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

Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

linux.oracle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 221 posts

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#181

Post by notatoad »

wdaher wrote: post #73
vtanase wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the exact same feeling that I'm getting from this announcement. To me this just feels like a publicity stunt, where Oracle is aiming to get a slice of the CentOS/RHEL market with very little investment. As far as I'm concerned this isn't even a valid attempt on their behalf to earn the trust of the Open Source Community. Taking something that already works and touting your own horn about how you can provide f…

I was trying to go for a "for linux nerds, by linux nerds" vibe, so I'm amused that your complaint is "This doesn't sound corporate enough". At the end of the day, my view here is that Oracle has actually produced something useful, but lots of people are blind to it, in no small part because of what ultimately boils down to zealotry (which doesn't seem like an awesome reason to me). Hence the point of trying to get t…

You did a good job of the "for linux nerds, by linux nerds" thing. However, when you work for Oracle writing as a linux nerd just comes off as insincere. Your employer is actively working to hurt the linux community, and your continued employment implies your consent of their actions. Your target market needs to be other evil companies that don't care what Oracle does in the courtroom, not linux nerds. "Our product is good" is not a sales pitch that matters right now, because we don't care about your product. It may technologically be the best product for my use case, but that is irrelevant if i don't trust the company behind it. You can call it zealotry if you want, i call it trust and pragmatism. I'm not going to build a business on top of a product that might be used next week as a tool to sue me or my friends. This was the only deciding factor when I chose Postgres over MySqL earlier this year for my company.

If you want to market to linux nerds, you need to change the perception of the company, because that's what matters most right now. Stop being evil, and then we'll give your products a chance.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#182

Post by rys »

wdaher wrote: post #93
SwellJoe wrote: post #26

I'm pleased to see that evil deeds have consequences, though I'd like to see Oracle suffer a little (OK, a lot) more before getting over the hump. People don't use Oracle Linux because the Open Source community doesn't trust Oracle (and they shouldn't; that mistrust has been well-earned over a couple of decades). There's a lot of reasons not to use Oracle Linux, most of them non-technical. Oracle is simply not an eth…

By the way, Scientific Linux isn't perfect when it comes to these delays either. I wanted to make a similar graph plotting SL, but laziness prevailed. (I crawled the RHEL, CentOS, and OL mailman archives to get the data, but SL uses listserv.) It's just one data point, but: Red Hat released RHEL 5.6 on January 13, 2011, but Scientific Linux didn't release SL 5.6 until June 21, 2011 [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives…

The SL Wikipedia entry shows you the historical delays:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Linux

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#183

Post by SwellJoe »

grogs wrote: post #147
SwellJoe wrote: post #26

I'm pleased to see that evil deeds have consequences, though I'd like to see Oracle suffer a little (OK, a lot) more before getting over the hump. People don't use Oracle Linux because the Open Source community doesn't trust Oracle (and they shouldn't; that mistrust has been well-earned over a couple of decades). There's a lot of reasons not to use Oracle Linux, most of them non-technical. Oracle is simply not an eth…

Yeah, Oracle's brand/goodwill is completely dead if we're talking about consumers. However, does this effect business decisions at all? Any paid thing is aimed at businesses, and the business doesn't care about open source/ethics issues in the same way.

Which business doesn't care? My business does. I know a lot of other businesses that do. It's time to alter the idea that corporations should be free from ethical concerns. Any Open Source supporter working within a company should be helping that company make ethical decisions about software. I'm not suggesting "never buy commercial software" here, I'm just saying that discouraging dealings with demonstrably unethical companies like Oracle is worth doing and it makes business sense.

That's the thing that always kills me about the mindset that ethics don't matter, when you're talking about business decisions. Why would you believe that a company that has repeatedly screwed customers and competitors won't screw you when there's even modest economic benefit to doing so? History indicates you will be screwed, at some point, by Oracle, if you rely upon them. And, by supporting them, you're supporting the ongoing damage they do to our community and the tech industry in general. That's lose-lose.

So, doing the right thing has a pretty good business case.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#184

Post by rytis »

wdaher wrote: post #129
Spearchucker wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Useful it may be, but after more than 10 years of having to work with Oracle products and consultants, the first thing that jumped at me was ...doesn't Oracle Linux cost money? A: Oracle Linux support costs money That "support" word, right there, is the thing that makes me stay as far from Oracle as I can. It's like "Dude, here's the software. Have it, it's cheap/free." When things go wrong you get stung for exorbita…

I'm totally with you on fear of lockin, but for what it's worth, this particular case is basically the opposite of lock-in. You can, at any time, switch away to CentOS, Scientific Linux, or Red Hat (if you're willing to write the check) and not have to totally reinvent your stack from scratch, since they're all binary-compatible.

I can only see centos2ol.sh on that page. Was looking really hard, but failed to notice ol2centos.sh anywhere...

Oh, I need to write my own? Or will Oracle help me? For free?

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#185

Post by hluska »

I don't know what to say....

On one hand, good for Oracle, this actually sounds like a good initiative. On the other hand, Oracle consistently gives us reasons to distrust them. Consequently, while I think this is a good effort, I certainly wouldn't install it. In fact, I somewhat suspect that I'd find a way to make A/UX work before I install Oracle Linux.....

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#186

Post by taligent »

bcantrill wrote: post #141
wdaher wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Disclaimer: I had a hand in a lot of this) That's not quite the intent. Look, here's the deal: I know we all like to think that corporations are evil and the presence of corporate interests actually messes stuff up. But this really is one case where you want the oomph of bilion-dollar company making sure that you get your security updates in time. No one else is providing that. Oracle happens to be doing so, and we'…

Anyone decrying Oracle as "evil" is falling into a trap that I have warned about[1]: they are making the mistake of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison -- they are infusing Oracle with humanity that it does not in fact have. Oracle is, as another commenter put it, a corporate sociopath. The inability to empathize is fine for a monopolist (and indeed, it's a terrific asset -- and after five months of working there, I con…

What has Oracle done to Java ?

As a developer they've done nothing but deliver very welcome new features to the platform and add stability that Sun could never bring.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#187

Post by SwellJoe »

gaius wrote: post #154
skorgu wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, with all due respect we're not blind to it. I'm sure Oracle Linux is a fine piece of software, I bet it's just as good as RHEL and I'll even spot you that your support team is equally good as Red Hat's. We do not have technical objections to the work you've done. We simply don't trust your employer to behave with anything even approaching good faith in any interaction. What happened to Solaris alone is a huge w…

What has happened to Solaris?

Oracle.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#188

Post by taligent »

jasonlingx wrote: post #15

What's their track record with Java, MySQL etc?

Fantastic from the Java side.

They have made a number of very useful improvements to the JVM e.g. addition of JRockit, new parallel GC etc at no cost. It is annoying that they don't offer a repo to allow for easy updates but there are scripts to help.

And they just seem eager to push the platform forward with a confidence that was lacking from Sun.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#189

Post by taligent »

russell wrote: post #111
bdunbar wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Oracle actually is evil. Evil is stomping a kitten to death. Evil is the gulag, the concentration camp, the cultural revolution. Oracle is just a business.

Businesses can be evil. Crushing your competition via patents is evil. Damaging others way out of proportion to your own gain is evil. Buying elections with a flood of money is evil. The Libor scandal is evil because it screwed millions of contracts. Stomping a kitten is pretty tame by comparison.

You're completely warped view on life warrants serious psychiatric help.

And surprised that you think defending patents is evil because almost every major IT company right now is doing that.

Re: Oracle launches "a better alternative to CentOS"

#190

Post by taligent »

moe wrote: post #153
wdaher wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm totally with you on fear of lockin, but for what it's worth, this particular case is basically the opposite of lock-in. You can, at any time, switch away to CentOS, Scientific Linux, or Red Hat (if you're willing to write the check) and not have to totally reinvent your stack from scratch, since they're all binary-compatible.

Then why mess with Oracle to begin with? There are so many mature linux distros to choose from and plenty have trustworthy, battle-tested, commercial support-options if that's what you need. I can't come up with a plausible reason why anyone would even consider Oracle.

Because if it is more secure and offers more functionality than CentOS then why wouldn't I consider it ?
Post reply on HN