Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

redhat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 303 posts

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#71

Post by duxup »

voidfunc wrote: post #27

This is a great move for both companies. The doom and gloom in this thread is depressing. RedHat gets access to IBMs massive sales machine and IBM picks up a number of key technologies. Win-win.

IBM has been stumbling around trying to find its feet again for a while now. It seems possible that despite the advantages you cite that IBM won't know how to use them.

Word from the inside is that IBM's own "sales machine" selling Watson for what it really wasn't ... was a great deal of the problem with Watson.

The skepticism about IBM is rooted in their recent history.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#72

Post by magduf »

jaboutboul wrote: post #26
jake_morrison wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably Ubuntu will be bought by Microsoft. With the cloud, especially containers, there is little future in a business that involves paying for operating systems licenses. Most interesting is probably supporting legacy versions of operating systems for customers who value compatibility to be able to continue to run existing applications with the minimum changes.

I sort of agree with this. Either Microsoft will purchase Ubuntu outright from Shuttleworth or they will just create Microsoft Linux, in whatever form that is, probably something more container focused than a general purpose OS.

>they will just create Microsoft Linux

This sounds like something right out of a dystopian nightmare I might have had in the early 2000s.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#73

Post by yebyen »

billman wrote: post #62

What does this mean for centOS?

I was going to say that CentOS is independent from RedHat, but then I realized I don't know what I'm talking about.

From CentOS wikipedia page:

> In January 2014, CentOS announced the official joining with Red Hat while staying independent from RHEL,[7] under a new CentOS governing board.

So, good question!

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#74

Post by magduf »

voidfunc wrote: post #27

This is a great move for both companies. The doom and gloom in this thread is depressing. RedHat gets access to IBMs massive sales machine and IBM picks up a number of key technologies. Win-win.

Yeah, it'll be great. I can't wait until IBM pushes Red Hat customers to migrate from git to IBM Rational ClearCase.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#75

Post by jackhack »

bloopernova wrote: post #68
bmicklea wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respectfully disagree - I'm a Red Hatter so you can take that for what it's worth. To me the 34B buys IBM the real estate in the open hybrid cloud market which Red Hat has built up in the last 5 years. That is part of a large and rapidly growing market. If IBM interferes with Red Hat they will likely squander the value of what we've built. If they foster what Red Hat did to win that critical ground then their 34B c…

I certainly don't want to argue or appear confrontational, but wanted to ask you this: Have there ever been any situations where the acquisition of a smaller company by a larger one has resulted in the smaller company remaining independent? Or has there been any positives for companies like Red Hat when they get bought? Usually I hear or read the positive-yet-bland press release talking about how wonderful this is, a…

I usually put it this way: "Name one company that was better after a merger."

I've yet to find any affirmative answer.

It's good to have hope, but it's not good to be unrealistic.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#76

Post by ubermonkey »

bmicklea wrote: post #32
yitchelle wrote: post #14

Does this acquisition open up the market for a Linux company to move into the Linux enterprise space? Maybe Ubuntu could pivot into this space.

Red Hat's business model and open culture isn't changing. We will remain independent and I look at this as an opportunity for more people to engage with our stellar support and field teams. For some context you can read the email our CEO sent out to the whole company today: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/jim-whitehurst-email-red-hatt...

"Red Hat's business model and open culture isn't changing. We will remain independent "

Oh, man, wouldn't it be pretty to think so?

In all seriousness, this is an INSANELY naive statement. It doesn't matter what IBM says, and it matters less what the Red Hat CEO says. You got bought. They can, and will, do whatever they want, regardless of what lip service they pay to independence or preserving culture or whatever.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#77

Post by magduf »

abvr wrote: post #54
ilovecaching wrote: post #6

Feel sad, I know it's just the way things go in big business, but watching a prime example of a fiscally successful company built on open source who has committed so many resources to kernel development and making the Linux community better get bought by a beached whale like IBM just shakes me.

That I feel is just hyperbole, too many people tend to think this deal is some kid of death warrant to Red Hat, but in reality it is only going to strengthen it by adding more and providing support, both financial and managerial to any dearth of resources that may come around ope source companies, that is if IBM can keep their hands out of the technology and management of Red Hat. I think and hope they will be wise a…

>I think and hope they will be wise about handling things and learn from companies like Oracle who are now infamous for obliterating good technology.

That's the problem with your thinking and people like you in this thread: you're entirely banking on faith that IBM won't ruin RH, even when you cite a great example here about Oracle making similar acquisitions and running them into the ground. Seriously, what makes you think IBM is going to be any different?

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#78

Post by wayoutthere »

chr15p wrote: post #69
awill wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I think you are being overly optimistic. I worked at a company acquired by HP several years ago. They bought us because we were beating them, and yet, they still thought they knew better, and intefered. You can guess how things ended up. I am certain IBM will think they know better than Red Hat, and will intefere. It is in their culture. The HPs and IBMs of the world no longer innovate. They acquire inn…

34billion is a lot of money to mess around with so hopefully they will at least thing twice before trying anything too dramatic, plus Jim Whitehurst (Red Hat CEO) is going to be reporting directly in to Ginni Rometty (IBM CEO) which should help provide some aircover. In the end it will probably depend on a) Red Hat continuing to grow and make money, because why would you kill a golden goose, and b) how good Jim White…

At that level of a company like IBM, everyone is purely political. The CEO can’t necessarily force specific changes, and has to work with other senior executives who have clauses in their contracts that allow them to exit with huge payoffs if certain job responsibilities are taken away from them. Those senior executives (esp at IBM) have immense power; and will easily be able to kill RedHat by a thousand cuts or just parcel out the talent at the company.

Just poach a few key folks internally from RedHat to lead “strategic initiatives” and backfill their roles with IBM lifers. The culture will degrade accordingly.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#79

Post by GuiA »

jackhack wrote: post #75
bloopernova wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly don't want to argue or appear confrontational, but wanted to ask you this: Have there ever been any situations where the acquisition of a smaller company by a larger one has resulted in the smaller company remaining independent? Or has there been any positives for companies like Red Hat when they get bought? Usually I hear or read the positive-yet-bland press release talking about how wonderful this is, a…

I usually put it this way: "Name one company that was better after a merger." I've yet to find any affirmative answer. It's good to have hope, but it's not good to be unrealistic.

Apple/NeXT

Exception that confirms the rule though.

Re: IBM Closes Acquisition of Red Hat for $34B

#80

Post by coldtea »

bmicklea wrote: post #34
DevX101 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't spend $34B to not interfere.

I respectfully disagree - I'm a Red Hatter so you can take that for what it's worth. To me the 34B buys IBM the real estate in the open hybrid cloud market which Red Hat has built up in the last 5 years. That is part of a large and rapidly growing market. If IBM interferes with Red Hat they will likely squander the value of what we've built. If they foster what Red Hat did to win that critical ground then their 34B c…

>If IBM interferes with Red Hat they will likely squander the value of what we've built.

That's an argument why IBM shouldn't interfere, not an argument why IBM won't interfere...

Post reply on HN