Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

Post by p1necone » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:12 AM UTC

em500 wrote: post #326

CoconutPilot wrote: post #296

Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed. I think Rocky Linux needs to put out a plan how they will make themselves financially viable as we've had 3 high profile RHEL respins go down in the last 10 years. CentOS failed twice, it ran out of money in 2014 and was rescued back then by Redhat sponsership. Again in 2020. Another widely used RHEL respin was Scientific Linux which mothballed when RHEL 7 was releas…

Maybe it's a bit too obvious to spell it out, but 1. Red Hat Inc. does not want people to build and/or distribute gratis RHEL8 or clones. It would be trivial to just put the actual RHEL8 iso as an unsupported download on their ftp/www server and sell the support separately, like Oracle or Canonical do. Instead, they kept this ridiculous make work project called CentOS around, that involved non-trivial manual labor me…

Post by ralph84 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:17 AM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #260

teknopaul wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBM. Rocky will not be be IBM.

The most frustrating thing about this is that Redhat was making a profit before IBM bought them. They had existed for 20 some years on a business model that business people didn’t understand, and they were able to do that because they understood what open source would become and how they could play a role in that. One of the things that YC is always talking about is that founders looking for ideas should look to iden…

Post by 14u2c » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:23 AM UTC

geerlingguy wrote: post #377

wfuser wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the name and the logo is good. Don't listen to the people who just keep talking and not helping! Agreed. It's funny that people here are complaining "Rocky Linux" isn't a professional name and they won't be able to convince corporates clients to use it. Yet, there exists a billion dollar revenue company named "Red Hat" which clearly is a "professional" name.

Same here. Things that come to mind: Rocky, the champion boxer who can "go the distance" and never gives up... the Rocky Mountains, which are, well, rocky and strong... Rocky Road ice cream, which tastes good. A zillion times better than trying to explain what a "Suse", an "Ubuntu", or a "Manjaro" is, and that's before talking about the various types of hat-based distros.

Post by cpncrunch » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

reader_mode wrote: post #329

cpncrunch wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Ubuntu has a decent business plan, charging people $225/yr to extend support from 5 to 10 years. I would happily pay that in order to avoid having to migrate as often. CentOS just gave everything away for free and then is wondering why they're not making any money.

Paid CentOS support is called RHEL - the whole point of CentOS is repackage GPL RHEL stuff without the licensing fee. The only way I see this being viable is them getting bankrolled by a huge cloud provider - but cloud providers already decided that having their own distros was a better option.

Post by hda2 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:39 AM UTC

asddubs wrote: post #375

znpy wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in GIMP's defense, GIMP stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program, whereas names as Red Hat, Ubuntu and many others are not acronyms

to be fair to red hat and ubuntu, those names don't have multiple inappropriate meanings