Re: Why Red Hat is the "business" distro
* Matthew Macdonald-Wallace <mmw@tiger-computing.co.uk> [2008 Mar 18 04:18 -0500]:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:43:01 -0500
> Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps it is something uniquely American, but the key to
> > understanding Ron's association is the wine tasting example given in
> > the article. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the sex scandal
> > mentioned only guaranteed more people would read the article.
>
> I understood it and I'm English. I resent the assumption that only
> Americans can see the point and demand that the colonials surrender to
> the Imperial Forces of the British Empire immediately... :oP
I think you're almost 235 years late to the Tea Party ol' Chap! ;-)
> When I was selling websites, I would say "all the software it runs on
> is free, and the site design is £500". People didn't buy it. As soon
> as I said, "We can build you a website and host it for £500 with a
> monthly fee of £25, we couldn't sell things fast enough.
Perception is reality to many people. They perceived value from your
pricing but perceived that the free offering wasn't any good as even
you didn't have the faith in it to charge them for it.
Remember, "Nobody got fired for buying IBM^H^H^HMicrosoft."
- Nate >>
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
Reply to: