Brilliant post, Matt. I have been preaching a similar approach to software development teams who fear adding Hibernate and Spring software techno to older systems. Or even adding Java to a geriatric Perl or ColdFusion app. The first thought for software developers is (as you say) "rip and replace", and I tell them that its too risky. Instead just add Java with Spring and Hibernate by adding a new feature set or mix-in the new technology while fixing a broken feature.
Your "and" vs. "or" way of thinking is a great way to think about technologies of all types - hardware, OS's, app servers, and software tools. Let your working techno KEEP working, "and" bring in different techno to add more features and tools where appropriate.
Thanks for the eye-opening perspective.
In reply to: "Red Hat: Moving beyond 'rip and replace'"
December 3, 2008
0 replies
The article is not about product vs. support biz models - instead its about desktop vs. server sales. RedHat has never seriously chased the desktop market, instead they chose to chase the server market. its a simple question of sales - IT operations folks spend big money on big servers and software from Sun, IBM, Oracle without batting an eye at a 6-digit check. Red Hat is selling to those people instead of the home users that spend $45 on a Windows XP Home upgrade.
So RedHat yields the desktop market to Ubuntu while they chase the big IT operations checkbooks. Its difficult to focus on both like Microsoft has done (but it took M$ a few decades to get established in servers), and so Red Hat focuses on the server market, and JBoss helps them sell even more products to their old customers they already know. I'm sure someday RedHat would love to own the desktop at big IT corps who buy thousands of laptops per year, but for now they are busy selling RHEL/JBoss.
In reply to: "Red Hat: The money's in JBoss, not the desktop"
August 20, 2008
0 replies