Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SUSE to go private

suse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 245 posts

Re: SUSE to go private

#231

Post by ssnistfajen »

viddi wrote: post #136
COGlory wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open Build System and OpenQA, for automated building and testing of packages. This is what gets updates to their rolling release Tumbleweed faster than Arch, but with no instability ever. I can't emphasize enough how rock solid Tumbleweed is. OBS also doubles as their own AUR equivalent - you can make your own repo and do your own builds and install from the command line, or browse and install what other people have…

I have been using Tumbleweed for a few years now, but while it seems like a stable rolling release distribution, I am not quite sure about the "rolling release" part. Each month, a new snapshot comes out, which upgrades every single package you have installed, regardless of whether there were actual upstream updates. With a full Texlive installation and just a few more suites this amount to roughly 10,000 packages an…

>So yes, it is stable, but it comes at a price.

That's called a trade-off, a very fundamental concept in pretty much everything in life.

And no, snapshots don't come out every month. They come out ~5 times every week. The most number of packages I've had to update was maybe around ~3500 and that's after 6 month of not upgrading my system.

I agree for "true" rolling distro enthusiasts, Arch is still the top choice, but Tumbleweed is great for those seeking to use a rolling distro without sinking too much time into configuration.

Re: SUSE to go private

#232

Post by ssnistfajen »

deaddodo wrote: post #143
profwalkstr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Dell went downhill after the acquisition, their hardware quality is junk all across their line: servers, workstations, laptops, monitors, etc. Every device from them that I had my hands on recently have, at best, terrible build quality, and at worst, multiple failures. And their support is a bad joke.

That's the complete opposite of my experience. I bought an XPS 15 (it supported Linux well) and broke the screen (my own fault) about 8mos into owning it. Spoke to support and they sent a technician over two days later. They replaced the screen, tested it and were on there way 40mins later, all for free.

I've had to replace the BIOS twice in the 3 years I've owned my Dell XPS 15 (2018 model). Both cases were spontaneous failures that completely disrupted my workloads and customer support told me it's something that "just happens". Service technicians came quickly but I'd rather not need them to come in the first place.

First year warranty is usually included in the product, so of course the replacement was free. I'd suggest renewing the warranties until EoL of your laptop as these service trips will likely become a bi-annual fixture.

Re: SUSE to go private

#233

Post by [deleted] »

slater wrote: post #228
hliyan wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been hearing a lot about private equity lately (particularly from folks who used to pursue VC money in the past). Can you expand a bit on the negatives of PE?

Not op, but as i understand it: they swoop in, load up the company with debt, fire lots of people, then go "oh, fiddlesticks.. whelp, what can ya do??" and throw up their hands as the company inevitably crumbles. Citation: Read up on how Toys'R'Us was put through that wringer. Edit: actually, here's a good write-up: "Less attention was paid to the albatross that Bain, KKR, and Vornado had placed around the company’s…

[deleted]

Re: SUSE to go private

#234

Post by brightlancer »

slater wrote: post #228
hliyan wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been hearing a lot about private equity lately (particularly from folks who used to pursue VC money in the past). Can you expand a bit on the negatives of PE?

Not op, but as i understand it: they swoop in, load up the company with debt, fire lots of people, then go "oh, fiddlesticks.. whelp, what can ya do??" and throw up their hands as the company inevitably crumbles. Citation: Read up on how Toys'R'Us was put through that wringer. Edit: actually, here's a good write-up: "Less attention was paid to the albatross that Bain, KKR, and Vornado had placed around the company’s…

That article discusses PE rebuilding Dollar General successfully. A lot of it depends in what condition the companies are in when they get bought. It isn't all corporate raiders.

My recollection of Toys 'R' Us was actually that the owners deliberately tanked it. They may have originally wanted to save the company, but they spent years deliberately buying and selling pieces so that Toys 'R' Us would hold all the debt while the profitable pieces went elsewhere. That wasn't an accident.

"Private equity can stack the deck in other ways, too. Firms can direct businesses they own to buy other companies and then act as broker on the deals, reaping transaction fees. After its buyout, Toys “R” Us acquired a number of companies, including FAO Schwarz, eToys.com, and assets from KB Toys (itself a failed reclamation project of Bain’s). Consolidating brick-and-mortar and online toy businesses may have been a good-faith strategy. What’s certain is that the deals helped generate $128 million in transaction fees for the owners."

What the article misses is that FAO and KB were sold off before the bankruptcy, with Toys R Us keeping all the bad parts, specifically their debt.

Re: SUSE to go private

#235

Post by lysium »

finnjohnsen2 wrote: post #213

Is SUSE relevant? Maybe I live under a rock, but I don't hear anyone talking about using it for anything anymore. Feels like 10+ years since it went off radar

I had the same thought, then I read the comments to be shown the wiser, eg. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37169896

Re: SUSE to go private

#236

Post by mcpackieh »

wheelerof4te wrote: post #204
mcpackieh wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Private companies funded by public funds is my jam. So, most of the tech megacorps in the US I think you're getting a bit confused by the terms public and private. Most US tech megacorps are public companies e.g. publicly traded private enterprises. They're public companies because they're traded on the stock market, not because they receive "public funds" aka funding from the government; that's not what a company…

"You should probably pump the brakes on adopting any sort of ideology before you get a firm grasp on basic terminology." Oh, I know basic terminology. Faschism - when big private enterptise is in service to the government and having lucrative, beneficial and unfair deals with the government or it's agencies. Most of big tech and MIC companies in the USA have beneficiary status (multi-billion deals, tax-exemption, etc…

> Faschism [...] Nazies

Strange spellings, is your spellcheck off? If your intention was to communicate your familiarity with these terms, you're failing badly.

And no, US tech companies getting paid for fulfilling lucrative contracts for the government is not what fascism is, even if there is corrupt dealing. Corruption and fascism are not interchangeable concepts. And to reiterate the point, a company being publicly traded does not mean they are receiving public funds.

And FYI, SUSE is not even an American company so your rants are completely irrelevant anyway. They have little if any connection to the US MIC.

Re: SUSE to go private

#237

Post by zeruch »

qwytw wrote: post #209
zeruch wrote: post #49

Private Equity needs to be regulated into oblivion.

So companies shouldn't be allowed to own shares of other companies?

No, but they shouldn't be allowed to not act as fiduciaries, and do what they do now, which is to load debt, do bolloxed sell-lease contracts, and basically take money from all sides, and screw everyone else into a pulp.

It's a garbage model out of a Dicken's novel and is a huge reason why a groundswell of anti-capitalistic sentiment keeps growing. It's a case study in "worst practices" of venality.

Re: SUSE to go private

#238

Post by t0mas88 »

username332211 wrote: post #37

Suse IPOd in 2021 at 30€/share. Now they are buying it back at 16. I think we should thank everyone who bought shares at the IPO for their charitable contribution to open source software.

Charitable contribution to EQT and other shareholders. I don't think the company saw much of that money.

Re: SUSE to go private

#239

Post by deaddodo »

ssnistfajen wrote: post #232
deaddodo wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the complete opposite of my experience. I bought an XPS 15 (it supported Linux well) and broke the screen (my own fault) about 8mos into owning it. Spoke to support and they sent a technician over two days later. They replaced the screen, tested it and were on there way 40mins later, all for free.

I've had to replace the BIOS twice in the 3 years I've owned my Dell XPS 15 (2018 model). Both cases were spontaneous failures that completely disrupted my workloads and customer support told me it's something that "just happens". Service technicians came quickly but I'd rather not need them to come in the first place. First year warranty is usually included in the product, so of course the replacement was free. I'd…

> First year warranty is usually included in the product

Warranties don't usually cover damage on the part of the user/negligence.

> I'd suggest renewing the warranties until EoL of your laptop as these service trips will likely become a bi-annual fixture.

I've had it for about 2.5 years and haven't had any other issues (beyond Dell's idiotic choice to only support Modern Standby S-states).

Re: SUSE to go private

#240

Post by qwytw »

zeruch wrote: post #237
qwytw wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So companies shouldn't be allowed to own shares of other companies?

No, but they shouldn't be allowed to not act as fiduciaries, and do what they do now, which is to load debt, do bolloxed sell-lease contracts, and basically take money from all sides, and screw everyone else into a pulp. It's a garbage model out of a Dicken's novel and is a huge reason why a groundswell of anti-capitalistic sentiment keeps growing. It's a case study in "worst practices" of venality.

> which is to load debt ... and screw everyone else into a pulp

Individuals are just as capable of doing this, just look at Twitter and there are plenty of adequately run companies owned by PE. We just don't pay attention to them.

But yeah somehow severely limiting debt funded acquisitions (when the debt is offloaded to the company which is being acquired) would probably be a very good idea.

Post reply on HN