Edward Muller wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 17:17, Paul Gear wrote: > [snip] > > >>(As an aside, i suggest to RH that a good way to fix the distribution >>problem would have been to change your trademark policy and allow >>resellers to reproduce a set of ISOs and call it Red Hat Linux, bundle >>it in whatever packaging they chose (probably with a selected set of >>logos that are approved for use by resellers), with or without printed >>manuals, and drop the centralised installation support (resellers or >>retailers could offer it at their discretion). That way resellers could >>make the boxed sets and the only thing you'd be responsible for would be >>giving them the ISOs - all of the other distribution costs could be left >>to them. Don't forget that you did win an award (last year?) for being >>the best product to resell - that will be >> all gone in the brave new world of RHEL.) > > Doing so would destroy the RedHat name brand. I don't see how that would be any different to the situation they're in now. They have destroyed the product entirely, not just their name brand. (I know you could argue that RHEL still has the name brand, but those who are familiar with the product would not equate it with RHL, and brand loyalty is based on familiarity.) If "the name" is such a big deal, it could have been renamed to preserve "Red Hat .*Linux" as their brand, and the product could have been contiuned under another guise. -- Paul http://paulgear.webhop.net A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should i start my reply below the quoted text?
Attachment:
pgpSdJsRx6ddQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
