First Github and now Redhat, is the world changing for the better or worse?
IBM acquires Red Hat
451–460 of 1001 posts
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you'd rather go back to Upstart or SysV? Really?
No, it was just a joke, you know... but in fact I've checked and I'm already running upstart right now, as part of my Ubuntu LTS system. So really no need to "go back" :P
Ubuntu switched to systemd from 16.04. You must be running 14.04. Ubuntu improved a lot in 4 years.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#453Guys, this is not just, or mainly not RH Linux. :( - kernel development - Ansible - JBoss (I know HN hates Java, especially Java EE, but it was and is an important factor in enterprise OSS adoption) - OpenShift - Ceph, Gluster All these are in danger, not just RHEL. I don't know about any other company that is large, successful, focuses on the enterprise and absolutely behind OSS. Canonical is way behind Red Hat in t…
Also everything CoreOS-related.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#454Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Conversely, I wonder what this does to the Linux ecosystem. It looks like at this point, Debian and Arch are the only major self-sufficient distros (i.e. not built on top of another distro) that are still community-owned and community-driven; and of the two, Debian is clearly more broadly popular. So, will this result in Debian becoming the de facto standard of "open Linux"? This could make things interesting when it…
What about PCLinuxOS, openSUSE, Mageia, Void, Nixos, Solus ?
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#455$50 says someone like Microsoft or Google responds to this by buying Canonical.
Why would either of them need them?
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Conversely, I wonder what this does to the Linux ecosystem. It looks like at this point, Debian and Arch are the only major self-sufficient distros (i.e. not built on top of another distro) that are still community-owned and community-driven; and of the two, Debian is clearly more broadly popular. So, will this result in Debian becoming the de facto standard of "open Linux"? This could make things interesting when it…
well, that’s basically already happened. with its strict adherence to GNU, and with the truly phenomenal number of distros based on debian (especially if you include ubuntu derived distros, but ubuntu is so different these days that idk if it’s really the same any more?)
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Others pointed out that the Github merger wasn’t all positive, but Microsoft is at least a software company. IBM is a consulting company and their model is really different than RedHat. Competing with AWS and Microsoft is pretty crazy and does not make sense to me. RedHat’s value is in its software, not its cloud delivery. And, frankly, I depend a little more on centos/fedora than I do Github.
They've been competing with cloud providers for while already. Bluemix may not be very popular, but it seems to be growing https://console.bluemix.net/catalog/
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#458IBM has been historically a Linux contributor. Eclipse, their open source IDE, opened the other to Java and other programming languages in the OS. And Power processors supported Linux early on. From that perspective to purchase Red Hat makes sense. It makes even more sense as the announcement states that they are trying to create a bigger cloud provider to compete with Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, and Microsoft…
>> IBM has been historically a Linux contributor. Maybe, but IBM has been historically a for profit enterprise, required to appease investors every quarter (or the CEO goes, stock crashes etc.) They may have contributed to projects to then sell services, but make no mistake, IBM has their own interests at heart, not yours.
You do realise that a lot of Linux kernel development is being done by for profit enterprises, don't you? None of these companies are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they have a vested interest. Linux is at the heart of possibly the majority of modern IT infrastructure.
Besides,IBM/RH are by not even the largest contributors. Intel does more than both of them combined, and then you have other heavyweights like Google who have an interest (notably through Android) in keeping the project going. Even if IBM were to pull out for some reason, there are more than enough others who could pick up the slack.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, 10 years down the line RHEL is pretty much guaranteed dead. Probably say goodbye to Fedora as well.
This is sad, Fedora has been my favourite distribution for a little while. Red Hat have been a good community player and it is a big loss for them to be gobbled up by IBM. What is the best alternative to Fedora and CentOS?
I only used tried-and-tested distros like Yggdrasil.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#460HELP, I have a big question : The buyout will go to the shareholders, that is a deterministic ~30% net benefit. (the offer being ~30% > than the market cap) So WHY shouldn't us the readers of the news, buy shares right now, before the market react ? And we can even imagine a Web crawler software that detect that entreprise X announce to buy entreprise Y && the offer being > to the market cap, then auto buy ?
It's already too late to buy "before the market reacts". This is public information now, so it will be priced into the market price once the stock market opens.