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

281–290 of 303 posts

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

#281

Post by vel0city »

pmoriarty wrote: post #130
devonkim wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with any M&A is no different than what happens in marriages - do the two blend together, does one dominate the other's culture, etc? The truth is that IBM's history (and to be fair, almost all 10-figure+ market cap tech companies) even with multi-billion dollar acquisitions (that's almost all they do with the exception of Google and Apple I can think off the top of my head) is that the current company's i…

"the current company's inertia dominates whoever they acquire and the internal sales-driven culture in developed markets supersedes anything resembling engineering related from a company they acquire" What engineering-related innovation has RedHat come up with? As a Linux sysadmin I've noticed that all of the companies I've worked at that have used RedHat chose it not because it was innovative but because: 1 - they c…

SELinux is not purely Red Hat innovation, it largely came from the NSA's Trusted Systems Research Group[0]. That said, you shouldn't be turning off SELinux. Its like saying you should just chmod 777 all your files as you otherwise cannot figure out why your web server won't host your PHP script. On a basic level, it really doesn't take too long to figure out how it works and how to get whatever you're doing play nice with type enforcement.

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

#282

Post by samtrack2019 »

babarock wrote: post #259
kitd wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't see how Red Hat competes with AWS, Azure, and GCP It doesn't. Their cloud tech, OpenShift, runs on top of the others. Kubernetes can sit on top of that. It makes private clouds portable (kind of).

Slight nitpick. OpenShift, since its latest major version (3?) is Kubernetes. It's mostly a repackaging/distribution of k8s. OpenShift can run on top of AWS/Azure/GCP, but also, most importantly, OpenStack.

Another nitpick, openshift is not a repackaging but a fork of Kubernetes pure and simple, if you look at the origin you'll see those merge patch they do on every Kubernetes releases

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

#283

Post by ethbro »

streetcat1 wrote: post #267
ethbro wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on market share, Google has undoubtedly run the numbers and realized that increasing cloud portability hurts Amazon and Microsoft more than it hurts Google. From that perspective, community adoption of k8 benefits Google.

This is correct, however, kubernetes is a platform of platforms. I.e. it will hurt all of them at the end. Kubernetes is realy a free, uncontrollable , widely installed (on prem and cloud) infrastructure, that compete directly with the clouds. Think of the iphone app store, without any apps (yet), and not controlled by apple. The reason that companies pays for cloud services (which are 20x the real cost of hardware)…

We use kubernetes on my team, so I'm familiar with the FAQ. ;)

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

#284

Post by kitd »

babarock wrote: post #259
kitd wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't see how Red Hat competes with AWS, Azure, and GCP It doesn't. Their cloud tech, OpenShift, runs on top of the others. Kubernetes can sit on top of that. It makes private clouds portable (kind of).

Slight nitpick. OpenShift, since its latest major version (3?) is Kubernetes. It's mostly a repackaging/distribution of k8s. OpenShift can run on top of AWS/Azure/GCP, but also, most importantly, OpenStack.

I stand corrected, thx.

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

#285

Post by gscott »

roymurdock wrote: post #97

IBM is all in on the multi cloud story since they missed the cloud memo, and RH openshift is their key to allowing customers to lift and shift from AWS to Azure to GCP etc. Plus it's pretty clear they know how to do layoffs and that knowledge may be applied to RH soon to boost profitability.

Anyone with a neck beard better shave it, anyone with grey hairs better get a dye-job, Botox for anyone with wrinkles otherwise IBM will have them out by there ear quick.

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

#286

Post by KUcxrAVrtI »

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #254
bdcravens wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't bode well for Red Hat over the long term.

Unless Red Hat cannibalizes IBM from the inside out, and there's some talk that this is exactly what they want. They may be grooming Red Hat's CEO to replace IBM's CEO.

That would be a pleasant surprise.

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

#287

Post by KUcxrAVrtI »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #257
KUcxrAVrtI wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and at almost $80hr (Texas), he's making better coin than most programmers here. Not sure about all programmers but I'm at $200 and I'm underpaid compared to my coworkers. Big telco.

You're underpaid at $200 an hour?

If I was making what my father was making at my age for doing the same job relative to the size of the economy at the time I should be getting paid 1.125 million.

Yes $200/h is underpaid, it should be what people working at Walmart get paid.

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

#288

Post by bluGill »

stirfrykitty wrote: post #241
bluGill wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FreeBSD is looking closely at systemd. While it is agreed it isn't the right solution to the problem, it is also agreed it solves a problem that init scripts cannot solve. Systemd as is will not (for legal reasons) ever be in freebsd, but don't be surprised if FreeBSD writes their own semi-clone that does most of the same things and implements a good part of the interface. I suspect if debian will drop systemd for th…

I like BSD-style init scripts; they are easy to work with and understand. I dislike this trend that systemd started. Pretty soon, everything will be a binary blob. This is one of the reasons I love OpenBSD--no binary blobs. OpenBSD runs great on most laptops with a few issues, but for the most part, I've had great success. It's very stable, easy to learn and use, and more importantly, secure. I want for nothing using…

There are things to like about init scripts. That is why freeBSD hasn't jumped in and created a systemd like replacement. However systemd as an approach to starting services has some significant advantages and that FreeBSD wants. Smart people are thinking hard about the problem in hopes they can come up with a good compromise.

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

#289

Post by bluGill »

trasz wrote: post #223
bluGill wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the system. For a desktop enviornment you are correct, *bsd is at best an after thought to pretty much all projects. However "serious" server programs tend to get much more testing on BSD. I don't think you will have any issues running a database on BSD, and probably not a web server (though some web frameworks are Linux first so YMMV)

The biggest problem in "FreeBSD desktop" is not the "FreeBSD" part - that works pretty much fine.

I run a FreeBSD desktop. There are enough problems that I wouldn't install that for my family. Too many blank windows and the like (I suspect graphics driver issues but have no idea how to debug further)

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

#290

Post by throw0101a »

babarock wrote: post #209
throw0101a wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you referring to systemd-journal-remote ? * https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-jou... I am referring to something syslog -based: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syslog#Internet_standard_docum... which can be used by other tools to process. Can you point me to documentation on how journald can be configured to send to a remote syslog server?

https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/journald.co... Seriously, it's in the man page.

Seriously, do you understand the word REMOTE?

From the man page:

> Journal events can be transferred to a different logging daemon in two different ways. With the first method, messages are immediately forwarded to a socket (/run/systemd/journal/syslog), where the traditional syslog daemon can read them. This method is controlled by the ForwardToSyslog= option. With a second method, a syslog daemon behaves like a normal journal client, and reads messages from the journal files, similarly to journalctl(1). With this, messages do not have to be read immediately, which allows a logging daemon which is only started late in boot to access all messages since the start of the system. In addition, full structured meta-data is available to it. This method of course is available only if the messages are stored in a journal file at all. So it will not work if Storage=none is set. It should be noted that usually the second method is used by syslog daemons, so the Storage= option, and not the ForwardToSyslog= option, is relevant for them.

That is all about local. Again: I end having to running a syslogd locally so that I can send stuff remtely using an industry standard protocol.

Post reply on HN