remember that there are
redistribution rights for many of the binary-only pieces that are part
of ON, etc.
Another problem is closed binaries. Only Sun has source code for it..
How do you think "any other vendor" can offer support independently from
Sun?
The same way Linspire and other distributions support users that have
binary-only Linux drivers?
You do the best you can I suspect.
It is all a matter of how they choose to do that support, etc.
--
"Less is only more where more is no good." --Frank Lloyd Wright
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
