> Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
> Oracle.com
Oracle is telling someone to keep it free and open? LOL.
Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
41–50 of 142 posts
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oracle does care about open source, to the extent that they have been the top Linux kernel contributor several times. https://blogs.oracle.com/linux/post/oracle-is-the-1-contribu... Oracle actually does not undercut the least expensive Red Hat support offerings. Oracle Linux support is $499/year for basic, and $1,399/year for premier. Both tiers allow 24x7 access to file service requests (SRs). https://www.oracle.com…
Based on your provided links the apples to apples comparison for RHEL Server Standard Support ($799) would be the Oracle Basic Support ($499) Also, considering that OEL is downstream from RHEL how sustainable do we really think it would be for RHEL to downstream from OEL? How long would OEL invest and maintain in OS components that don’t directly benefit their specific offerings? Is there evidence to suggest there is…
Oracle does maintain Solaris, which would seem to me to entail a much larger support burden than Red Hat's stewardship of their enterprise Linux distribution.
Oracle also ships a few Linux userspace utilities outside of the main yum repos; the btrfs utilities come to mind. There really isn't any obvious btrfs performance need within Oracle or its products, which runs contrary to the spirit of your observations; in fact the Oracle database is explicitly not supported on btrfs.
Note 2290489.1: "Oracle DB has specifically said that they do not support using BTRFS filesystems... BTRFS is optimized for non-database workloads."
I will also somewhat agree with you in circumspection on the quality of Oracle's 24x7 support. I have endured frustrating delays on SRs for various reasons, and have been forced to escalate in the past. I don't know if IBM's $1,299 24x7 support is good, but I can say that Oracle's has been astonishingly bad - be prepared to escalate, which usually moves things along.
I think that, if IBM decided to let go of all of their RHEL developers, Oracle is certainly capable of assuming this burden.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#43This is one of those uncomfortable situations where you find yourself on the same side as the devil.
Worse, I find myself applauding the devil for their championing Open Source ! This is Oracle ! The lawnmower[0]! The company that killed OpenSolaris! What mad world is this!? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=33m
I think like, a big part of this was Solaris has near zero chance of gaining headshare among people who need Unix. Solaris has value for customers with vendor lock in, and its a declining revenue source which can be ridden out for a decade or two, and then discontinued.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#44Yes, Oracle is evil overall, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I'm totally on their side on this issue, just like even though Amazon is evil overall, I'm totally on their side with OpenSearch.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#45[dead]
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#46This is one of those uncomfortable situations where you find yourself on the same side as the devil.
Worse, I find myself applauding the devil for their championing Open Source ! This is Oracle ! The lawnmower[0]! The company that killed OpenSolaris! What mad world is this!? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=33m
Well world is about same as before. But it does remain tricky for people who think there is only one possible behavior for an entity all the time.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was about to say. Never before have I agreeed with Oracle.
Big tech companies have a history of supporting the community where doing so attacks their competitors’ cash cows. There’s also that Oracle linux was formed from RHEL. Maybe let’s not confuse Oracle undermining their competitor’s moat with their genuinely being on the side of the community. It’s been a while, but the necessity of MariaDB and Percona also seem to show that Oracle’s been very much on the other side of…
> Maybe let’s not confuse Oracle undermining their competitor’s moat with their genuinely being on the side of the community.
Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons (Oracle) is better than doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons (IBM).
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worse, I find myself applauding the devil for their championing Open Source ! This is Oracle ! The lawnmower[0]! The company that killed OpenSolaris! What mad world is this!? [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=33m
I think like, a big part of this was Solaris has near zero chance of gaining headshare among people who need Unix. Solaris has value for customers with vendor lock in, and its a declining revenue source which can be ridden out for a decade or two, and then discontinued.
Yeah, probably the consistent way to explain it is that Oracle thought they could get away with it for Solaris but the market of Linux distros is quite healthy and they don't have the power to pull the same thing so they push the other angle instead.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#49Wow, to continue calling Red Hat IBM is a very passive aggressive move that I expect on message boards, not from corporate blogs. Interesting. ;D
Their recent actions definitely feel more like IBM than Red Hat
The moment IBM acquired Red^WBlueHat this was all inevitable, the only question was when.
Re: Keep Linux Open and Free–We Can’t Afford Not To
#50Wow, to continue calling Red Hat IBM is a very passive aggressive move that I expect on message boards, not from corporate blogs. Interesting. ;D
Aren't they just a division inside IBM now?