Re: Suse Model

Graydon wrote:

> Since you've gone to a bunch of public trouble to say that this
> integration effort is valuable, I'm not at all sure why paying for it is
> objectionable, especially not in a business context where being able to
> say 'paid support for <time period>' is a selling point.  (I can see 'do
> I have to?', or 'I think that's overpriced!', but 400 bucks is one day
> of your time *or less*; if having the subscription saves you that, it
> was worth it.)

I don't deny that it's valuable, but I was thinking that there are 
businesses to which a minimum of $350 per year is not an insignificant 
cost. Non-profits and engineering offices with less than 20 people are 
just two examples with which I am familiar. You're right, of course, 
that $350 is less than a day of consulting time, which is roughly what 
I'd say that it would take to do an upgrade, and make sure nothing broke.

> This strikes me as a really quite good business model; it doesn't muck
> with GPL issues at all, it's clear about what it's selling, it makes it
> clear that RH is willing to compete on *product*, rather than "it's
> free!", an essential step in widespread market success, and it could
> well keep RH in the black.

This is a great point, in the larger scheme of things.

Thanks for the perspective. This is exactly the sort of reason I brought 
it up to begin with.

Regards,
dk





-- 
Phoebe-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list