Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-18 Thread John Cavan
"Henning P. Schmiedehausen" wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael H. Warfield) writes: > > > Excuse me? A 1 billion dolar investment in Linux is not > >supporting it? > > On their own hardware. Which is really the point and they won't be the only ones. If IBM wants to attract and keep

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-18 Thread Henning P. Schmiedehausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael H. Warfield) writes: > Excuse me? A 1 billion dolar investment in Linux is not >supporting it? On their own hardware. > Setting up tier 1 and tier 2 support services for a half a dozen >distributions is not supporting it? For their own hardware. > Porting their

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-18 Thread Henning P. Schmiedehausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael H. Warfield) writes: Excuse me? A 1 billion dolar investment in Linux is not supporting it? On their own hardware. Setting up tier 1 and tier 2 support services for a half a dozen distributions is not supporting it? For their own hardware. Porting their AIX

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-18 Thread John Cavan
"Henning P. Schmiedehausen" wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael H. Warfield) writes: Excuse me? A 1 billion dolar investment in Linux is not supporting it? On their own hardware. Which is really the point and they won't be the only ones. If IBM wants to attract and keep customers on

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Gerhard Mack
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote: > BSDI is distributing FreeBSD now. They havent done anything useful to > support it. They are just cashing in on it. That's BS last I heard they were merging their SMP support. Btw have you submitted bug reports for your networking card? If not you have no

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Michael H. Warfield
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:56:15PM -0500, Dennis wrote: > At 05:59 PM 02/16/2001, John Cavan wrote: > >Dennis wrote: > > > objective, arent we? > > > >You might ask yourself the same question... > > > For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet > > > drivers for the

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Dennis
At 05:59 PM 02/16/2001, John Cavan wrote: >Dennis wrote: > > objective, arent we? > >You might ask yourself the same question... > > > For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet > > drivers for the eepro100, you'd have a choice of which one to buy..perhaps > > with

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Dennis
At 05:59 PM 02/16/2001, John Cavan wrote: Dennis wrote: objective, arent we? You might ask yourself the same question... For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet drivers for the eepro100, you'd have a choice of which one to buy..perhaps with different

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Michael H. Warfield
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:56:15PM -0500, Dennis wrote: At 05:59 PM 02/16/2001, John Cavan wrote: Dennis wrote: objective, arent we? You might ask yourself the same question... For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet drivers for the eepro100, you'd

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-17 Thread Gerhard Mack
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote: BSDI is distributing FreeBSD now. They havent done anything useful to support it. They are just cashing in on it. That's BS last I heard they were merging their SMP support. Btw have you submitted bug reports for your networking card? If not you have no

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-16 Thread John Cavan
Dennis wrote: > objective, arent we? You might ask yourself the same question... > For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet > drivers for the eepro100, you'd have a choice of which one to buy..perhaps > with different "features" that were of value to you.

Re: Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.]

2001-02-16 Thread John Cavan
Dennis wrote: objective, arent we? You might ask yourself the same question... For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet drivers for the eepro100, you'd have a choice of which one to buy..perhaps with different "features" that were of value to you. Instead,