1995-09-24 - Re: Netscape for Linux?

Header Data

From: “Christopher J. Shaulis” <cjs@netcom.com>
To: paquin@netscape.com (Tom Paquin)
Message Hash: da56da184221298a8e26c59cc9b67f53de48f4d45d81653b0144c3b10a74f3ea
Message ID: <199509240243.WAA00266@hoopsnake.cjs.net>
Reply To: <3064BDFB.717F@netscape.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-09-24 03:50:08 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 23 Sep 95 20:50:08 PDT

Raw message

From: "Christopher J. Shaulis" <cjs@netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 95 20:50:08 PDT
To: paquin@netscape.com (Tom Paquin)
Subject: Re: Netscape for Linux?
In-Reply-To: <3064BDFB.717F@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199509240243.WAA00266@hoopsnake.cjs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text

> > And the sad part is that now that they have announced that they are
> > dropping their unofficial Linux support, 
> I have no current plans to alter our treatment of Linux.  It is not now,
> nor has it ever been, a supported platform.  We do build for it,
> and some people are happy about that.
> I have not constructed a business case which would cause Netscape
> to begin support for Linux versions of the Navigator.  Right now, I'm 
> not sure that making a point of this would do what you want.

I'll say some people are happy about it. 

You just recently turned down an order for 230 copies of the netscape
navigator for Linux, and as you folks aren't making any money, you can
only wonder why.

You have also turned numerous other attempts by varionus people to buy
both quantities of navigaors and server software for Linux.

It seems to me that you folks are going out of your way to deny the
fact that the Linux market exists. I think that its because you are
embarassed that all these people with a $20 operating system are
throwing money at you while all the folks with $10K operating systems
aren't talking to you at all. 

While you may WANT to have all your sales be for OSF/1 machines or
solaris, but refusing to support Linux and ignoring the demand for
your products by the Linux community just because you don't think it
would sound as impressive, is actually quite childish and doesn't make
any financial sense.