Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM acquires Red Hat

redhat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#201

Post by cenal »

filereaper wrote: post #130

I'm surprised at the amount of backlash here. IBM's had the Linux Technology Center (LTC) for a long time and has been contributing to the community. All the platforms Z, POWER etc... support Linux as a first class citizen and plenty of other ecosystems are also supported (i.e GCC, OpenJDK, etc...) Maybe its time to re-evaluate the old biases? The old incumbents like Microsoft have warmed up to OSS, not sure why Big-…

Microsoft has been doing a lot to rebuild itself as a cloud provider.

IBM has been doing a lot to go out of business.

Microsoft's first CEO is still chairman and helping lead the company even from the sidelines.

IBM is a floating raft of failed leadership.

Microsoft isn't trusted fully by the community but they are making inroads under their new CEO.

IBM has been firing its most senior people in an effort to slow its cash burn and to hire younger folks. IBM also claims it's also to bring on folks with more relevant skills to emerging technologies. I think there is a lawsuit about this.

Anyway, IBM has done nothing in recent years to show they are a true contender.

If the Redhat team is able to pull a Next here and assume leadership roles inside of IBM this could be stellar. Big Blue's formidable sales team and reputation with a great product line overseen by passionate people would be powerful.

If the IBM existing leadership team emerges as the winners here it will likely continue to fade into irrelevance.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#202

Post by classichasclass »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #159
classichasclass wrote: post #88

For those of us running Red Hat or Fedora on IBM POWER, though (I run Fedora 28 on a Talos II), this is probably a good sign of future commitment. Hopefully they don't screw up Fedora maintaining the enterprise side.

Out of curiosity what sort of workloads are you running on a Talos II?

Just using it as a big workstation. Firefox, Krita, LibreOffice. The software has improved to the point where it can realistically be a daily driver (that can also compile Firefox at -j24 on this octocore SMT-4 machine in about a half hour).

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#203

Post by jhabdas »

bloopernova wrote: post #187
solatic wrote: post #153

It's like Vader asked Luke to join him in defeating the Emperor (Microsoft) and ruling the galaxy as father and son - and instead of the audience hearing "I'll never join you!!", we hear "sure, let's team up." The cognitive dissonance is so strong here. WTF just happened? If you asked me a month ago to put down serious money in Vegas on this never happening, I'd have happily done so. What on Earth were they thinking?…

I share the sentiment. Gawd. Freaking. Dammit. I've been using RHEL-derived systems for like almost 20 years. This actually feels like a betrayal of the Open Source community. Any bets on whether Fedora and CentOS will exist in November 2019?

See you in RHEL.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#204

Post by lima »

Kye wrote: post #28
bdavis__ wrote: post #9

RedHat can be replicated. Not cheap, and it will take a few years. What do I mean? Well, IBM will slaughter this goose very quickly. Customers will experience vendor hate to a high degree. But, RH is based on open source. A replacement, open source friendly, can fork RHEL at any time.

Ubuntu looked like it was taking over last time I paid attention. Every new cloud thing touted its pre-configured Ubuntu images, for example. Even Microsoft started with Ubuntu with WSL. Maybe that's why a still multi-billion dollar company decided to cash out even as Linux seems to be making inroads. People used Red Hat for the same reason they used IBM: it was corporate, understood corporate needs, and knew how to…

Ubuntu has a long way to go before they reach Red Hat levels of quality assurance.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#206

Post by bdavis__ »

filereaper wrote: post #130

I'm surprised at the amount of backlash here. IBM's had the Linux Technology Center (LTC) for a long time and has been contributing to the community. All the platforms Z, POWER etc... support Linux as a first class citizen and plenty of other ecosystems are also supported (i.e GCC, OpenJDK, etc...) Maybe its time to re-evaluate the old biases? The old incumbents like Microsoft have warmed up to OSS, not sure why Big-…

sir, you make a good point. the world always changes. microsoft has changed, perhaps IBM has also. one who believes in sin and redemption perhaps should give IBM a chance.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#207

Post by beatgammit »

solatic wrote: post #153

It's like Vader asked Luke to join him in defeating the Emperor (Microsoft) and ruling the galaxy as father and son - and instead of the audience hearing "I'll never join you!!", we hear "sure, let's team up." The cognitive dissonance is so strong here. WTF just happened? If you asked me a month ago to put down serious money in Vegas on this never happening, I'd have happily done so. What on Earth were they thinking?…

As soon as I heard this news, I was looking to invest in SUSE until I found out they were just bought by a private equity firm earlier this year.

What's going on with Linux providers? Is Amazon really just dominating the space?

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#209

Post by bengalister »

delfinom wrote: post #81
crb002 wrote: post #32

This will only work out if IBM beefs up it's data centers to clone AWS (Lambda, Batch, S3, RDS, SQS, Fargate), gobbles Netifly, then puts mainframe DB2 in the cloud next to commodity servers. Also needs to open the ZOS toolchain and get a modern syntax and tooling around COBOL.

Tried IBM cloud when it was "released". 50% of the portal pages were failing due to their own cross origin policies. Only a idiot would touch such an incompetent cloud system.

I worked for a company that used bluemix PAAS (cloudfoundry based back in 2016). We were early adopters(customers), the service was not really stable at that time (but we were not in production yet) but it improved and ended up quite stable before we left for different reasons. I think I preferred (cost aside) their PAAS offering to some competitors like AWS beanstalk.
Post reply on HN