Microsoft and Red Hat partner • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#161

Post by orionblastar » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 12:12 AM UTC

joepie91_ wrote: post #128

thebouv wrote: post #8

I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. Who's the main target for Azure? Enterprise companies who trust Microsoft implicitly. When an exec comes to the head of IT and says "we need to be on the cloud! I read about it!", Azure eases the transition by being able to go to vendor you've already bee…

> Microsoft's new direction under their new CEO is one surprise after another. I don't know about that, it all seems fairly logical. Don't forget that Microsoft is primarily a "business business" rather than a software business (ie. optimizing for business longevity above all else). Microsoft appears to have practically perfected the game of "maintaining vendor lock-in in an otherwise open ecosystem". That game requi…

The open sourcing of the Dotnet CLR and compilers is done for more than just competing with other open source languages, didn't Microsoft offer to buy out Unity which was based on Mono and other things?

Microsoft open sources their languages and then buys out the company that does the best job in making it crossplatform with as many platforms as possible.

What Microsoft can't do they usually buy out a company that can do what they can't. Getting Visual Studio for other platforms is near impossible for them, so they open source the CLR and compilers and see who can do a better job at porting them to other platforms.

Microsoft makes a lot of money selling Workstation and Server version of Windows to businesses as well as Visual Studio licenses and BackOffice (SQL Server, Exchange Server, ISA Server, Sharepoint, etc) for Windows Servers to make custom apps on. Not to mention Office licenses and other software for businesses.

New CEO got Microsoft into the Cloud and Cloud services, so it only makes sense to make a deal with Red Hat for an Azure Server deal to sell to more businesses that want a GNU/Linux solution with paid support.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#162

Post by scott_karana » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 12:37 AM UTC

TallGuyShort wrote: post #151

scott_karana wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon Linux is not based on Ubuntu. (And I edited my comment since the wording was unclear... sorry if that caused confusion)

I think they mean Ubuntu was the default before Amazon Linux was even a thing. As I recall, that's correct, but I don't know where to find a citation on that. Amazon Linux only rolled out to production in 11/2011, so less than half of EC2's life: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Machine_Image#Amazon_Li... . It's

Ah, you might be right. I can't find anything in a quick search of archive.org and old press releases, except that Canonical did offer an official Ubuntu AMI pretty far back in the day. Still can't find out what the default EC2 linux was based off though.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#163

Post by endlessvoid94 » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 1:41 AM UTC

thebouv wrote: post #8

I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. Who's the main target for Azure? Enterprise companies who trust Microsoft implicitly. When an exec comes to the head of IT and says "we need to be on the cloud! I read about it!", Azure eases the transition by being able to go to vendor you've already bee…

> I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft.

That's the point of a partnership.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#164

Post by erostrate » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 1:44 AM UTC

"Linux is a cancer" Microsoft's CEO, 2001 (Steve Ballmer)

Source: http://slashdot.org/story/01/06/01/1658258/ballmer-calls-lin...

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#165

Post by DigitalSea » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 2:19 AM UTC

Here is a headline I never thought I would ever see. I guess from a business perspective this makes a tonne of sense. Red Hat is a massive player in the Linux market.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#166

Post by bobbles » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 2:33 AM UTC

joepie91_ wrote: post #128

thebouv wrote: post #8

I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. Who's the main target for Azure? Enterprise companies who trust Microsoft implicitly. When an exec comes to the head of IT and says "we need to be on the cloud! I read about it!", Azure eases the transition by being able to go to vendor you've already bee…

> Microsoft's new direction under their new CEO is one surprise after another. I don't know about that, it all seems fairly logical. Don't forget that Microsoft is primarily a "business business" rather than a software business (ie. optimizing for business longevity above all else). Microsoft appears to have practically perfected the game of "maintaining vendor lock-in in an otherwise open ecosystem". That game requi…

> I don't know about that, it all seems fairly logical.

For people dealing with Microsoft for many years... this is the surprising part.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#167

Post by netheril96 » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 2:41 AM UTC

adrianlmm wrote: post #153

jenscow wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your personal views are just that, personal As is yours, so why bicker? C#/.NET is also my favourite, but it's not the be-all and end-all of web development. It might be the best for all of your projects, but not for everyone else. It has it's flaws, like everything else, and I'm happy for you that you haven't used it (or anything else) for long enough to discover them.

Anyone is free to use the tool/framework of their preference, but not to make ignorant statements about other frameworks w/o even knowing them.

The points you are refuting are all subjective evaluations, not objective facts. If he were wrong on objective facts, then it would be reasonable, albeit impolite, to call him ignorant. But he isn't.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#168

Post by thebouv » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 3:22 AM UTC

endlessvoid94 wrote: post #163

thebouv wrote: post #8

I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. Who's the main target for Azure? Enterprise companies who trust Microsoft implicitly. When an exec comes to the head of IT and says "we need to be on the cloud! I read about it!", Azure eases the transition by being able to go to vendor you've already bee…

> I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. That's the point of a partnership.

Almost like it was planned.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#169

Post by thebouv » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 3:24 AM UTC

samstave wrote: post #157

thebouv wrote: post #8

I'm not fooling myself into seeing this as anything but a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" setup. RedHat is getting a ton out of this, and so is Microsoft. Who's the main target for Azure? Enterprise companies who trust Microsoft implicitly. When an exec comes to the head of IT and says "we need to be on the cloud! I read about it!", Azure eases the transition by being able to go to vendor you've already bee…

> RHEL is the de facto standard for that level of infrastructure due to the support you can get versus any of the distributions that are equally as good, but minus the support contracts. This was the biz model for LinuxCare.... but they failed.

Yet it seems to be working well for RedHat.

Re: Microsoft and Red Hat partner

#170

Post by avar » Thu, Nov 05, 2015, 2:44 PM UTC

CaptSpify wrote: post #119

avar wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be the benefit of slowing the release process of RHEL on AWS by pruning it down to the bare essentials? Is redundant stuff like WiFi-drivers & firmware really taking that much space that it matters?

maybe, maybe not. What that tells me though, is that they didn't sit down and say: "Here's how we optimize this to work for the cloud". I can't say other distro's do either, but it seems like something they should do

I don't think they should. This way lies madness. You want e.g. the kernel & packages to be pruned down to only have the things needed for each cloud host?

That means that for N cloud hosts Red Hat would have to potentially build N different patches for any update or security fix.

Now you can't certify software to run on "RHEL 7" anymore, it has to be "RHEL 7, assuming it has XYZ, which some cloud hosts don't".

It can be done, but it's a huge hassle, it's much easier to just ship the same distro to everyone. Space is cheap.