71–80 of 203 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fedora / CentOS Atomic, which is Redhat's "clone" of container linux.
Atomic (or at least OStree) predates ContainerLinux by quite a bit. Also Atomic is more than just an OS; it's a system of reliable upgrades / versions switching. So it's got something in common with NixOS.
CoreOS = 2013 Atomic host = 2014
Red Hat acquired Ansible, now CoreOS. They seem to be really gunning for the DevOps marketplace.
However, I would love to see how they have evolved their openstack offering and their integration with intel's secure compute since the last time I worked on that project... I havent really looked - but I wonder if at all the meltdown/spectre issue affected them at all.
is there any at all risk from a security standpoint where redhat owns the tooling for many devops customers?
Not great news if you use container Linux: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-red-hat-acquire-coreos Container Linux and its investment in container-optimized Linux and automated “over the air” software updates are complementary to Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host and Red Hat’s integrated container runtime and platform management capabilities. Red Hat Enterprise Linux’s content, the foun…
Super disappointed in this part of it. Is anyone else aware/familiar with a decent immutable lightweight Linux distro like Container Linux?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, not great. That sounds like an EOL announcement. EDIT: Thanks for everything CoreOS team, and congrats on the sale! This immutable distribution was a breath of fresh air in a crowded "enterprise / kitchen sink" space.
Man have I really enjoyed CoreOS/Container Linux, etcd and generally all the work the CoreOS guys have done, and boy have I hated Red Hat's business practices. I moved away from Red Hat back when they split the OS into Enterprise and Fedora flavors. I was a big fan of Red Hat back when they were leading the way in the early days of linux with things like application packaging, and a general vision towards simplicity.…
The split of Fedora and RHEL was a great move for users IMHO. Serving the needs of desktop users and enterprise (servers) with the same distro just isn't doable. They have wildly different and incompatible needs. I've been a happy fedora user for years.
Red Hat has also done tons of things that directly fly in the face of a company seeking profits. Like continuing to release your full source code, even when punks like Oracle just rip it off and sell it for less. They even directly support the CentOS project, even tho it cannabalizes people who might otherwise buy RHEL.
Red Hat is an amazing company that has poured countless millions of dollars in both money and time to make all of our lives better. Even the Gnome project may not be a thing without Red Hat's contributions, and everybody on linux benefits from that work. I wish there were more companies out there like Red Hat.
Disclaimer: I have zero affiliation with Red Hat. I'm just an appreciative observer and beneficiary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Atomic (or at least OStree) predates ContainerLinux by quite a bit. Also Atomic is more than just an OS; it's a system of reliable upgrades / versions switching. So it's got something in common with NixOS.
Atomic doesn't predate CoreOS. CoreOS = 2013 Atomic host = 2014
A quick D&B search on CoreOS, Inc. shows revenues of ~$550,000 [1], which means at $250m acquisition price, RH paid ~454X revenues..! [1] http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/company-search.ht...
I have personally seen checks cut to CoreOS that were larger than the D&B number you quote. The set of similar corporate customers we'd run into was surprisingly vast and diverse. Redhat's made a brilliant move here.
For $250M Red Hat bought outstanding technology, a strong R&D team with community street cred, and upstream influence in Kubernetes. They know how to monetize these things. They definitely did not buy revenue or customers. In fact they got a great price precisely because CoreOS failed to monetize these things sustainably, and needed a way out. It's a great outcome for the team, and a great match for Red Hat.
I suspect an announcement re: Docker's acquisition by a major tech player may follow closely on the heels of this news.
I don't think so. Docker Inc seems to want to take this as far as they can on their own, and I haven't seen anything to indicate a deviation from their stated and implied goal of becoming an entrenched brand of enterprise platform. I don't think they've done much in the way of positioning themselves to be bought, though I'm sure some of the bigger players would like to buy them. I'm interested in this kind of discuss…
For Docker the question is: can they carve out enough of the enterprise IT budget to reach IPO-level revenue growth before either A) their direct competition (Red Hat and Vmware) catches up to them, or B) Big Cloud commoditizes the entire container platform space, eventually nuking the growth of Docker, Red Hat and Vmware alike.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Man have I really enjoyed CoreOS/Container Linux, etcd and generally all the work the CoreOS guys have done, and boy have I hated Red Hat's business practices. I moved away from Red Hat back when they split the OS into Enterprise and Fedora flavors. I was a big fan of Red Hat back when they were leading the way in the early days of linux with things like application packaging, and a general vision towards simplicity.…
Interesting, I totally disagree. The split of Fedora and RHEL was a great move for users IMHO. Serving the needs of desktop users and enterprise (servers) with the same distro just isn't doable. They have wildly different and incompatible needs. I've been a happy fedora user for years. Red Hat has also done tons of things that directly fly in the face of a company seeking profits. Like continuing to release your full…
And they say there's no money in open source... ;-) Anyone want to wager that MS buys Canonical?