I am having a feeling that Dell might buy Canonical soon.
IBM acquires Red Hat
301–310 of 1001 posts
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
Red Hat tends to employ people through offices in low/moderate COL areas or as fully remote. It would have been my #1 prospect after leaving the Bay Area. People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily.
> People who've already established lives in places like Raleigh may not find a comparable job so easily. Gonna have to disagree here. Raleigh is not a tech backwater. There’s plenty of comparable work to be found in the area.
What are some examples?
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#303God help us. Will there be any independent open source/open source friendly company that isn't controlled by some corporate giant?
Probably if things go wrong, every community will just fork the code and move on.
The problem being that forked projects rarely get much traction. Look at Devuan. Only the very hard core Debian fanboys moved over. Sure, it's nice not having systemd, but the project will never have the user base and developer support that its parent project enjoys. Maybe, though, with RH being bought out, people will take a second look. I've always favoured Debian over RH for servers, as the upgrade path is dead simple and almost always works. RH/CentOS is a tough row to hoe in this regard comparitively.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#304It'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?
The boilerplate and vague statement of Red Hat remaining a distinct unit doesn't really tell us anything. More relevant is what the CentOS and Fedora communities think of this acquisition, because no matter what they are community driven projects.
There are two coins to toss: whether IBM reaches into Red Hat in a way that kills off either project; and whether enough of the community steps out.
I'm curious what openSUSE folks think of SUSE having been acquired by Novel, then Attachmate, and then the Micro Focus merger. They've been through a lot, and openSUSE is still here.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#305Well, I don't know anybody in the FOSS community which would be worried it systemd became endangered ;)
So you'd rather go back to Upstart or SysV? Really?
I'd rathe someone take another shot at service management.
I don't want to hold onto everything about SysV style systems - I love SMF in Solaris! - but I'd definitely prefer a leaner and more focused approach to development than we see with systemd.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#306It'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?…
Defeting aws not ms. And projects like ansible and cloud formation / manage iq are the weapons
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#307New IBM hire, software developer. So far; I've taken part of 3 separate events where I was essentially sat through a presentation on why I should file patents (so they could farm IP off of me and my peers). IBM is a pathological company, and definitely not good news for open source.
”sat through a presentation on why I should file patents”
Some years ago, I worked for Red Hat. I remember them saying the same thing about patents. There was even some kind of reward scheme if you filed one with your name on it.
(in hindsight, I guess I should have held on to those employee stock options!)
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worse, IMHO. IBM treats their customers as prey just like Oracle plus they treat their own people worse. I know people who've had the IBM licensing ninja squad show up at their door for surprise validation with a big bill as a result.
I have extensive dealings with both. Oracle are actually malicious. IBM are just incompetent. If you can find a good account manager inside IBM for your needs, then there is a chance that you'll be able to get on well. Otherwise you'll have to do what I did which is say publicly shame the head of department on a public platform, with their superiors listening in. Oracle however, have no shame.
I seriously wonder who is still left at oracle who actually cares about technology and pushing it forward, instead of using it as a tool to squeeze money.
Most competent Sun people have left oracle and are onto greener pastures.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#309This is a massive cash expenditure. IBM's biggest bet to be back into the cloud game. Given the amount of cash involved this might be IBM's last card, at least from an M&A perspective, so this deal needs to work.
RedHat is much smaller than IBM, however far better managed with a clear product roadmap, lean sales and customer support. In a good scenario a reverse takeover will take place and RedHat management will take control and lead new IBM to a better future, however this is very unlikely.
IMO: This is great for RedHat shareholders, terrible for the new IBM co...
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#310The history of the “free economy” is one of concentration of market power. Good reference is Galbraith’s “1929 the great crash”
I feel you're right, which is why I'm surprised by the seemingly negative response to this news, and the overwhelmingly positive response from GitHub+Microsoft. Some of the same conflicts of interest exist in both modern cases, notwithstanding, both have opposite contribution histories. Am I missing something?
I wouldn't call the GitHub+Microsoft acquisition response "overwhelmingly positive".