My 0.02:
IBM:Oracle=RH:Sun
(question from a non-native English speaker: is the above interpreted as IBM is to Oracle as RH is to Sun ?)
Bad times are coming for open source.
IBM acquires Red Hat
581–590 of 1001 posts
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#582Guys, 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…
I don't know of any other OSS company that does _exclusively_ OSS. Canonical, for example, has a number of proprietary solutions built around their core OSS stuff, so they function as an open core business. And they're not doing anywhere close to as well as Red Hat does.
SUSE? They make a big song and dance (literally) of being open source, but I don't know if they're exclusively OSS.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#583RedHat 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.
At least they didn't get bought by Oracle. All the important people Sun had left within ~6 months of Oracle buying Sun.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#584Guys, 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…
CoreOS :(
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#585Guys, 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…
- kernel development - OpenShift I very much doubt these 2 are in any danger. In fact, I'd say these are the golden eggs IBM wants.
Agreed. Seems that most $largeco I come across used to use IBM AIX and are switching to RHEL. This seems more strategic than surface level only.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#586Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion: Either invest in developing hacker news support for updated news comment threads better (my recommendation is to split each thread by the original article/time in a megathread and use the newest title for the base merged thread and sort the sub-threads by time or stop merging these threads because it makes it so freaking confusing as the comments are based on totally different contexts and yet they are…
This happens whenever a story is changing rapidly. It doesn't have to do with merging the threads—it has to do with different comments dating from when different information was available. In this case the initial story was "might acquire" and then turned into "has acquired". The threads weren't neatly partitioned before we merged them; people just post to whichever discussion they happen to see. When a story has bee…
The threads were neatly partitioned because they were all based on an initial source of information (the source article), but it was then merged into one mega-thread contained conflicting sources and thus it makes it confusing since all the comments which were based on different sources are now intermingled.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#587Guys, 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…
The OpenShift folks sit on a ton of critical posts in the Kubernetes project. I'd suspect this is what IBM wants, but it's a risk that they stop contributing to the open source project.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#588> Second quarter total revenue of $823 million, up 14% year-over-year, or 14% in constant currency
ARR around $3.3 billion. I think they have sold the company very cheap.
Source - https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-repor...
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#589Ugh. Terrible news. Better than by MS or Oracle though. Just.
Re: IBM acquires Red Hat
#590Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion: Either invest in developing hacker news support for updated news comment threads better (my recommendation is to split each thread by the original article/time in a megathread and use the newest title for the base merged thread and sort the sub-threads by time or stop merging these threads because it makes it so freaking confusing as the comments are based on totally different contexts and yet they are…
This happens whenever a story is changing rapidly. It doesn't have to do with merging the threads—it has to do with different comments dating from when different information was available. In this case the initial story was "might acquire" and then turned into "has acquired". The threads weren't neatly partitioned before we merged them; people just post to whichever discussion they happen to see. When a story has bee…
I think it's reasonable to expect HN readers to realise that threads have been merged, but it can be difficult to track down the article in question all the same.
Whilst complex threading might seem to counter the simplicty of HN, might it be reasonable to include a link to the original article when merging?