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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#881

Post by ric2b »

coderjoe wrote: post #864
sjellis wrote: post #816

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Red Hat's Open Source only approach does mean that none of these projects can be closed down, though: AFAIK, IBM are acquiring people and a brand, but no significant proprietary IP. If higher-ups at IBM turn out to be as clueless as Oracle, then key engineers will just walk and continue working on those projects elsewhere.

Where elsewhere? The landscape of options to be paid for your OSS has just become a barren field. Yes, OSS as a concept can survive only on gratis work. However I'm not sure the portfolio of projects supported largely by Red Hat maintainers could. If maintainers are forced to start walking as they did with Oracle I expect to see quite a few projects fall into disrepair.

I guess they can start a new company and keep working on the same products. The community would have to change to their new repo's but other than that RedHat could get a new start, with a different name.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#882

Post by justinclift »

brazzy wrote: post #841
mcv wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a terrible and completely unreasonable stance for an employer. You get the hours you pay for. You don't get to own people's free time.

One relatively benign reason behind such policies is that the employer wants your free time to actually be free time that helps your recover, not a second job that leaves you exhausted and fighting burnout and sleep deprivation.

They can "want" whatever they like. Doesn't mean it's reasonable, nor something people should cater to. ;)

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#883

Post by teddyh »

thinkingemote wrote: post #376

Has Richard Stallman responded yet? I'd be interested to see if any of the legends of Linux have commented and what they have to say.

RMS is usually eminently practical and pragmatic. Since this has not caused any practical change yet, there is nothing to comment on – it’s all speculation, and RMS usually does not speculate.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#884

Post by [deleted] »

JohannesH wrote: post #870
aedron wrote: post #865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A long time ago I joined IBM via an acquistion of the company I worked for. One part of the (lengthy) contract I had to sign, was a form listing any side projects I may have that I would be required to no longer work on. I simply omitted that page when I returned the contract and no one ever noticed.

I'm curious. Anyone care to outline the legal ramifications of this action? What would happen if IBM tried to stop his side-project? 1. Would IBM be able to enforce the original contract as it was outlined when they sent it to him? Would he be liable to fraud or other similar charges (for instance if he altered the contract after IBM representative added their signature)? 2. Or would the altered contract stand up in…

[deleted]

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#885

Post by xte »

Talking about procrastination I see a big problem for us user of FOSS desktop: RH need to be on GNU/Linux desktop just to play a SUN-like role. IBM have no need for that.

So after Ubuntu ditch desktop and actual "Gnome disaster" I think things will go even worse, leaving us with no more generic GNU/Linux desktop for end-users, pushing us again on a small tech/geek niche, witch in turn push end-users, many "power users" included, to the cloud-mobile world so delete the last bastion of digital freedom we have. On desktop we have our system, we control our files, we decide when and how to upgrade, what to install or uninstall. On mobile vendor choose for us and we are powerless.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#886

Post by MetalBuddha »

mcv wrote: post #811
MyNameIsFred wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What wouldn't be the 5th time I've heard such stories, but I don't think it's in any way specific to IBM. Employers like that want any OT you do to be dedicated to THEIR endeavor, not somebody else's...even your own. If you're able and willing to code in your off-time, you should be doing it for the good of the Company. /s

It's a terrible and completely unreasonable stance for an employer. You get the hours you pay for. You don't get to own people's free time.

Why can't you just be a good little slave?

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#888

Post by knightofmars »

phkahler wrote: post #518
janc_ wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

...promising everything and delivering half of that at best... I work for a company driven by sales people. It sucks. They keep promising things we don't have and complaining that engineering can't deliver. IMHO a good sales person should be able to sell what we have. Any jackass can make empty promises.

The sales process needs both rewards (commission) as well as punishments (commission loss based on unmet delivery). The idea, "As soon as the contract is signed I should get my money." is a broken one as it reinforces the type of behavior that leads to unrealistic promises being made. The 50% at signing and 50% at delivery model is better for this reason. Yes, there would need to be additional language surrounding what an "unmet delivery" would be and how it would be gauged with relation to promises made during the sales process.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#889

Post by dingaling »

jordigh wrote: post #425
colordrops wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Red Hat used to sell non-free software using the freemium model with Redhat Enterprise. Is that no longer the case?

No, RHEL isn't freemium. They sold you access to the source code. You also have the right to redistribute RHEL, which is how CentOS happened. I understand they did threaten to terminate support if you redistributed, but they couldn't stop you from doing so if you so chose.

They also require a support contract to view their bug tracker.

Re: IBM acquires Red Hat

#890

Post by Quequau »

I have to wonder if folks aren't making more of this news that is really there. I mean besides a lot money changing hands and the usual process of IBM taking on a lot of employees and eventually laying many of them off.

Could anyone venture to predict how this might effect the wider Linux ecosystem?

Post reply on HN