6 ms·
Red Hat Nearing $1 billion in revenue
- rch 16y agoIt took me a long time to settle in on one Linux distribution, but Red Hat is it for me. I really feel as though I can trust the company to innovate and deliver products that are aligned with my long-term objectives. Thank you, Red Hat.
- pinko 16y agoinnovate and deliver products that are aligned with my long-term objectives I'm tempted to simply make a joke about whether Red Hat also leverages your synergies and upscales your key metrics -- but I'll ask the question: what does that mean? Can you give me an example of what you're talking about? (Vis-a-vis another distro?)
- sceadu 16y agoYeah, this (-> http://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html http://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html) popped into my head when I read that too. Red Hat has made some cool stuff though. Not sure if it would be my first choice if I had to choose a distro to deploy, however.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- rch 16y agoHow about EGit and JBoss? Going after another distro might be a bad idea though. It's late here.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- rdtsc 16y agoDo you actually use Red Hat, or do you use CentOS or another community compilation of Red Hat source?
- runT1ME 16y agoThe question is, does Redhat have a repeatable business model, or is it a combination of being in the right place at the right time, with very good execution?
- elbrodeur 16y agoredhat has been in business for almost 20 years. They're traded publicly. They have over 3,000 employees. I'm pretty sure they have a repeatable business model.
- wtallis 16y agoI think the question is more: is there room for more than one RedHat? They're by far the biggest and most notable "Linux company", and all the other companies like them have had a way of either getting bought to become a mere division of a corporate giant (like SuSE to Novell), or else losing money until they become irrelevant. It's important to have at least one or two corporate sponsors of Linux that won't "sell out" or screw the community in favor of their proprietary offerings. If Canonical can get to where they are comfortably profitable and growing for two or three years, then I think we can say that RedHat's repeatable, but until then we'll only have the one example of a sustainable and successful independent Linux company.
- fierarul 16y agoWhat are you trying to say with this question? Are most major companies something that have a repeatable business model or are they a combination of being in the right place at the right time, with very good execution? Would you want for your own company a repeatable business model or to be in the right place at the right time, with very good execution? Could you even make a repeatable business model without a combination of being in the right place at the right time, with very good execution? Really, I don't understand your question at all.
- runT1ME 16y agoFair enough, I'll clarify: When I say repeatable business model, I mean something like selling physical products online(amazon, zappos), selling physical hardware (IBM, HP), , selling enterprise software (oracle, SAP), or selling SAAS subscriptions (SalesForce, ec2). Is giving away a 'community edition' of software and selling an enterprise licensed one repeatable to other types of software, or is it a unique case where Linux became The other server operating system, and they were both lucky and skilled enough to become the number one provider of linux.
- savoy11 16y agoThis is how ridiculous the open source model is. They bust their asses working and reach a billion after so many years, building on top of so much work and complexity. Come on, Angry Birds can beat that in 2-3 years.
- known 16y agoDoes RedHat have a product similar to Microsoft's Visio?
- bryanwb 16y agogood to see RH being profitable. They put a lot back into the open-source technologies that are the foundation of their business, much more than many other modern tech companies, ahem facebook, amazon whose contributions are relatively small compared to their huge profits