101–110 of 142 posts
Hmmm, well yes, there's https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-isos.html
But no one here on HN in my memory has mentioned trying to run it on, say, a personal desktop. What's the reality of this?
Ahh, right. Keeping things open source only counts when someone else is doing all the heavy lifting for you.
Oracle owns some great tech, they have always had great engineers. Oracle has ALWAYS leveraged their technology to prop up their protection racket. I'm constantly astonished they haven't violated RICO enough to free that Hawaiian island Uncle Larry bought, even considering their In-Q-Tel roots.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And to be fair, Oracle has been a remarkably good steward of Java. It's truly amazing how fast and far Java has come since the Java 7 and Java 8 days. It's been on a rocket sled of development, while still being shockingly well behaved for earlier code. If there's any critique, it's "too fast". But that's nonsense, since the LTS work helps maintain stability. And it's pretty wide open. They keep some things close to…
> Oracle has been a remarkably good steward of Java Well, other than ramming through modules and the --add-opens fiasco from Java 9.
Yeah this is just opportunistic PR. Oracle cares less about Open Source than even the most brain dead Red Hatter. As with all things Oracle, they are taking the angle that potentially creates a revenue opportunity for themselves. This is fine. I get it but doing it under the guise of higher open source ideals is comically transparent. Their OEL market share mostly consists of them targeting specific Red Hat accounts…
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…
Anybody who watched what Oracle did to OpenSolaris after the Sun acquisition who does this might as well start planning for their alternate product launch right now because they're gonna need it when Oracle changes direction.
Yeah this is just opportunistic PR. Oracle cares less about Open Source than even the most brain dead Red Hatter. As with all things Oracle, they are taking the angle that potentially creates a revenue opportunity for themselves. This is fine. I get it but doing it under the guise of higher open source ideals is comically transparent. Their OEL market share mostly consists of them targeting specific Red Hat accounts…
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…
Back when I worked for Huawei, we regularly figured in the list of top contributors to the Linux kernel each cycle. I never got the impression that Huawei cares about open source. It was just a pragmatic, disinterested business decision.
Also, you shouldn't anthropomorphize Oracle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 fa…
Solaris was effectively killed off in 2017 when Oracle laid off most people working on it. And Open Solaris is dead too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't think that awaits Solaris. The Rdb database for OpenVMS is still getting updates, and a new port to the VMS-x86 release that has recently emerged. https://www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb.htm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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).