From popmail Fri Jul 24 06:44:53 1998 Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 15:18:23 -0400 (EDT) From: " Raymond A. Ingles" To: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Microscopic mention of Linux in Newsweek X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: It's not much, but the word "Linux" actually appears in this week's edition of Newsweek. The article is a fluff piece on the difference between "hype" (organized attempts to generate interest, e.g. the recent media blitz for the movie "Godizilla") and "buzz" (genuine grassroots interest and positive word-of-mouth). As with all fluff peices, there's a table with two columns, labeled "hype" and "buzz". Among many other things, they list: Hype Buzz ---- ---- Windows 98 Linux There is, so far as I can see, absolutely no mention of Linux anywhere else in the entire magazine. Still, it's interesting that they would make such a distinction... Sincerely, Ray Ingles (248) 377-7735 ray.ingles@fanucrobotics.com "Anybody who has ever seen a photograph showing the kind of damage that a trout traveling that fast can inflict on the human skull knows that such photographs are very valuable. I paid $20 for mine." - Dave Barry ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 09:10:53 1998 Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 22:36:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Brian Bartholomew wrote: > what cost perceived > value CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 Branding 0 50.00 This is more of a real-world analysis. Pay RedHat $40 and get $60 worth of value. You may not like it that way but then you don't count. If RedHat's customers like it that way then that is all that matters. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 09:11:29 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 02:25:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Thu, 23 Jul 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > what cost perceived > value > CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 > Branding 0 50.00 > > This is more of a real-world analysis. Pay RedHat $40 and get $60 worth of > value. You may not like it that way but then you don't count. If RedHat's > customers like it that way then that is all that matters. So, you're saying, that if Red Hat took out the manual and the floppies and the support and went to plain packaging and still charged $49, people would still pick it over the $2 Cheapbytes CD because of the 'branding'? I don't think so. The branding is a significant factor, but it couldn't exist without real perceived tangible value. Red Hat's (or any other distro's) customers may be loyal, but they're not stupid. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 09:11:31 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 02:17:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Brian Bartholomew cc: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Brian Bartholomew wrote: > Thanks for participating! This is a great thread. Hey, it sure beats Gnome vs. KDE ... > > Extra software > > Ah, so it isn't all up for ftp, and some of it is proprietary. > Perhaps they only make money from the proprietary software! > This contradicts the 'free your software and make money' thesis. You're combining two answers, to two different people, in one message. I never advanced that thesis, though I agree with it ... to a point. I personally subscribe to the belief/theory that there are fundamental flaws in the open source model of software development, that will prevent it from totally replacing proprietary models as ESR & friends believe. While open source development is central and critical to Linux's success, I don't accept the model as being *universally* superior. The distros are merely supplementing (what they believe to be) gaps in the functionality of existing open source software with commercial products. Such hybrid systems may well be more suitable for some environments, where (for instance) tar and cpio may not be sufficient backup solutions but BRU fits the bill nicely. Even here, different distros take different approaches. Part of the money spent on official Red Hat goes to Metro Link for its proprietary X server. Part of the money spent on official SuSE goes towards the company's R&D into improving and extending XFree86 (all of which goes back to the community, but SuSE naturally has its changes first). > > Moral support > > Otherwise known as 'charitable contributions'. See next question. Not a *real* charity; there are no tax deductions. I see your point that, for some, the choice to buy the 'official' release indicates an optional desire by the buyer to "give to the cause", so to speak. There is some truth to this; for if the Linux distributors cannot be financially successful, then the community would have a much more difficult task of 'spreading the word' without them. Still, if there was no added value in the form of books or additional software or support, I doubt many would pay the extra money just for 'charitable' reasons. The value must be there too. > > Well, I pay red hat because I like them and want to see them stick > > around... but, your point is valid for a certain segment of the > > population, sure... > I disagree with the implied criticism of people who don't wish to make > charitable donations to RedHat. If you suggest to businesspeople that > they pay any more money for something that they have to, they will > laugh and you will lose a lot of credibility. Their competitors don't > pay extra, and if they do it, they will lose. Paying the lowest price > makes you a 'smart shopper', which is a good thing in their worldview. Then again, sometimes you get what you pay for. Often the non-'charity' reasons for buying an official release (docs, support, etc.) are quite valid. > When an organization is a charity, it's appropriate to guilt people > into making donations. When an organization is a for-profit business, > it's appropriate that they compete for every nickle against every > other business. It's all relative, of course. When comparing a $2 Cheapbytes RedHat CD against the $49 official release, it's easy to moan that you don't get 25 times more value for the extra cost. OTOH, note that in business settings Linux is going up against OSs costing many thousands of dollars; in this context the difference between $2 and $49 (or even $199 like Caldera's premium distro) is irrelevant. Then again, there is a certain mindset amongst some that if a product is less expensive it *must* be worse. Applied to its extreme, "you get what you pay for" says that a $50 Linux *must* be better than a $2 one. I've made sales of the $200 Caldera to people who really didn't need more than what was in the $2 Lite CD, and I told them so. *They* insisted, saying it would be a *harder* sell against NT is they revealed they paid less than $5 for business-critical systems software. Go figure. But that attitude is real, Maybe not widespread, but very real. I long ago stopped advancing Linux in business because of cost. It's simply better at *any* price than other options. I find I'm more successful that way; there's still a strong instinct to relate the terms "inexpensive" and "cheap". That's my company's approach ; we'll never be the cheapest game in town. Yet our pricing does not deter clients who see value in the higher costs. Even in the freeware world, sometimes you indeed get what you pay for, Sometimes clients will appreciate that you gave them the less expensive option, but take the more expensive one anyway. > > In the case of Red Hat Linux, people gladly pay the price for a > > nicely packaged version of the Linux operating system software with > > some added value, even if they know they could obtain the basic > > software as such at a lower price elsewhere. > > 'Branding I'. People know the box on the shelf has the right thing. > RedHat's actual or perceived QC saves them shopping time. Alternate scenario; attractive packaging, given shelf space in the right locations, will catch the eye of peeople who may not have been aware of Linux's existence there (or anywhere), and may well lead to impulse buys. It happens. Or did you think those chocolate bars at the grocery checkout were there by accident ;-)? > > I fail to see how the exact reasons for people to buy Red Hat Linux > > in the shop could have any effect on the question of whether or not > > Red Hat is in the business of selling the Red Hat Linux software. > > What is RedHat selling? Warm fuzzies? Paper books? Coasters? A > 'lifestyle' credibility statement for people tuning in late to Linux? > They may not be selling software at all, given that you can download > it for free. All true. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:00:47 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 01:23:46 -0400 From: Brian Bartholomew To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Now consider a completely different business, whose goal is to write software for profit while reducing costs by using electronic means wherever possible. This software is shipped in source code to customers, but it is *not* available for use at no charge: what cost CD production and duplication costs, Printed documentation, Sexy packaging, Retailer's cut 0.50 (1) Tech support 0.00 (2) Proprietary software 0.00 (3) Charitable contribution 0.00 (4) Branding I -- QC saves shopping time 0.50 (5) Branding II -- generic is worse 0.00 (6) Software development 29.00 (7) Profit margin 10.00 (8) ------- $ 40.00 Footnotes: (1) User downloads software off ftp site and cuts their own CD if they want one. User prints documentation if they want a paper copy. No packaging, as no physical objects shipped. No shelf space, no retailer's cut. (2) Tech support is a profit center, billed as time and materials. (3) No bundled software. (4) This is a for-profit business, no donations expected. (5) Advertising on web, spread by satisfied customers' word of mouth. (6) Software doesn't have freeware equivalent. (7) Paying developers market rates to write boring office packages. Need to sell 2,700 packages/programmer/year. (8) 25%, higher than average due to low overhead. League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf/patents.text ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:00:57 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 01:04:23 -0400 From: Brian Bartholomew To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Thanks for participating! This is a great thread. > Printed documentation I addressed that angle. > Tech support I conceeded that angle. > Extra software Ah, so it isn't all up for ftp, and some of it is proprietary. Perhaps they only make money from the proprietary software! This contradicts the 'free your software and make money' thesis. > Moral support Otherwise known as 'charitable contributions'. See next question. > Well, I pay red hat because I like them and want to see them stick > around... but, your point is valid for a certain segment of the > population, sure... I disagree with the implied criticism of people who don't wish to make charitable donations to RedHat. If you suggest to businesspeople that they pay any more money for something that they have to, they will laugh and you will lose a lot of credibility. Their competitors don't pay extra, and if they do it, they will lose. Paying the lowest price makes you a 'smart shopper', which is a good thing in their worldview. When an organization is a charity, it's appropriate to guilt people into making donations. When an organization is a for-profit business, it's appropriate that they compete for every nickle against every other business. When an organization tries to do both, it is in danger. The organization will invite smart shoppers by making a profit, and their donations will dry up. If they were surviving on the donations, and don't have any other revenue source because their software is up for ftp, they will go out of business. Oops. > The fact that there may be ways of obtaining the same software at > lower cost or even free of charge is not relevant Suppose RedHat's price was $4,000 instead of $40, and everything else was the same. Would anybody buy their distribution then? > The money is paid for the value that the product represents for the > buyer. That is a pricing principle that is most valid in the absense of competition. I believe RedHat has lots of competition, both from other distributions and other varieties of Unix, so the principle doesn't apply. You aren't claiming that putting up a company web server only adds $40 of value to a company, do you? > People have a tendency to pay more for a product when the packaging > is nicer. Americans luuuuuve packaging, even when they throw it away. > In the case of Red Hat Linux, people gladly pay the price for a > nicely packaged version of the Linux operating system software with > some added value, even if they know they could obtain the basic > software as such at a lower price elsewhere. 'Branding I'. People know the box on the shelf has the right thing. RedHat's actual or perceived QC saves them shopping time. > Who was it on this list that related the story of this Swedish > medicin company selling the same product under two names at two > prices, making a good turnover on both? 'Branding II'. This strategy depends on hiding from the customers that the cheapo product is just as good as the expensive product. People buy name-brand drugs instead of generics, even though generics are required to be functionally identical by law. > I fail to see how the exact reasons for people to buy Red Hat Linux > in the shop could have any effect on the question of whether or not > Red Hat is in the business of selling the Red Hat Linux software. What is RedHat selling? Warm fuzzies? Paper books? Coasters? A 'lifestyle' credibility statement for people tuning in late to Linux? They may not be selling software at all, given that you can download it for free. It's extremely important to know what your customers think they are buying. Let's see if we can decompose the price of RedHat into its component parts. Please post improvements to chart!: what cost perceived value (1) CD production and duplication costs: $ 0.50 $ 10.00 (9) (2) Printed documentation 4.00 6.00 (3) Tech support 0.50 4.00 (4) Proprietary software 2.00 3.00 (14) (5) Charitable contribution 0.00 0.50 (13) (6) Sexy packaging 4.50 2.50 (7) Branding I -- QC saves shopping time 0.50 4.00 (8) Branding II -- generic is worse 5.00 5.00 (12) Profit margin 3.00 0.00 (10) Retailer's cut 20.00 $ 5.00 (11) ------- ------- $ 40.00 $ 40.00 Footnotes: (1) > You can go to Cheapbytes, and they'll sell you a CD > burned from the net-downloadable edition of Slackware, > Red Hat or SuSE for $1.99 US. (2) Guess based on a few print jobs I've done. (3) Web access only. Can't even pay recent immigrants to blow off phone calls at this rate. (4) Wonder how bundled vendors pay their rent. Maybe this is a freebie and users pay full price for the next version after they're hooked. (6) Pack, stuff, etc. (7) Assume ftp site is mechanically generated from master CD contents. (8) Gotta pay for all those print ads. (9) Something like the average price of all distributions. (10) 100% is a guess based on consumer electronics. May be way different in software publishing land. (11) It was here on the shelf when I wanted it. (12) 15% is a guess. (13) I thumb my nose at Bill, it feels good. (14) It's proprietary, so it must be better. League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf/patents.text ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:01:35 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 00:15:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > what cost perceived > > value > > CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 > > Branding 0 50.00 > > > > This is more of a real-world analysis. Pay RedHat $40 and get $60 worth of > > value. You may not like it that way but then you don't count. If RedHat's > > customers like it that way then that is all that matters. > > So, you're saying, that if Red Hat took out the manual and the floppies > and the support and went to plain packaging and still charged $49, people > would still pick it over the $2 Cheapbytes CD because of the 'branding'? No. In order to maintain the value of the brand they need to keep the packaging that they are using. But the value is not in the packagaing itself, it is in the brand. > The branding is a significant factor, but it couldn't exist without real > perceived tangible value. There is a perceived tangible value whenever you have a successful brand. However there is not neccessarily a real tangible value associated with the perception. > Red Hat's (or any other distro's) customers may > be loyal, but they're not stupid. They're not cheapskate techies either. They buy hamburgers at Burger King instead of making them at home even though Burger King costs more. Buying RedHat or Caldera OL is no more stupid than eating in a restaurant instead of at home. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:01:42 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 00:34:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Brian Bartholomew wrote: > > what cost perceived > > value > > CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 > > Branding 0 50.00 > > I don't believe their profit margin is that high. An unrealistic > prediction of their costs doesn't lead to an useful analysis. The column heading says PERCEIVED value. Brands have a high perceived value because the customer is willing to pay more for a brand name product. > Where did the number $60 come from? Same place your number came from. It was made up. > What bothers me is that I am considering trying RedHat on my next > system, and I'm not quite sure why I have this desire to purchase > their pretty packaged CD. Forget it. Don't waste your money. Get Cheapbytes instead. RedHat is only for people who aren't worried about a measly $40. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:02:51 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 03:10:14 -0400 From: Brian Bartholomew To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: > what cost perceived > value > CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 > Branding 0 50.00 I don't believe their profit margin is that high. An unrealistic prediction of their costs doesn't lead to an useful analysis. > This is more of a real-world analysis. Pay RedHat $40 and get $60 > worth of value. Where did the number $60 come from? The breakdown in the purchaser's mind, in whatever arrangement it may be perceived, is very interesting and important. Why do you, personally, feel it's worth $60? > You may not like it that way but then you don't count. If RedHat's > customers like it that way then that is all that matters. What bothers me is that I am considering trying RedHat on my next system, and I'm not quite sure why I have this desire to purchase their pretty packaged CD. I have the **perception** that the CD will be a tested, stable release, while the ftp site will be a snapshot of current development. Plus the ftp site will not have source for interesting bits like the install tool. If either of these *totally fantastical, paranoid imaginings* are true, these are both deliberate choices to keep the real product from being downloaded. I just can't imagine why they would make the ftp version as convenient to snag for free as technology allows. League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf/patents.text ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:07:46 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 00:56:46 -0700 From: sean dreilinger X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b1 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.35 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kplug-list@ultraviolet.org, linux-biz@lege.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] Newsweek: nice Linux reference X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: nice Linux reference in Newsweek today -- the July 27th 1998 Newsweek magazine (page 26) has a table comparing: HYPE versus BUZZ where HYPE = propoganda, artificially manufactured popularity and BUZZ = infectious, genuine excitement about something here's a few excerpts from the 20-item table: HYPE BUZZ ==== ==== JFK Jr. Chelsea Clinton Windows 98 Linux DVD Players PalmPilot Armageddon There's Something About Mary VW Bug VW Bug its a large table embedded in a bigger article on Buzz. -- sean dreilinger, mlis http://www.interactivate.com/people/sean/ sean@interactivate.com +1 (619) 793-4060 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 12:08:44 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 04:39:14 -0400 From: Brian Bartholomew To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: > The distros are merely supplementing (what they believe to be) gaps > in the functionality of existing open source software with > commercial products. Which makes them proprietary software distributors, period. Not ESR model enterprises. > I doubt many would pay the extra money just for 'charitable' > reasons. The value must be there too. The number of dollars allocated in the buyer's head towards charitable reasons is testable, at least in theory. Posit two companies, MoneyGrubbingFreeRiders and ZealotsForTheCause. Both sell bit- identical CDs. MGFR likes this arrangement because they just copied ZFTC's distribution. MGFR and ZFTC sell to a pool of customers who know and understand their charitable reputations. Adjust the prices of each distribution so that the same number of each is sold in a month. At that point, the price differential of ZFTC can be accounted for as user valuation of that company's attitude. The hard part of this experiment is knowing if the customers both companies sell to are the same; there could be two disjoint groups, Suits and Zealots, each of which prefers the attitude of one company. > note that in business settings Linux is going up against OSs costing > many thousands of dollars; in this context the difference between $2 > and $49 (or even $199 like Caldera's premium distro) is irrelevant. If the ESR model is to take over the world, the overpriced competitors will disappear, and we must know how to set prices. I think justifying RedHat's profitability is a wonderful test of the ESR theory. I think the real answer is that RedHat is proprietary, and that's what their profitability hangs on. They're just a lot less proprietary than other proprietary software companies. Their current success is not proof of the ESR theory until I can bitcopy *all* of their intellectual property and resell it. Some time ago I stirred up religious ire on the fsb list by positing a for-profit company that sold duplicates of the FSF software tapes, at a lower price. This thread generated much heat and no light. Problem is, the businesses buying Linux now are smart shoppers, and don't give a about donating to the community. Maybe pervasive run-time metering is the only solution. Bleah. > Alternate scenario; attractive packaging, given shelf space in the > right locations, will catch the eye of peeople who may not have been > aware of Linux's existence there (or anywhere), and may well lead to > impulse buys. It happens. Or did you think those chocolate bars at > the grocery checkout were there by accident ;-)? Last time I went by my local big software shop (which was easily six months ago), Linux wasn't wasn't in a privledged location. I will visit and see if that has changed. League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf/patents.text ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:01:30 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 08:14:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: linux biz mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Brian Bartholomew wrote: > > Well, I pay red hat because I like them and want to see them stick > > around... but, your point is valid for a certain segment of the > > population, sure... > > I disagree with the implied criticism of people who don't wish to make None implied. I'm simply conceeding that because I do that doesn't mean others do, and that your observations are correct for that slice of the pie chart. jim ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:01:30 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 08:11:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: Evan Leibovitch cc: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Well, when I sell a solution to a client, I buy them the box set with the CD and all because is DOES cost $50. I have a hard enough time convincing them that this thing they've never heard of will do the job, so I let them think it at least costs something, and since all the other software they buy that costs something has shrinkwrap and a box with the company name on it, they get redhat that way too. If redhat cut out the manual and just went with the cd stamped with the logo and product name, in the sleeve that had the same art on it, I'd still buy that for $50, even without bru and whatever on it, for my clients, because it looks more professional and its cost is perceived better than $2. When I installed a fax server or something for a client, I list the software as "Included" rather than "Free" for the same reason. Someday people will accept free software, but I'd rather fool them, let it run flawlessly for a year, and THEN tell them. jim On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Jul 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > > > what cost perceived > > value > > CD's, packaging, manuals 2.00 10.00 > > Branding 0 50.00 > > > > This is more of a real-world analysis. Pay RedHat $40 and get $60 worth of > > value. You may not like it that way but then you don't count. If RedHat's > > customers like it that way then that is all that matters. > > So, you're saying, that if Red Hat took out the manual and the floppies > and the support and went to plain packaging and still charged $49, people > would still pick it over the $2 Cheapbytes CD because of the 'branding'? > > I don't think so. > > The branding is a significant factor, but it couldn't exist without real > perceived tangible value. Red Hat's (or any other distro's) customers may > be loyal, but they're not stupid. > > - Evan > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > -- [L]inux has an installed base conservatively estimated at around 3 million users.... [V]endors say that most of the top companies in the US have bought the OS - but that few will readily admit to running their multimillion-dollar corporations on code put together by a band of software idealists. -- _Wired_ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:01:58 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 09:16:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Eric Lee Green To: Steve Lacey cc: "'linux-biz@lege.com'" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Steve Lacey wrote: > The Linux box is to act as the mail server for a NT/Windows network (of up to 100 users), accessing the SMTP/POP3 servers of the ISP for external mail. In the future it may be called upon to act as a proxy server for browsing from the client PC's. > It will only use a 33.6k modem for the dial-up connection. Okay, so you're saying that it has an outgoing dial-up connection to the Internet? This doesn't work too well :-(. A SMTP server must be connected to the Internet 100% of the time for reliability, else people trying to send mail into your company will get their email bounced back to them. The alternative is to have your ISP host your EMAIL mailboxes. Then yes, you could use fetchmail to dial out every thirty minutes and fetch any waiting EMAIL -- but for 100 users, via modem, it will be VERY slow (because it has to log in as each user, check to see whether there's mail in that user's mailbox on the ISP, then log out and log in as the next user on the list). You have two alternatives: An on-demand ISDN connection (i.e. if the ISP gets a packet bound for your computer, it brings the connection up, and if your computer has a packet for the Internet, it brings the connection up), and good old reliable UUCP. Check with your local phone company for the cost of ISDN. If it is a per-minute charge then on-demand will work great, mimicking a full-time connection to the Internet at a much lower cost. If it also includes a per-call cost, then on-demand is not so great, because it will make a great many very short calls :-(. UUCP is proven and reliable, but many ISP's nowdays don't want to bother with it because a) their techies sneer at anything less modern than a T1, and b) their techies are younger than your children and don't remember what UUCP is. *IF* you can find an ISP that knows what UUCP is, they can take incoming SMTP messages for your domain and route them into a UUCP spool. Then you can set up a crontab on your server to poll the ISP every thirty minutes. If there's no mail waiting on the ISP, the call will disconnect within a minute, unlike with "fetchmail", where each mailbox has to be polled even if there's no mail in any of them. If you properly configure your own system, outgoing mail will immediately dump it into the outgoing UUCP queue, which will then immediately dial out to the ISP and deliver the mail to the Internet. UUCP is quite capable of handling a workgroup of 100 people in an on-demand dialup manner like this, without even breathing hard. The problem, as I said, is to find an ISP who still remembers what UUCP is :-(. Eric Lee Green eric@linux-hw.com Linux Hardware Solutions Systems Specialist Quality Systems Designed For Linux ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:10:50 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:25:41 -0500 From: shock@lx.net (shock) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Business Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list of packages that Linux users would like to see ported. You can vote and add your own wishes to the list at http://www.linuxresources.com/wish/ . -- Stephen E. Hargrove http://www.buckowensfan.com http://www.lx.net/shock ----------------------------------------------------- If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done? ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:11:21 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 07:45:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: "'linux-biz@lege.com'" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Eric Lee Green wrote: > This doesn't work too well :-(. A SMTP server must be connected to the > Internet 100% of the time for reliability, else people trying to send mail > into your company will get their email bounced back to them. Nope. ISPs set up this kind of config all the time. As long as the ISP is secondary MX for the domain and you rig the box to issue an ETRN to the ISP's mailserver every time it connects and flush the outgoing queue it will work flawlessly. This question really belongs on linuxisp@friendly.jeffnet.org Lots of Linux ISP info at http://www.mtiweb.com/isp and don't forget to STFW. > UUCP is proven and reliable, but many ISP's nowdays don't want to bother > with it because a) Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, faster and simpler to set up. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:11:31 1998 From: Steve Lacey To: "'linux-biz@lege.com'" Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:27:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [linux-biz] FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Status: Sorry if I was not clear in the original posting. The Linux box is to act as the mail server for a NT/Windows network (of up to 100 users), accessing the SMTP/POP3 servers of the ISP for external mail. In the future it may be called upon to act as a proxy server for browsing from the client PC's. It will only use a 33.6k modem for the dial-up connection. A redundant 486/Pentium PC with 16Mb+ of RAM would be used while it is to act as the mail server only. Storage requirements will be monitored and increased as required. The requirement is simply that the Windows mail clients (Microsoft Outlook and Internet mail) should be able to send and receive both internet and internal mail using the same configuration. Does the idea of using the default IMAP server to handle the internal mail with sendmail and fetchmail to handle the external mail side of things sound correct ? The system will be required to check incoming mail for the internet at approx 2 hour intervals (cron). Outgoing mail should be sent at a maximum of 15 minute intervals. (Will sendmail( or qmail/smail) only make the dial-up connection if there is queued mail when the "sendmail -q" is issued ?) -----Original Message----- From: Steve Lacey [SMTP:stevel@sjmicros.co.uk] Sent: 23 July 1998 10:22 To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat I missed the bulk of the recent discussion regarding using Linux as the mail server for a Windoze/NT network. (Maximum of 100 users) What is a suitable POP3/IMAP server to use in conjunction with sendmail to serve such a network ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:11:59 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:54:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Jim Hebert cc: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > Well, when I sell a solution to a client, I buy them the box set with the > CD and all because is DOES cost $50. I have a hard enough time convincing > them that this thing they've never heard of will do the job, so I let them > think it at least costs something, and since all the other software they > buy that costs something has shrinkwrap and a box with the company name on > it, they get redhat that way too. So what stops ypu from charging them $500, giving them the cheapbytes CD, or a custom "Compu-Aid" CD you burned last night, and pocketing the difference? > If redhat cut out the manual and just went with the cd stamped with the > logo and product name, in the sleeve that had the same art on it, I'd > still buy that for $50, even without bru and whatever on it, for my > clients, because it looks more professional and its cost is perceived > better than $2. Well, I wouldn't. > When I installed a fax server or something for a client, I list the > software as "Included" rather than "Free" for the same reason. > Someday people will accept free software, but I'd rather fool them, let it > run flawlessly for a year, and THEN tell them. Difference in approach, I guess. When I install a fax server (usually HylaFax) I quote a very non-free price, which includes the license, installation, testing, training, and sometimes customization (to integrate with a database system, for instance). I am totally up-front about what software I am using and the nature of its license; I usually give the client the Hylafax URL in advance of the installation so they can see what they're getting (in lieu of glossy brochures). The software may be free, but my time and experience are not. Clients understand that. They're not primarily buying a license for code, they're buying a solution to a faxing problem -- and the cost of a software license, if any, is only a part of the total. At least with the clients I work with, they don't really care for a line item breakdown of my quote. All they care about is the end-result. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 18:12:01 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:38:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Brian Bartholomew cc: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Brian Bartholomew wrote: > > The distros are merely supplementing (what they believe to be) gaps > > in the functionality of existing open source software with > > commercial products. > > Which makes them proprietary software distributors, period. Not ESR > model enterprises. I guess I just don't see it as a binary kind of thing. If making a distribution with one line of non-copyable code makes Red Hat and Caldera "proprietary software distributors", well, then, so be it. I'm not sure what the point of such a label is, except to announce that they haven't (yet) bought into ESR's vision of a proprietary-free world. Big hairy deal. The public has a choice; We have SuSE, which to my knowledge contains no proprietary code (but five CDs of freeware) in its $50 distro. Or Debian, which is run by zealots and can pretty well be guaranteed to be a commercial-software-free zone. And then there's always good ol' Slackware. If there were big philosophical problems people had with Caldera and Red Hat's official distros, nobody would be buying them. But people either don't know or don't care, or (horrors!) they know about the proprietary code and appreciate the distros' attempts to fill the gaps that exist in the open source world. > > I doubt many would pay the extra money just for 'charitable' > > reasons. The value must be there too. > > The number of dollars allocated in the buyer's head towards charitable > reasons is testable, at least in theory. [...] May be; but we're never going to see this pure a test in real life, so what's the point? > > note that in business settings Linux is going up against OSs costing > > many thousands of dollars; in this context the difference between $2 > > and $49 (or even $199 like Caldera's premium distro) is irrelevant. > If the ESR model is to take over the world, Well, I for one don't believe this will (or even can) happen... > I think justifying RedHat's profitability is a wonderful test of the ESR > theory. I think the real answer is that RedHat is proprietary, and > that's what their profitability hangs on. If we are to judge, by the actions of the marketplace, which of the approaches is more successful, I think at this point the nod would go to the 'proprietary' vendors over the 100% freeware ones. As for the ESR theory, since I think it's a crock I personally have no interest in testing it... > They're just a lot less proprietary than other proprietary software > companies. Their current success is not proof of the ESR theory until I > can bitcopy *all* of their intellectual property and resell it. Then your case study is more likely to be found in the likes of Cheapbytes and Walnut Creek, which do nothing but repackage stuff that's freely available. > Some time ago I stirred up religious ire on the fsb list by positing a > for-profit company that sold duplicates of the FSF software tapes, at a > lower price. This thread generated much heat and no light. Problem is, > the businesses buying Linux now are smart shoppers, and don't give a > about donating to the community. Or they do, but not by financial means. There are many ways to contribute. Even so, I think that being a smart shopper doesn't always mean going for the absolute cheapest. A reasonable case can be made that Red Hat and Caldera fund freeware developments (rpm, COAS, the new filesystem work) that might not exist -- or come to maturity as quickly -- if not for the participation of these companies. It's therefore in the interest of users who appreciate these efforts to help fund them, even if such funding is not mandatory. I happen to believe that the 'proprietary' elements of Red Hat and Caldera and SuSE (which sells proprietary products, though it doesn't put them in the distro itself) are necessary to fill in (what I believe to be) fatal flaws in 'the ESR theory'. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evan Leibovitch * Xunil Computing * Brampton, Ontario, Canada * www.xunil.com Supporting Intel-based Unix and Linux since 1985 * Caldera & SCO authorized Ask me about the Toronto Linux Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:01:07 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 08:46:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Eric Lee Green wrote: > > > UUCP is proven and reliable, but many ISP's nowdays don't want to bother > > with it because a) > > Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, > faster and simpler to set up. And don't forget about procmail. It is very handy in there with sendmail and fetchmail. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:01:44 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:04:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: steve@BuckOwensFan.com cc: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:01:58 1998 From: twm139@its.to X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on Linux Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:09:25 -0600 (MDT) To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] RE: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On 24-Jul-98 Michael Dillon wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Eric Lee Green wrote: > >> This doesn't work too well :-(. A SMTP server must be connected to the >> Internet 100% of the time for reliability, else people trying to send mail >> into your company will get their email bounced back to them. > > Nope. ISPs set up this kind of config all the time. As long as the ISP is > secondary MX for the domain and you rig the box to issue an ETRN to the > ISP's mailserver every time it connects and flush the outgoing queue it > will work flawlessly. This question really belongs on > linuxisp@friendly.jeffnet.org > > Lots of Linux ISP info at http://www.mtiweb.com/isp and don't forget to > STFW. > >> UUCP is proven and reliable, but many ISP's nowdays don't want to bother >> with it because a) > > Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, > faster and simpler to set up. I am going to disagree with that for a couple of reasons. 1) Fetchmail makes many many connects and disconnects. This is often the most wasteful protion of any networking connection. UUCP on the other hand downloads one large spool file. It was designed for 300 baud links and as a result is pretty effecient any time there is a large amount of e-mail. 2) Fetchmail requires that you store the Passwords for each one of the e-mail accounts on the mail server. UUCP only requires authentication to one account. The local mail server then takes care of sorting out the mail. Fetchmail is like drinking out of a cup with a thimble, whereas with UUCP you just pick up the cup. We ran UUCP at the ISP where I used to work almost from day one for some of our customers. It has worked for years without even so much as a hiccup. On the other hand I have been using fetchmail for about 7 months and have had it exihibit odd behaviour and inability to retrieve e-mail on several occasions. This is not to say that fetchmail is not a great piece of software but it depends on a model(ie Imap) that IMO does not lend itself well to this type of aplication with a lot of users. Terrence > > -- > Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting > Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com > Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe ---------------------------------- Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math. Date: 24-Jul-98 Time: 10:00:19 ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:07:21 1998 To: Evan Leibovitch Cc: steve@BuckOwensFan.com, Linux Business Mailing List Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Craig Brozefsky Date: 24 Jul 1998 12:47:12 -0500 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.2 Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: A Evan Leibovitch writes: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. Then organize it, fund it, or write up a description of what you think is wrong with Linux Journal, or what you think would be in the "better" magazine. Otherwise please refrain from posting this kinda non-sequitor complaint that's little mroe than troll bait. The last thing we need is another meaningless flamefest like the KDE/GNOME one. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:07:34 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:07:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: linux-biz@lege.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 twm139@its.to wrote: > > Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, > > faster and simpler to set up. > > I am going to disagree with that for a couple of reasons. > Fetchmail is like drinking out of a cup with a thimble, whereas with UUCP you > just pick up the cup. So then don't use it. Just use sendmail by itself. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 20:07:50 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 01:12:13 +0800 (HKT) From: Xia Hao To: Evan Leibovitch cc: steve@BuckOwensFan.com, Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] What does it take to make a better mag? was: Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: I agree that there should sth. better than LJ. Some of their articles are just man pages and very general background info reorganized, looking pale next to certain tech articles on SunWorld. And how do you think about the "Linux means Business" column, Evan? Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has more business feel in it? Axis On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. > > - Evan > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:01:32 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:53:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 twm139@its.to wrote: > > On 24-Jul-98 Michael Dillon wrote: > > Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, > > faster and simpler to set up. > > I am going to disagree with that for a couple of reasons. > > 1) Fetchmail makes many many connects and disconnects. This is often the most > wasteful protion of any networking connection. UUCP on the other hand downloads > one large spool file. It was designed for 300 baud links and as a result is > pretty effecient any time there is a large amount of e-mail. I have been defending the use of fetchmail on this list, but I find this consideration a quite compelling reason to consider UUCP when there is a fairly substantial amount of email. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:01:57 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 11:19:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Xia Hao wrote: > Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has > more business feel in it? I think that Nick Petreley's Open-Source magazine is the way to go and if we want to help we should be encouraging vendors to contact Nick regarding advertising in the new magazine. If he gets enough advertising support then the magazine *WILL* happen. Vendors can contact Nick at this email address nicholas_petreley@infoworld.com IMHO, LJ will never be a magazine for the IT or business community. It will probably have a long life as a magazine for engineers, programmers and other technical folks and could probably do a much better job at that if it didn't have to try and be a little bit of everything. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:05:44 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:52:57 -0500 From: shock@lx.net (shock) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: axis@prodigychina.com, Linux Business Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Xia Hao wrote: > Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has > more business feel in it? Yes! Maybe we could publish it on the net, and the members of this list could contribute articles. -- Stephen E. Hargrove http://www.buckowensfan.com http://www.lx.net/shock ----------------------------------------------------- If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done? ----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:05:56 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:22:25 -0400 From: Ted Maciag X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "linux-biz@lege.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] [Fwd: Re: LJ Wish List] X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. > Evan, was that one barrel or two that you were firing? Please Phil don't take this the wrong way, however, he has a bit of a point. Get some editors to help out these writers, please! A lot of the articles could be shorter, and more to the point. Others, especially some of the comparison articles aren't well defined. I would like to see better written articles, so that the read is easier and more informative. It reads like a couple of guys standing around the water cooler talking. I'm not suggesting that we become as stuffy as the ACM either. Maybe closer to something like Dr. Dobbs, VB Mag, the old C++ Journal? Some other departments would help too. Why not get Glynn Clements to do something on programming? We have very talented folks in the community why not hitch your horse to a few of them. Later folks... -ted ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:06:07 1998 To: linux-biz@lege.com Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 21:21:53 +0200 From: Willy Konijnenberg Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: >Here is what I would like in a web mag: > o links to linux stories on the web for the week/month > o help area to answer common question (Ask the Technie...) > o review of new products > o list of new versions of software released > o Cool Tool (app you can't live without) > o interview developers (via email) > o featured business using linux > o featured new port/product for linux > >How is this different from what is out there today (freshmeat.net, >slashdot.org, LJ)? I don't know that it is. However, it would be site >that collected all the information and a one-stop-shop. This sounds suspiciously like what Linux Weekly News is doing. It currently runs entirely on volunteer labor, does not have any advertising, and is thus essentially sponsored by Eklektix, who run it. Have a look at lwn.net. I am not sure this is the right angle for a more business oriented Open Source magazine though. That should probably be more like a "traditional" magazine, to appeal to the intended audience. -- Willy Konijnenberg X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:06:17 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:33:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, gregory j pryzby wrote: > I am signing up to help NOW. I am willing to start and run a new mailing > list if there is interest. Why would anyone want to have a Linux specific magazine? I can think of two reasons: 1. Because you have a religious devotion to Linux as the best, the one, the only, true OS. 2. Because you need to have a focus in order to sell advertising and in order to have a successful magazine, there needs to be enough advertisers with products that target your area of focus and it so happens that Linux meets both requirements. I think that LJ came about because of #1 and it is only recently that #2 has been possible. However, if #2 is your reason for publishing a magazine, you have to ask yourself if you are narrowing your focus in such a way as to lose potential advertising dollars. You don't want to lose focus but the name of the game is profitability because without that there is no magazine. Nick Petreley has quite rightly concluded that by focusing a magazine on Open-Source, you do not lose focus but you do broaden your advertiser base. And in reality, Linux Journal covered a lot of non-Linux stuff that happened to be open-source. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:06:28 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:12:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] A new magazine (was Re: LJ Wish List) X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. LJ is a good magazine. And it is becoming a better magazine. But with Linux growing so fast, I believe there is room for another magazine with a different editorial focus--and perhaps several magazines. The best future for LJ, in my opinion, is to take on the role that BYTE once held in the early eighties. A magazine such as this has a long production lead time and cannot focus on the interests of many specific user groups. By necessity it cannot be just-in-time. I have long felt the need for a Linux magazine that would be international in scope and yet could be produced quickly in a number of different countries and in several different languages. I love the Internet, but Web sites are not going to replace the power of print media any time soon. Using a newsprint or newsletter one color format, we could get the Linux news out quickly. News, news news. There is so much Linux news to report. LJs news is old hat by the time it gets to the door. A lot of Slashdot's stuff needs followup and more in depth coverage. Presenting timely reviews of packages, products and distributions is one big gap that needs to be filled. Focused stories about how Linux is being used in business are another need. LJ can only do one of these per issue. And there are so many stories to tell. Opinion. People want to hear the opinions of deep thinking, informed people about the current and future state of Linux and open source. LJ cannot do this justice. It mostly presents the views of its own editorial staff (there are notable exceptions to this). Stories about successful business models--how people are making money with Linux and open source software. Quick takes. Rather than LJs, collection of several longer articles per issue, short and focused stories of 1000 words of less--and mostly less. A web site might quickly organize an effort like this. But we should aim for print media ASAP. Such a publication to place in the hands of someone we want to inform about Linux, could have great power. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Fri Jul 24 22:06:40 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:31:57 -0400 From: gregory j pryzby X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5b1 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.35 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: Linux Business Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: LJ Wish List To: linux-biz@lege.com X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Xia Hao wrote: > > I agree that there should sth. better than LJ. Some of their articles are > just man pages and very general background info reorganized, looking pale > next to certain tech articles on SunWorld. And how do you think about the > "Linux means Business" column, Evan? I thought about this when Phil Hughes stepped down and LJ took over Linux Gazette. I don't have a problem with what SSC is doing, I just don't want all the information from one location. Does it have to be print? No... but one day it might make it there. I would suggest it be a web mag to start. I think setting up an automagic site (maybe /. can help out) would be nice. Then data is added and the site is built easily. A web product is better since it can be current. One complaint I have about LJ is it is out of date. Articles are submitted, and may wait one or more issues until it goes to press which means 2 or months till it hits the press... too long in this world! What should it cover? Anything and everything. Here is what I would like in a web mag: o links to linux stories on the web for the week/month o help area to answer common question (Ask the Technie...) o review of new products o list of new versions of software released o Cool Tool (app you can't live without) o interview developers (via email) o featured business using linux o featured new port/product for linux How is this different from what is out there today (freshmeat.net, slashdot.org, LJ)? I don't know that it is. However, it would be site that collected all the information and a one-stop-shop. There is a problem with getting people to commit and write articles in a timely fashion (I use to work on a weekly). However it was a site that pointed to data on the web, searching and compiling would be the hardest part. Yes there needs to be new articles. A few regular columns would be in the mag. Guest are welcome and would be published as people submit. I am signing up to help NOW. I am willing to start and run a new mailing list if there is interest. Yea, I have been thinking about this, but I didn't think there was an interest/need. > Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has > more business feel in it? > > Axis > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. > > > > - Evan > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe -- gregory j pryzby | gjp@sddi.com Founder of Linux Users Group of Manassas | lugman@vtci.com Check out the Home Pages | http://www.sddi.com/lugman.html Love animals-- don't eat them! | http://www.sddi.com/gjp.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 00:00:57 1998 To: linux-biz@lege.com From: corbet@eklektix.com (Jonathan Corbet) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 13:49:15 -0500 Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: > This sounds suspiciously like what Linux Weekly News is doing. > It currently runs entirely on volunteer labor, does not have any > advertising, and is thus essentially sponsored by Eklektix, who run it. > Have a look at lwn.net. I've been waiting to see if anybody would say anything like this...:-) I imagine that people are thinking of something a bit less ugly and amateurish. We're working on it, but it's a *lot* of work just to get as much as we have. It would be nice to have more longer, feature articles, if we could pull it off. The "no advertising" may go by the wayside as part of that; if LWN can pay its way it can get more effort. I don't know if LWN could be the base of what you all are talking about or not; it might merit some thought, anyway. jon Jonathan Corbet, Eklektix, Inc. corbet@eklektix.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 00:02:43 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:56:04 -0700 From: Norm J X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.34 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Business List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] SOHO Linux -- a new magazine X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Hi, Here is a prototype for a new magazine that my friend and biz partner are developing. http://www.brigadoon.com/~protek/slm/ We own the SOHOLinux.com domain. (Evan L. may remember me mentioning this at Linux Expo.) Chris and I haven't had time to get it up off the ground properly. We would like this mag to be part of a larger site focusing on the needs of the SOHO market. Please check out this prototype and give feedback. Norm -- ========================================================================= Norman M. Jacobowitz O/S: Linux http://www.linux.org/ Ride: Yamaha XT 225 http://www.yamahausa.com/mc/dp/dps.html Home Page: Weak http://www.aa.net/~normj/index.htm Email: NO spam mailto:normj@aa.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:01:13 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 15:39:56 -0800 (AKDT) From: "Christopher E. Brown" To: Eric Lee Green cc: Steve Lacey , "'linux-biz@lege.com'" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Eric Lee Green wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Steve Lacey wrote: > > The Linux box is to act as the mail server for a NT/Windows network (of up to 100 users), accessing the SMTP/POP3 servers of the ISP for external mail. In the future it may be called upon to act as a proxy server for browsing from the client PC's. > > It will only use a 33.6k modem for the dial-up connection. > > Okay, so you're saying that it has an outgoing dial-up connection to the > Internet? > > This doesn't work too well :-(. A SMTP server must be connected to the > Internet 100% of the time for reliability, else people trying to send mail > into your company will get their email bounced back to them. The > alternative is to have your ISP host your EMAIL mailboxes. Then yes, you > could use fetchmail to dial out every thirty minutes and fetch any > waiting EMAIL -- but for 100 users, via modem, it will be VERY slow > (because it has to log in as each user, check to see whether there's mail > in that user's mailbox on the ISP, then log out and log in as the next > user on the list). Huh? What about batched ETRN setups? The ISPs server is MX, queues it for you, and when you connect (hopefully every < 4 hrs) you ETRN their sendmail that then batches the mail to your sendmail. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher E. Brown (CB421) +907 357-4970 First Law of System Requirements: "Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about..." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:01:31 1998 From: linas@linas.org To: rains@nku.edu (J. Rains AA9KM) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 19:48:15 -0500 (CDT) Cc: linux-biz@lege.com, info@astroarch.com Content-Type: text Subject: [linux-biz] Re: Linux Billing Software? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: FYI, http://www.astroarch.com/BATS/index.html It's been rumoured that J. Rains, AA9KM said: > > Hi all... My company is looking for a GPL/very low cost billing > software package. Can anyone recommend one that is fairly easy to setup? We > resell domains and we need a billing package to bill our clients. I do not > want to have to use the M$ software. > > Thanks, > Justin Rains > > Justin Rains > http://www.nku.edu/~rains/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:01:56 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 18:17:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Christopher E. Brown wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Steve Lacey wrote: > > > The Linux box is to act as the mail server for a NT/Windows network (of up to 100 users), accessing the SMTP/POP3 servers of the ISP for external mail. In the future it may be called upon to act as a proxy server for browsing from the client PC's. > > > It will only use a 33.6k modem for the dial-up connection. > > > Huh? What about batched ETRN setups? The ISPs server is MX, > queues it for you, and when you connect (hopefully every < 4 hrs) you ETRN > their sendmail that then batches the mail to your sendmail. That's a nifty option. I suppose you are going to tell me I have to buy that fat book to learn more about it. :-) Do you have to make a special arrangement with your ISP for this? It's too bad this is the biz list as this is rather interesting to me. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:07:17 1998 To: linux-biz@lege.com Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Paul Foley Date: 25 Jul 1998 13:47:13 +1200 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3 - "Vatican City" Subject: [linux-biz] Re: A new magazine (was LJ Wish List) X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:12:11 -0700 (PDT), Dwight Johnson wrote: > I have long felt the need for a Linux magazine that would be > international in scope and yet could be produced quickly in a number of > different countries and in several different languages. Have you seen LinuxFocus? It's a web-based monthly (yeah, I'd like to see a version on dead trees, too) in several languages that could do with some new articles -- seems to be mainly just the editorial staff writing for it at the moment. http://mercury.chem.pitt.edu/~angel/LinuxFocus/English/ -- Paul Foley --- PGP-encrypted mail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:07:19 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:44:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: A new magazine (was LJ Wish List) X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On 25 Jul 1998, Paul Foley wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:12:11 -0700 (PDT), Dwight Johnson wrote: > > > I have long felt the need for a Linux magazine that would be > > international in scope and yet could be produced quickly in a number of > > different countries and in several different languages. > > Have you seen LinuxFocus? It's a web-based monthly (yeah, I'd like to > see a version on dead trees, too) in several languages that could do > with some new articles -- seems to be mainly just the editorial staff > writing for it at the moment. > > http://mercury.chem.pitt.edu/~angel/LinuxFocus/English/ Yes, I have been watching it with much interest. It resembles the Linux Journal in content and scope, adding multiple languages. I think it will do well. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:07:23 1998 To: linux-biz@lege.com Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Paul Foley Date: 25 Jul 1998 14:17:33 +1200 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3 - "Vatican City" Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 07:45:13 -0700 (PDT), Michael Dillon wrote: > Using fetchmail or sendmail with scripts is just as effective as UUCP, > faster and simpler to set up. It's inefficient use of bandwidth, with 4 protocol layers under your email (SMTP or POP3/IMAP on top of TCP on top of IP on top of PPP), instead of just one designed for low-overhead file transfers, it doesn't get compressed, and it's a potential security risk (while you're online to retrieve your email, you're accessible from the net). If you want to do PPP from that machine anyway, you might as well use SMTP ETRN or fetchmail, I suppose (no advantage to doing UUCP over TCP), but just for email/news UUCP is a much better solution. -- Paul Foley --- PGP-encrypted mail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 06:08:09 1998 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 23:42:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > Nick Petreley has quite rightly concluded that by focusing a magazine on > Open-Source, you do not lose focus but you do broaden your advertiser > base. And in reality, Linux Journal covered a lot of non-Linux stuff > that happened to be open-source. I agree; a few days ago I wrote Mr. Petreley, supporting his idea. For those who complained about what seemed like a flippant one-liner, I apologize. I thought I'd made my issues with LJ well-known in the past, and didn't need to repeat them. First, I will lay my bias up front: I offer this from a writer's as much as a reader's perspective. I have had two articles published in LJ, and in my former (pre-computer) life I held a graduate degree in journalism and worked at the Toronto Star. I'll get my main point out of the way up-front: LJ pays authors crap, and that's reflected in the content. The standard LJ rate is $100 per article, no matter how long it takes to write or how much research goes into it. Equivalent articles in most mainstream mags earn a *minimum* of $300 for small pieces and far more for in-depth stuff. LJ's offer of $100 barely buys an hour of my time; if I can't write something off the top of my head (both of my published pieces were of that nature), it's not worth my while. I believe that feeling would be shared by most professional writers I know. SSC, the publisher of LJ, can get away with such low rates because there is such a high number of eager beavers who have something to share with the community. To someone who's never been published, getting $100 *and* seeing their name in print can be a rush. To a professional writer, it's an insult. As a result, LJ has no professional writers. It has product overviews but no in-depth reviews, commentaries but no research. The kind of good articles that the community needs, also requires enough pay to allow people to commit time to them. Given the community and highly-volunteer spirit behind Linux, it *might* make sense that authors may want to contribute their efforts for free or cheap. That's fine, except that LJ is not a non-profit organization, and its ad rates are right up there with other mainstream magazines. (I also note that, as the one who organized the corporate sponsorships for the Linux presence at Comdex Canada, SSC was the only company we contacted that didn't respond.) So, my own personal opinion is that LJ is exploiting its Linux writing pool; because there are so many people willing to write for novelty or fun, there's no perceived need to hire real writers. Maybe not all of you believe that this is reflected in the quality of the writing. I do. What I would like to see in a *real* Linux magazine, that LJ in its present state would never pay for, are the following; - a legal column; - a regular piece or column targeted at VARs or consultants selling Linux in to businesses, competing with NT and commercial Unix; - in-depth reviews of software, comparing multiple entries in a category where possible,complete with benchmarks where applicable; - critical articles examining deficiencies in the Linux model and how we can improve upon ourselves; - a regular piece or column directly targeted at non-programmer system administrators; - a "Linux Means Business" column that isn't some propellerhead talking about how he snuck Linux in the back door. - a regular piece or column specifically involved in giving news about local Linux user groups around the world. As for me, I'm putting my effort where my mouth is. I've started writing pieces that I believe are magazine quality, but I'd rather put them up on my website for free rather than let LJ pay me $100 for the purpose of selling ads next to my piece for thousands. Here are my first two attempts, which I'm quite satisfied with, and cost me well over $100 each of my time: http://www.xunil.com/xunil/j4phases.html http://www.xunil.com/xunil/oschart.html I'll gladly offer these, and pieces like them, to Norman or anyone else starting a serious magazine intended to address business and other serious issues in the open source community. In the early goings of such a magazine I'll even offer them for free, just to help get an alternative off the ground. (Oh, and lest we forget; there is *no* magazine of any kind presently serving the BSD population...) - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 18:01:33 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 10:01:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: Evan Leibovitch cc: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > > > Well, when I sell a solution to a client, I buy them the box set with the > > CD and all because is DOES cost $50. I have a hard enough time convincing > > them that this thing they've never heard of will do the job, so I let them > > think it at least costs something, and since all the other software they > > buy that costs something has shrinkwrap and a box with the company name on > > it, they get redhat that way too. > > So what stops ypu from charging them $500, giving them the cheapbytes CD, > or a custom "Compu-Aid" CD you burned last night, and pocketing the > difference? Not a whole heck of a lot I suppose. Mostly that I don't want to have to pay for getting a cardboard box printed the way it needs to look, having a cd label printed on a decent color laser and applied, etc. For the volume that I seem to do on people who give a rat's ass about the athestic value, it's simplest to get a box that says "redhat 5.1" on it. Especially since I'd have to get new boxes all the time. =) And yeah, it needs to say Red Hat x.y on it, so that I can give them press releases and Internet World articles about how it's product of the year, etc. Peceptually, buying "Compu-Aid NOS" is bad because of the perception of it being proprietary to my company, which is a small business that could go away in a lot less time than a "big company" could have. That they've never heard of red hat before matters less -- they know damn well how big my company is, they've toured our facilities and met just about everyone who works there. Besides, someone at the client side would look at the cd, see that it was a verbatim blank with the copper colored bottom rather than the cd's they seen all their life coming out of mass production, and have some idea that Compu-Aid NOS must be pretty chincy and low volume if it's being produced on little cd burners. The CheapBytes CD looks, well, cheap, and would defeat the purpose. [snip] > > When I installed a fax server or something for a client, I list the > > software as "Included" rather than "Free" for the same reason. > > > Someday people will accept free software, but I'd rather fool them, let it > > run flawlessly for a year, and THEN tell them. > > Difference in approach, I guess. > > When I install a fax server (usually HylaFax) I quote a very non-free Yup, it was HylaFax. > price, which includes the license, installation, testing, training, and > sometimes customization (to integrate with a database system, for > instance). I am totally up-front about what software I am using and the > nature of its license; I usually give the client the Hylafax URL in > advance of the installation so they can see what they're getting (in lieu > of glossy brochures). Sure, they're paying for installation, testing, training, and we're talking about possible customization too. I'm reasonably up front: I tell them the license does not include user-count restrictions, that the updates are delivered via the internet for no additional cost, and that the source code is made availible, so that ultimately *I* can work on it if they don't like how it performs. I have to deal with people who want to know why their monitor is labeled Evergreen Research and not something like HP or Compaq. This is something that is fairly simple to demonstrate that it does its job effectively: you just have them look at the picture and try to convince them that it's the same thing. Take something like software that they have no formal contact with, since it's all stuff like imapd, sendmail, and samba, hidden behind netscape and windows 95 front ends, and try to tell them that this thing you downloaded off the 'net and burned onto a CD yourself is functionally the same thing as (let alone more than) what their friend who also has a business just paid a bazillion dollars in NT licensing and such for. > The software may be free, but my time and experience are not. Clients > understand that. They're not primarily buying a license for code, they're Sure they do, but every business thinks that they're taking their needs more seriously than you ever could possibly begin to. At least all the ones I've met. And we're like the most hand-holding business in this area, if you ask me. A client just said to me "Our fax machine is like a cash machine. It's the heart of the way we do business." They're a distributor, and their downstream clients all fax in big orders. If I'm writing a proposal to take something they know works -- plain paper fax machines -- and replace it with something where the POINT is to not have any paper (which scares them that it'll all be locked up inside a crashed server when something goes wrong) and this is the absolute core of his business, if he needs to not hear the word "free" because he convinced himself that this was a major software purchase, that they were buying the most expensive (== "best") enterprise solution on the market, then I'll happily give him a quote that lists the software's price as "included" and simply tell him the salient license details as above. > buying a solution to a faxing problem -- and the cost of a software > license, if any, is only a part of the total. At least with the clients I > work with, they don't really care for a line item breakdown of my quote. > All they care about is the end-result. Well, then we totally deal with different people. True story: we run cabling in another division here. We have a per-drop price. The client said that they wanted that price broken down, because they felt it was different if 3 drops required tugging string through 3 different conduits vs if the 3 drops all used the same conduit and just forked once in the room. They wanted a price for the punch down labor vs the pulling through conduit labor, the price for the jacks separate from the covers that the jacks sit in, etc. We had to FIGHT with them, saying that we do per-drop pricing because things like cutting through brick walls, drywall, or anything else required is included, and we'd have to plan every nut and bolt of the operation to quote them if they made us do it that way.... We listed "Pentium xyz with NT Server 4.0, xyz user licenses" and they wanted that broken down to the hardware, base server, and user license costs. Then they tried to buy their own hardware and make us honor the NT Server price, even though the price was an OEM price that assumed preinstallation on a computer. When told the price assumed bundling with the hardware, I got yelled at, because they wanted line item pricing and had told someone else at my company that they refuse to do business with anyone who tries to tie line items together and won't honor individual line items. So, yeah, I am forced to list the minutia line by line, and telling them that each server required a $50 purchase of redhat 5.1 box set was strategically the only feasible strategy. When I find clients who are receptive to the idea that the software is free but that my time is not, and that they're paying for my guarantee that the job gets done, and that the needn't worry about its performance because of the performance requirements in the contract (and the penaltie$ I pay if it fails), I tell them it's free, and tell them that the buck stops with me, that there's no vendor I'm ever going to claim screwed up, just me knowing that I can take this code and make it perform, and that I put it in writing. So, it's not that our approaches are different, just that I wish I had your client base instead of the nervious fidgety types I seem to deal with all day. Those guys are more impressed with their own self-generated guarantees of "If I pay more for it, it works better" than they are with legally binding penalty clauses. So, fine with me! jim ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 18:01:42 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 10:09:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: Evan Leibovitch cc: steve@BuckOwensFan.com, Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Evan, what an uncharacteristically unthoughtful, unhelpful, immature response! Perhaps you'd like to share what you see as the inherent immutable flaw in LJ that makes it impossible to improve it "into" this other magazine you're wishing for. Or perhaps the flaws that displease you so are indeed fixable, and you'd like to acknowledeg that with a retraction? Jesus Christ, I read threads on is list about "how we thank people who contribute to Linux in some way," read about how GNOME is a giant F-you to Troll Tech, "thanking" them for their contribution, but our thank-you to the good that Linux Journal does for the community is "you suck, we need a better magazine?" Evan, unless you think that, on whole, Linux Journal somehow does more harm than good by existing, I really can't understand your position here. I think it's great to be able to give a high-up exec a copy of it when it's got an article about samba, or about apache, or the cool setup someone just did with sendmail, procmail, and fetchmail. A whole magazine dedicated to Linux helps give it some legitimacy in dilbert's boss-type management, if you ask me. jim On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. > > - Evan > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > -- [L]inux has an installed base conservatively estimated at around 3 million users.... [V]endors say that most of the top companies in the US have bought the OS - but that few will readily admit to running their multimillion-dollar corporations on code put together by a band of software idealists. -- _Wired_ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 18:01:46 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 10:16:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: Xia Hao cc: Evan Leibovitch , steve@BuckOwensFan.com, Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: I know I'm repeating myself from another post, but I want to stess this: I hear about how we thank Troll Tech when we "attack" them with GNOME. Yet, here's Linux Journal, for all of the good it represents, and some linux-biz'ers are going to attack it with a new, better magazine, and ignore any attempt at improving the existing one. That'll teach those LJ'ers to try to get some basic info out there for people who need a magazine because they're too clueless to find the HOWTO's. Guys, let's admit something to ourselves: A large portion of what will be written in any printed publication will be limited in scope due to size constraints, and will be old due to latency of publishing a magazine. Further, that the people looking for the super-technical and the latest and greatest already find it electronically, via webzines, mailing lists, and other forums. The people who need printed info on basic stuff like how to write a device driver are probably not the racecar driver superstar coders that will be writing the IPV6 stack anyways, so why gripe about the lack of groundbreaking work on it. Further, please do organize your own magazine, compete with the web for readership, and see how much money YOU have to pay writers. LJ doesn't pay a mint, and there's a reason. If your complaint is the CONTENT than I can think of no more eminantly fixable problem for their wish list! If you want expensive writing done for a small audience, you're going to either have to defray that with a higher subscription cost or advance the readership. Are you willing to do either? Or is the reality of it that you'll just go read it on the web and the mailing lists anyways, especially if it costs more? jim On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Xia Hao wrote: > I agree that there should sth. better than LJ. Some of their articles are > just man pages and very general background info reorganized, looking pale > next to certain tech articles on SunWorld. And how do you think about the > "Linux means Business" column, Evan? > > Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has > more business feel in it? > > Axis > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, shock wrote: > > > > > FYI, the Linux Journal is compiling a wish list > > > > My wish is for a better magazine than LJ. > > > > - Evan > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe > -- [L]inux has an installed base conservatively estimated at around 3 million users.... [V]endors say that most of the top companies in the US have bought the OS - but that few will readily admit to running their multimillion-dollar corporations on code put together by a band of software idealists. -- _Wired_ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 18:01:52 1998 From: edw@detel.com (Ed Weinberg) To: linux-biz@lege.com Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:41:16 GMT X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 12:52:57 -0500, shock@lx.net (shock) wrote: >Xia Hao wrote: > >> Maybe we can discuss how to make a magazine for the community that has >> more business feel in it? > >Yes! Maybe we could publish it on the net, and the members of this list could >contribute articles. There are already two or three magazines like that. Check out the whatever.linux.announce newsgroup. -- Ed Weinberg, Detel, Inc., An Internet Presence Provider edw@detel.com www.detel.com/ www.serverking.com www.q5.com/ <-- find someone to CoolTalk or chat with here ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 18:01:58 1998 From: edw@detel.com (Ed Weinberg) To: twm139@its.to Cc: linux-biz@lege.com Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:33:10 GMT X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-biz] Re: FW: POP3/IMAP Servers for Redhat X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:09:25 -0600 (MDT), twm139@its.to wrote: > >On 24-Jul-98 Michael Dillon wrote: > >I am going to disagree with that for a couple of reasons. > >1) Fetchmail makes many many connects and disconnects. This is often the most >wasteful protion of any networking connection. UUCP on the other hand downloads >one large spool file. It was designed for 300 baud links and as a result is >pretty effecient any time there is a large amount of e-mail. >2) Fetchmail requires that you store the Passwords for each one of the e-mail >accounts on the mail server. UUCP only requires authentication to one account. >The local mail server then takes care of sorting out the mail. I was under the impression that you could configure your mail server to deliver all mail for a domain to one pop3 mailbox on your primary MX, then have your server dial the internet periodically and use fetchmail to get the mail, then sort it locally. Is there something wrong with this scenerio? -- Ed Weinberg, Detel, Inc., An Internet Presence Provider edw@detel.com www.detel.com/ www.serverking.com www.q5.com/ <-- find someone to CoolTalk or chat with here ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 20:00:50 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 08:59:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What's in a distro? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > We had to FIGHT with them, saying that we do per-drop pricing because > things like cutting through brick walls, drywall, or anything else > required is included, and we'd have to plan every nut and bolt of the > operation to quote them if they made us do it that way.... For the service of providing a detailled item by item price quote, the price doubles. > We listed "Pentium xyz with NT Server 4.0, xyz user licenses" and they > wanted that broken down to the hardware, base server, and user license > costs. Then they tried to buy their own hardware and make us honor the NT > Server price, even though the price was an OEM price that assumed > preinstallation on a computer. Not a problem because the itemized price quote takes that into account. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 20:00:55 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 09:08:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Dillon To: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > A whole magazine > dedicated to Linux helps give it some legitimacy in dilbert's boss-type > management, if you ask me. Until they read it and get turned off by its sophomoric juvenile gushing of religious fervor. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 20:01:01 1998 To: linux-biz@lege.com Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Paul Foley Date: 26 Jul 1998 04:00:35 +1200 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.3 - "Vatican City" Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998 10:16:57 -0400 (EDT), Jim Hebert wrote: > If you want expensive writing done for a small audience, you're going to > either have to defray that with a higher subscription cost or advance the > readership. Are you willing to do either? Or is the reality of it that > you'll just go read it on the web and the mailing lists anyways, > especially if it costs more? I hate the web. Who wants to sit in front of a computer all day to read online magazines? I want something on paper I can carry around and read when/where a computer would be inconvenient. I'd pay more for LJ. I wouldn't pay 10 cents for a web-based "zine", though, even if my online time was free (which it isn't) and the pages loaded instantly (which they don't). Too damned inconvenient. The only one I read is LinuxFocus, and that only because I can download a tar file and read it locally (so the time is free, and it does load instantly). -- Paul Foley --- PGP-encrypted mail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 20:01:22 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 13:49:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Michael Dillon cc: Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > > A whole magazine > > dedicated to Linux helps give it some legitimacy in dilbert's boss-type > > management, if you ask me. > Until they read it and get turned off by its sophomoric juvenile gushing > of religious fervor. If it's really the Dilbert's-boss type, he'll never look inside -- just the existence of a magazine gives the needed credibility Jim's talking about (if I read him right). Still, I agree with Michael. The Linux world is changing. We can tone down the shrillness of the advocacy now that we know the world is listening anyway. The community has turned the corner, so to speak. Those of us who no longer need to be sold on the benefits of Linux, who are beyond the novelty factor, simply want to get the most out our Linux systems. Frankly, the market isn't IMO large enough to support two solid, healthy Linux (or open source) print magazines. Maybe soon but not now. The preferred answer would be for LJ to pick up the ball and serve this growing segment of the community? It could be done, but it would take a substantial overhaul of the magazine's policies and editorial direction. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 20:52:32 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:13:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Evan Leibovitch To: Jim Hebert cc: Xia Hao , steve@BuckOwensFan.com, Linux Business Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > I know I'm repeating myself from another post, but I want to stess this: > > I hear about how we thank Troll Tech when we "attack" them with GNOME. > > Yet, here's Linux Journal, for all of the good it represents, and some > linux-biz'ers are going to attack it with a new, better magazine, and > ignore any attempt at improving the existing one. That'll teach those > LJ'ers to try to get some basic info out there for people who need a > magazine because they're too clueless to find the HOWTO's. SSC is a profit-making organization; the main thanks that it cares about sits in a bank. I guess my problem is that I may be too close to the publishing biz. I've seen magazines die because the community around them changes and they don't. (examples: SCO World, Unix World). I've seen other magazines die because they tried to dictate, rather than follow, what their readership wants (example: Byte). > Guys, let's admit something to ourselves: A large portion of what will be > written in any printed publication will be limited in scope due to size > constraints, LJ is now a large enough magazine to do what I advocate. It's not quanitity that's the problem, it's quality. > and will be old due to latency of publishing a magazine. Every medium has its strengths. LJ can't have the immediacy of the web so it shouldn't try to duplicate it. Instead, LJ can (and should) do more to present an overview of the "big picture" amongst all the little stories out there. But that requires reserarch and investigation -- and that costs money. > If your complaint is the CONTENT than I can think of no more eminantly > fixable problem for their wish list! Fine, it was asked and answered -- in detail. > If you want expensive writing done for a small audience, Look at the specifics of what I recommended. Do you really think that informed and definitive explanations on the legal aspects of open source licensing would not be of interest? Are the things I suggested really each only relevant to a tiny part of the audience? Not everyone reading a magazine reads every column. But the good mags out there have enough variety of content to satisfy the spectrum of the intended readership. > you're going to either have to defray that with a higher subscription > cost or advance the readership. Are you willing to do either? Go ahead. Pretend you're an advertiser, call LJ and ask for their ad rates. Then look at a typical issue's ad content (revenue), count up the articles by outside writers (cost), and do the math. - Evan ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 22:01:21 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 11:47:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > So, my own personal opinion is that LJ is exploiting its Linux writing > pool; because there are so many people willing to write for novelty or > fun, there's no perceived need to hire real writers. Maybe not all of you > believe that this is reflected in the quality of the writing. I do. As a contributor to this list who is also a copyeditor for LJ I can tell you that I am generally very pleased with the quality of writing for LJ that crosses my desk. Perhaps you have not taken the time to read LJ lately, but I have found that the quality of both the writing and the qualifications of the writers for LJ have risen by an order of magnitude in just the past 12 months. There are many reasons why a good and well-qualified writer may want to write for LJ besides getting paid. And they are doing it. The tremendous contribution LJ makes to the Linux and open-source community requires no defense. Personally, I greatly look forward to seeing it arrive in my mailbox every month. Certain features like 'At the forge' by Reuven Lerner which appear every month are alone worth the modest subscription price. Many of the articles are real keepers. I often find myself going back into old issues of LJ. LJ has a subscriber base of about 40,000 which is doubling every 12 months and there are about 7 million Linux installations out there and millions more using open-source software. This is a large open market for new and different publications with different editorial focuses, different editorial policies and even different ways to pay authors. LJ is what it is. Rather than wasting your breath complaining because LJ is not the magazine you want it to be, why not put that same energy into creating the magazine you want? If you have the same entrepreneurial spirit as Phil Hughes and you are fortunate to catch a wave, you just may have an equal or even greater success. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sat Jul 25 22:01:22 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 11:59:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > Frankly, the market isn't IMO large enough to support two solid, healthy > Linux (or open source) print magazines. Maybe soon but not now. The > preferred answer would be for LJ to pick up the ball and serve this > growing segment of the community? It could be done, but it would take a > substantial overhaul of the magazine's policies and editorial direction. In my opinion, it would. There are 7 million Linux installations out there. By the time there were 7 million PCs out there, there were already several very healthy print publications. The only ingredient needed is someone with what it takes to create one. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sun Jul 26 00:00:53 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 14:54:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Hebert To: linux biz mailing list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? was: Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: [Horrible cc cruft snipped. -- JFH] On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Jim Hebert wrote: > > > I know I'm repeating myself from another post, but I want to stess this: > > > > I hear about how we thank Troll Tech when we "attack" them with GNOME. > > > > Yet, here's Linux Journal, for all of the good it represents, and some > > linux-biz'ers are going to attack it with a new, better magazine, and > > ignore any attempt at improving the existing one. That'll teach those > > LJ'ers to try to get some basic info out there for people who need a > > magazine because they're too clueless to find the HOWTO's. > > SSC is a profit-making organization; the main thanks that it cares about > sits in a bank. Bah, so is Troll Tech, what's your point? > I guess my problem is that I may be too close to the publishing biz. I've > seen magazines die because the community around them changes and they > don't. (examples: SCO World, Unix World). I've seen other magazines die > because they tried to dictate, rather than follow, what their readership > wants (example: Byte). Sure, I agree with you there... > > Guys, let's admit something to ourselves: A large portion of what will be > > written in any printed publication will be limited in scope due to size > > constraints, > > LJ is now a large enough magazine to do what I advocate. It's not > quanitity that's the problem, it's quality. Here's a platform, Linux, that runs on umpteen different platforms, can act in just about any role of your enterprise that you can imagine, including file, web, print, call center, email, ocr, fax, control of robots on production lines, scientific/mathematic uses (eg beowolf), router, as well as ham radio, xyz language enthusist, etc. etc. etc. And you don't think that the Linux Journal needs to have breadth? Not that quality and depth aren't needed -- they most certainly are! And now is perhaps the first time in history where there are enough people interested in a given particular aspect of linux that a magazine supposedly covering the above panorama can afford to see the tress and not the forest, two or three trees leaf by leaf per issue. And it still may be premature to make that sort of change, I dunno, I dunno linux journal's readership... > > and will be old due to latency of publishing a magazine. > > Every medium has its strengths. LJ can't have the immediacy of the web so > it shouldn't try to duplicate it. Instead, LJ can (and should) do more to > present an overview of the "big picture" amongst all the little stories > out there. But that requires reserarch and investigation -- and that costs > money. Yup, we're on the same page there. You've got it quoted below. > > If your complaint is the CONTENT than I can think of no more eminantly > > fixable problem for their wish list! > > Fine, it was asked and answered -- in detail. > > > If you want expensive writing done for a small audience, > > Look at the specifics of what I recommended. Do you really think that > informed and definitive explanations on the legal aspects of open source > licensing would not be of interest? Are the things I suggested really each > only relevant to a tiny part of the audience? Congrats, you've found one article, and you really had to make it beyond the scope of Linux to get that. Not that Linux Journal doesn't already stray beyond the confines of Linux now... Do you really believe that Linux Journal can sustain a ledger full of 1 year subscriptions when a given issue has a large potential to be completely uninteresting to a given person? Or do you really believe that Linux Journal, in the long run, can write about things within their scope that are interesting often enough to a given subscriber that the subscriber keep the subscription? I can't help but think that if *I* were looking at a journal where a given issue may have zero in it for me, I'd probably buy it on the newsstand when it was interesting and figure that I'd come out ahead in the long run. Perhaps you need to get in touch with the Linux Journal people and make your case to them. If you really can debate and defend that Linux Journal will be a better magazine that MORE people will be interested in, and demonstrate to them that they will see an increase in readership and ad revenues that will offset their increase in expenditures, then you will probably get through to them. If you can defend this claim and they just turn you down, well, then they're stupid and you're completely in the right. But if you want them to pay a lawyer what a lawyer makes to do thorough research on the legal implications of open source software, you'd better be able to tell them that the increase in magazine quality will respond with an increase in revenues. When I suggest that I support red hat for a reason other than a pure business one, I am reminded that red hat is not a charity, that they are a business looking to sell to clients who are also in business, and need something better than "it's the charitble thing to do" to justify spending the extra 38 bucks on redhat 5.1 But when you want increased Linux Journal quality, your pitch seems devoid of any claim that Linux Journal, as a business, should make such a decision for business reasons. Your arguments seem to be based entirely around what would make for better reading, without any calculation of the slopes of the quality curve and the readership curve. The Linux Journal-reading community is equally not a charity to be given more for the same price because it's the right thing to do. > Not everyone reading a magazine reads every column. But the good mags out > there have enough variety of content to satisfy the spectrum of the > intended readership. Isn't this what you're criticizing LJ for doing -- trying to have a bit of everything in there? Scroll back, and look at the things that are just in the scope of Linux, let alone the other things that sneak into LJ, like general unix issues, minix books, stories about things like apache which could appear unedited in a FreeBSD Journal.... Now, tell me again that you can simultaneously be a "good mag" that has "enough variety of content to satisfy the spectrum of the intended readersh" while having longer, in depth articles, and still carry a subscribership. Linux Journal is not the Linux-Biz Journal. It covers aspects of Linux that you have no interest in, at the expense of fewer longer articles but also coves a hell of a lot of stuff that Beowolf-using-astronomers don't care about either. This is why I think Norm's idea for SOHO Linux is AWESOME. It eliminates out from the outset all the chaff about robotic arms and scientific calcuations... > > you're going to either have to defray that with a higher subscription > > cost or advance the readership. Are you willing to do either? > > Go ahead. Pretend you're an advertiser, call LJ and ask for their ad > rates. Then look at a typical issue's ad content (revenue), count up the > articles by outside writers (cost), and do the math. Go ahead, pretend you're this thing called a for-profit business whose job it is to maximize the bottom line and do some math too. Or, construct an argument that you can present to LJ demonstrating that it would see returns on the investment in its writers you describe. Jeez, the last place I'd expect to have to make this point is the linux-biz mailing list. And, ultimately, if you tihnk you can get a better readership than current LJ has, using your model, and they hear that argument and ignore it, then you *should* start a magazine and kick their butts. But I can't sit on a list where I constantly hear about showing gratitude to vendors who help linux out, and support a plan to skip right over trying to improve LJ and go straight to blitzing it. This isn't to say I don't support magazines like SOHO Linux, I think that's a great magazine idea with a different scope. But if you're going to be Linux Monthy or any such thing, where you're going to *re-invent* the Linux Journal only *way better* to teach them a lesson abou underpaying writers, publishing lousy articles, and gettings tons of ad revenue, then I've just got to point out the parallels to the KDE thread where gnome "re-invents" kde, only "way better" to teach KDE a lesson about using non-libre libraries. jim ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sun Jul 26 00:00:56 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 12:13:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Re: What does it take to make a better mag? X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > Every medium has its strengths. LJ can't have the immediacy of the web so > it shouldn't try to duplicate it. Instead, LJ can (and should) do more to > present an overview of the "big picture" amongst all the little stories > out there. But that requires reserarch and investigation -- and that costs > money. If you really cared about changing the direction of LJ, you would be presenting your proposals for improving LJ to publisher Phil Hughes. This thread reminds me a little of how you waxed on about what Linux International could '(and should)' do earlier this year. Tighten down that loose screw, Evan. Others do not owe you. They follow their own visions with their own energy. It is up to you and you alone to create the vision you have. And you will *never* win anyone to your side when you start by telling them how deficient they are. Dwight ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sun Jul 26 06:00:51 1998 From: linas@linas.org To: steve@kostecke.net (Steve Kostecke) Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 17:04:42 -0500 (CDT) Cc: linux-biz@lege.com Content-Type: text Subject: [linux-biz] Re: Medical Office Management Software X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: It's been rumoured that Steve Kostecke said: > > Is anyone doing Medical Office Management software for Linux? The developers of the Arachne orb are doing medical something or other. See http://dsg.harvard.edu/public/arachne/ and then write to the author(s) who will know more. --linas ------------------------------------------------------------------ Unsubscribe: To: linux-biz-request@lege.com, Subject: unsubscribe From popmail Sun Jul 26 06:02:22 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 15:09:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Latest Paul Krill--InfoWorld X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: Paul says such nice things about Linux: http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?980725.whlinuxsupport.htm Dwight From popmail Sun Jul 26 06:20:02 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 15:15:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Dwight Johnson To: Linux-Business MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [linux-biz] Petreley must read X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: OK, with a header like this: Will Ballmer take the fall when Linux supplants Windows NT 5.0? I think Petreley wants us to hang over to his Web site: http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayNew.pl?/petrel/petrel.htm Dwight From popmail Sun Jul 26 06:20:05 1998 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 22:49:47 -0400 From: Brian Bartholomew To: linux-biz@lege.com Subject: [linux-biz] Re: LJ Wish List X-Unsubscribe: send a blank message to linux-biz-off@lege.com X-Status: > Until they read it and get turned off by its sophomoric juvenile > gushing of religious fervor. As compared to, say, any Ziff publications' sophomoric juvenile gushing of religious fervor? Hmm, maybe it isn't sophomoric, it sounds like what the good-hair types produce themselves. League for Programming Freedom (LPF) ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/lpf/patents.text