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

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#371

Post by int_19h »

janc_ wrote: post #316
jarym wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RH are good at a LOT of things but sales remains a bit of a weak point compared to Oracle and to a lesser degree IBM. Hopefully the RH guys can bring back a focus on technology to IBM while IBM figure out how to sell it to customers. PS: so will it be called Blue Hat?

Oracle sales means promising everything and delivering half of that at best. Are you sure you want to use that as an example?

In this context, the only thing that matters is whether Oracle's strategy is more successful at generating profits than RedHat's. Is it?

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#372

Post by jacques_chester »

arendtio wrote: post #360
chrisseaton wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All major tech companies file patents - shouldn't be surprising that it's going to be part of the job.

How about SAP? Aren't they a European company where software patents have no legal force? Do they fill patents for the US too?

Europe has software patents but (this was the advice given to me) the bar to obtain one is very high.

Otherwise you may apply for patents in any country that has them. And indeed you need to file in each country where you want protection.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#373

Post by goliatone »

bdavis__ wrote: post #206
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.

Is there a hell for corporations?

To add some substance to my comment. I’ve interacted with IBM in different scenarios. I’ve had to manage a team of IBM consultants at work, very frustrating experience. I still shed tears every time I think the hourly rate paid vs the value they provided. When Watson was being hipped the company I was working for was approached to use the tech and come up with some PoCs, the dissonance between the biz dev pitch and the actual “solution” was abismal. Currently I’m at a different company and we have IBM as one of our customers, the image that comes to mind is a headless chicken running around. That is to say, not a very impressive impression. I’ve to say that I’ve seen some interesting stuff as well. But I’m still very sad about the buyout

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#374

Post by tw04 »

jlg23 wrote: post #330
ethbro wrote: post #234

IBM the company is like an iceberg. The R&D and open source contributions are the tip. And the other 90% is services revenue. And most people's experience with IBM services isn't positive.

> most people's experience with IBM isn't positive. That does not reflect my or my friends experience. Once one gets beyond the local representatives, service for me always was exceptional.

He's talking about IBM global services. If you had an exceptional experience with an IT department outsourced to IGS you'd be the first.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#375

Post by adamt »

arendtio wrote: post #360
chrisseaton wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All major tech companies file patents - shouldn't be surprising that it's going to be part of the job.

How about SAP? Aren't they a European company where software patents have no legal force? Do they fill patents for the US too?

It's not entirely true that in Europe that software patents don't exist.

From: https://fsfe.org/campaigns/swpat/swpat.en.html "The European Patent Convention states that software is not patentable. But laws are always interpreted by courts, and in this case interpretations of the law differ. So the European Patents Office (EPO) grants software patents by declaring them as "computer implemented inventions". "

There's 20,000 hits for a Google patent search for patents assigned to SAP (https://patents.google.com/?assignee=SAP+SE+)

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#377

Post by indigodaddy »

cmurf wrote: post #304
bloopernova wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 openSU…

I wonder if the Fedora community could immediately fork off their own and essentially "leave" IBM/RH hanging? Not even sure if that is legally possible now, as the terms of the sale could have potentially included looming/upcoming license changes that might prevent that. I'd say they'd have to act quick and with their general feeling on whether they'd want to go that route (the Fedora community), and I'm sure their would still be legal challenges from IBM in any case if they attempted something like that.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#378

Post by trhway »

cozzyd wrote: post #269
trhway wrote: post #110

RH fell behind the times. Their paradigm of a stable though an older kernel was suitable for the times when kernel wasn't that stable and things in the industry were developed slower than today. I work in a big enterprise space and usually we do Ubuntu if we can and SUSE Enterprise if we can't :), i recently tried Docker/Kubernetes on a recent RHEL - looking at the kernel version i already didn't expect the stuff to…

You know you can run your own kernel, right?

Good luck IT-blessing kernel changes at BigCo-s. And what would be the purpose of a BigCo buying RHEL if one has to mock around with kernel afterwards? Anyway though, the RH not being a cloud player that has been making it obsolete too.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#380

Post by AndyNemmity »

c3d wrote: post #347
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #31

There cannot be a single Red Hat employee outside of RH's board of directors that thinks this would be a good move for Red Hat.

I have some hopes that Red Hat has a strong-enough future value for IBM that we end up redefining IBM rather than the other way round. There are precedents, notably the Apple/NeXT merger. Today's Apple is 95% NeXT and 5% old Apple. Can this happen here? Time will tell.

It's very unlikely, having been through a ton of m/as on a lot of sides.
Post reply on HN