Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL

On 25 Jun 2001, Trond Eivind [iso-8859-1] Glomsr�d wrote:

> "Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos" <thalis@cs.pitt.edu> writes:
>
> > On 25 Jun 2001, Trond Eivind Glomsr�d wrote:
> >
> > > "Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos" <thalis@cs.pitt.edu> writes:
> > >
> > > > Always a first time for everything bad. Anyway, not wanting to be the
> > > > pessimist of the bunch, I'll hold my horses and hope that none of my
> > > > "fears" turns into reality. The issue is that none of the other open
> > > > source projects RH supported was anything major they could make real
> > > > money out of, at least not compared to what they can make out of the
> > > > DB arena.
> > >
> > > Uh? The database project is small FTTB (moneywise) compared to other
> > > things like the kernel, gcc and glibc which are core parts of our base
> > > product.
> >
> > But kernel/gcc/glibc don't comprise a market by themselves.
>
> But you called them "not major" and something we couldn't make money
> from. We make quite a bit of money on gcc, to give one example -
> through contracts to add features, support for architectures, support
> etc. We are the number one company in that area (remember, Cygnus is
> now part of Red Hat).
>
> > They are just components of the OS market as a whole (if there is any such
> > thing left anyway).
>
> But the core on which the rest is built.

I may use a ladder to gather cashew nuts of a tree. They are expensive. That doesn't necessarily mean that ladders are
expensivealthough this may bring some value to their market :o)  


cheers,
thalis

> --
> Trond Eivind Glomsr�d
> Red Hat, Inc.
>