Live data from Hacker News

The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

opencoreventures.com

151–160 of 222 posts

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#151
post #82

I quite disagree with two ideas in this article: 1. For me until proven otherwise, RedHat have an OpenCore model, the CentOS shift is too recent to be meaningful. My company literally panicked about their CentOS servers because they didn't want a rolling distro and so decided to switch to something else free for low risk VM (worse I'm afraid) and pay RHEL support for critical applications. 2.There are a shitload of s…

[deleted]

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#152
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why they created OpenShift which is arguably worth more than RHEL.

Eh, OpenShift is too opinionated to be valuable for the companies that can afford it, and way too expensive for those that might benefit from it vs a cloud based PaaS. OpenShift's biggest problem has always been that it continues to diverge just enough from vanilla k8s to require "OpenShift specific" shit for everything. I don't see OpenShift getting the same COTS lift as RHEL, so in my mind it's still going to be a…

This isn’t true at all, openshift is a conformant distro of k8s. You are not required to use any OpenShift specific shit, but what it adds is very nice.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#153
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That very brief segment of the article pretty much collapsed a decade of time into two sentences, but yes it appears to be denoting the transition from CentOS [Linux] to CentOS Stream.

Right, but I assume the first sentence refers to CentOS and the second sentence of "sunsetting" referring to the end of CentOS and the start of CentOS Stream. After all, CentOS became a part of Red Hat back in 2014 and stopped in 2021. In other words, how was downstream CentOS considered a beta or "a preview of what was coming down the pipe"?

They're probably referring to CentOS Stream being upstream of RHEL.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#154
post #89

(Note: I work for Red Hat) I'm constantly amazed that people still don't understand why Red Hat makes money, and this article won't enlighten you as it doesn't understand it as well as being full of other incidental mistakes (like their description of CentOS is way off the mark). Red Hat takes Linux and certifies it against all kinds of government, safety, privacy etc standardards, such as PCI and FIPS and numerous l…

Next level of the game is to invent the certifications in collaboration with regulators and then sell software that is certified.

That's what M$ does with Azure, is it not?

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#155
post #131
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because compliance is mostly about documentation. glorified checklists. but checklists work (you might have heard about surgeons leaving medical tools in patients, and checklists eliminating this problem, seemingly the dumbest simplest technology, yet it's very powerful compared to the default of nothing) of course the quality of answers matter, but that's on the environment (auditors, regulators, industry best pract…

>but checklists work (you might have heard about surgeons leaving medical tools in patients, and checklists eliminating this problem, seemingly the dumbest simplest technology, yet it's very powerful compared to the default of nothing) These glorified checklists also backfire all the time. With the surgeon it's indeed simple. With software what I see is that certification and process often lessens quality. Why you as…

> Why you ask? Well if you need certification, changes become expensive.

Thank god it does, so that you cant just yolo it and “move fast and break things” with mission critical infrastructure.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have work that 1) you enjoy, 2) is well paid and 3) is legal. Pick two.

Tell me more about this well paying and enjoyable work please.

Short version: You’re high off your own stash.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#157
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi - I work at Red Hat for the last eight years, long before IBM had anything to do with us, and I cannot stress enough how much IBM is *nowhere* to be seen in not just our day to day engineering jobs, but pretty much not even periodically. I know nobody at IBM, I have no email addresses of anyone at IBM, nothing we get in our inbox (and we get a lot) ever has anything to do with "IBM" in it, I have no links or acces…

> as far as Podman it's all I use for all of my server environments and I like it a lot better than Docker. It's simpler without all the weird "Dockerish" things getting in the way. Not having a monolithic server hang the whole machine due to a misbehaving container is well worth it. Podman-compose was feature-lacking and beta even when podman already had its 3rd major release, while the communitcation was that "Podm…

"docker-compose" is one of those "weird, dockerish things" to me. I use ansible to organize rollouts.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#158
post #73
post #36

I was at Red Hat very early on. Red Hat has been remarkably consistent throughout its journey once it graduated from selling boxes of software at book stores (which was a necessary step). Red Hat only astook venture money once it was ready to go public and never before. The philosophy of Red Hat was to "make the pie bigger" and still largely is, therefore it supports open source first before anything else. This works…

one detail > Red Hat created an industry and all of the successful enterprise Linux distros have followed its model to some extent or another (Canonical, SUSE, etc) IBM created that industry, by lifting Linux into their supported platforms portfolio. and the first Enterprise Linux ever was suse linux enterprise for s/390, followed by x86 releases at about the time RH released their first RHEL.

They deserve credit but while IBM did spend lots of money on Linux around 2000, and that helped legitimize Linux. I feel that RH has always been the leader in this industry, and RH Linux was well entrenched in the enterprise long before IBMs big push. So IBM helped but they did not create it, in my view.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#159
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi - I work at Red Hat for the last eight years, long before IBM had anything to do with us, and I cannot stress enough how much IBM is *nowhere* to be seen in not just our day to day engineering jobs, but pretty much not even periodically. I know nobody at IBM, I have no email addresses of anyone at IBM, nothing we get in our inbox (and we get a lot) ever has anything to do with "IBM" in it, I have no links or acces…

Well, there's two very different views of reality.. And one of them appears to be from a very unhappy customer. Is it possible that different IBM Depts - or IBM regions, are selling Redhat Software/Support without much actual involvement of the Redhat business? Like the might have done in their traditional reseller/consulting/support role? TBH I actually think it's likely - sales and account execs can probably just t…

Red Hat getting access to IBMs vast customer base was why the merger was good for us and to the degree that pays my salary, that's great.

Re: The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat

#160
post #89

(Note: I work for Red Hat) I'm constantly amazed that people still don't understand why Red Hat makes money, and this article won't enlighten you as it doesn't understand it as well as being full of other incidental mistakes (like their description of CentOS is way off the mark). Red Hat takes Linux and certifies it against all kinds of government, safety, privacy etc standardards, such as PCI and FIPS and numerous l…

We use https://cloud.google.com/container-optimized-os/docs for our kubernetes nodes on GCP, as I'm sure most companies that use GKE do.

Your comment made me want to say "but COS is certified too!" however now I'm unsure - a quick Google certainly doesn't bring anything up. Why have Google not done this, is the demand not there? Or have they and they just don't document it prominently?

(Note we don't have any PCI requirements as we offload those to the likes of stripe etc)

Post reply on HN