Red Hat Stands Alone, For The Better

"Isn't there something disingenuous in such thinking? "Open source is indeed a fine component of a business model -- provided someone else is paying your bills for you."

"Pardon the pun, but I don't buy it. If Red Hat has done this well for themselves -- not just financially, but in terms of clout, respect, and being a consistent leader in their industry -- what could compel them to think they could do better by being bought? As Jim Whitehurst himself put it, Red Hat benefits by being an island (or, rather, a "Switzerland") unto itself. Being someone else's property wouldn't give them any particular advantage that they don't already have or which they can't grow on their own -- the right way."

Complete Story

Related Stories:

• Red Hat CEO questions desktop's relevance in Linux debate(Mar 26, 2009)
• Red Hat and Linux a big part of Cisco's Blade Server push(Mar 17, 2009)
• Red Hat Shakes Off Economic Meltdown(Dec 23, 2008)
• A Linux Year in Review: Sun's Very Big Buy(Dec 19, 2008)
• Red Hat Chief: 'Cheaper Generally Wins'(Dec 03, 2008)
• Red Hat, Inc.'s Matthew Szulik Named Entrepreneur Of The Year(Nov 18, 2008)