131–140 of 179 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any reselling a rebuilt RHEL?
Oracle have a sales pitch - I've been on the end of Oracle's - that is "we'll sell it for less, we don't care, name a price we just want to hurt Red Hat." OEL is just rebuilt RHEL.
I am SUSE-curious after all the drama and lost trust with RedHat and IBM but any partnership with Oracle makes me uncomfortable.
why not donating a certain amount of money to some distros instead? there's an expected level of entitlement when it money's involved.
As openSUSE user, the only answers that I care from SUSE are: - Are you going to kill Leap and Tumbleweed? - Are you going to handle the "community" as you do with the openSUSE community?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the differentiator from the Fedora/Centos/RHEL line?
Probably YAST¹ and the Open Build Service². I think the latter is especially great. There's a public instance of it hosted by openSUSE³, and you can use it to build packages for almost any distro and get a feel for it. -- 1: https://yast.opensuse.org/documentation 2: https://openbuildservice.org/ 3: https://build.opensuse.org/
This is United Linux 21 years later. But this time, instead of building a distribution to compete with Red Hat, it's based on Red Hat (in practice, it is Red Hat). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Linux > "No subscriptions. No passwords. No barriers. Freeloaders welcome." I'm sure they're trying to be cheeky. But it also comes off as confirming Red Hat's position. OpenELA isn't about community, it's about having…
Simply put, I'm not using anything with 0racle's name on it. Free software from 0racle? There are gonna be strings attached... to lawyers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...because Oracle themselves had bought BEA Systems, owner of Weblogic. JBoss was a competitor to Weblogic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEA_Systems
Your timeline is wrong. JBoss was acquired by Red Hat in 2006, then Oracle Linux was announced a few months later also in 2006, then Oracle bought BEA Systems in 2007. Oracle and Red Hat both entered the bidding for JBoss and Red Hat ended up winning. Larry Ellison took this very poorly.
Why would anyone use a server OS that's a fork of another server OS, provided by a group of 3rd-parties with their own competing enterprise distros? I'm sure there's a reason for it with all the discussions, but if I want to use CentOS, why wouldn't I just use CentOS Stream that RH is providing? If I want RHEL, I'll go get RHEL that afaik is also free. If I want to see the future of RHEL, there's Fedora Server. And i…
Because soon that will be the fork everybody will target,and the de facto standard. RHEL could have survived for a while in hostile mode if everybody was complacent (maybe making the entire thing profitable). But this is exactly people not being complacent. Anyway, you can bet there will be infighting once this is established. But well, the power that free software grants for people to misbehave is very limited.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're enterprise with more than 16 machines, you can and should probably be paying for RHEL. What I'm not understanding is why people need to use RHEL and would resort to free random forks of it, instead of just using CentOS Stream or Fedora that are basically the same thing, actually from RH, and 100% free. RHEL is not that special.
> can and should probably be paying for RHEL. I'm on the fence about that. I wish people were more willing to financially support open-source development, but I've worked with dozens of customers using RHEL over the last 10 years and never seen a single one of them open a support request - on that basis I can see why people feel that the price is too high. When the options are "get gouged" or "be labelled a freeloade…
In other words you pay for not having to open support requests.