IBM looking to acquire RedHat
-
@travisdh1 said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@travisdh1 said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Just saw this myself. What in the world? Somehow I don't see IBM as the type of company to embrace open source.
Seriously? They have been the number one open source supporter for decades. They are the ultimate open source company overall (obviously their bread and butter is hardware, which isn't sourced at all.) Red Hat has a more pure open source stance, but in dollar value, no one compares to IBM in open source whatsoever. From an open source perspective, it is an absolutely perfect marriage. IBM is the top funder of Linux, the top promoter of open source, and Red Hat is the top maker of it.
Shows you how much I actually know about the IBM of today.
My wife, who most of you know is in IT, immediately said "IBM and innovation? What?"
That's pretty much how people feel.
-
Regarding Support, I can attest to the chnage if support, they purchase Merge and their PACS system and that changed support dramatically and not in a good way.
-
@dbeato said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Regarding Support, I can attest to the chnage if support, they purchase Merge and their PACS system and that changed support dramatically and not in a good way.
Yes, I love IBM as a company, but I never consider their products because of their support problems.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@dbeato said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Regarding Support, I can attest to the chnage if support, they purchase Merge and their PACS system and that changed support dramatically and not in a good way.
Yes, I love IBM as a company, but I never consider their products because of their support problems.
Is it likely that Red Hat support will turn bad because IBM buys it? Or will that operate as-is and continue how it's been?
-
@Obsolesce said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@dbeato said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Regarding Support, I can attest to the chnage if support, they purchase Merge and their PACS system and that changed support dramatically and not in a good way.
Yes, I love IBM as a company, but I never consider their products because of their support problems.
Is it likely that Red Hat support will turn bad because IBM buys it? Or will that operate as-is and continue how it's been?
I'd say 50/50 that it could go either way. Honestly, because of integrity problems I've had with Red Hat in the past, the quality of their support was lost to me because I could not trust them being allowed in the door. So IBM buying them makes me feel comfortable that IBM will deal with ethics issues. Which is more important than support.
-
Who could potentially be more effected, if any, by this Fedora and/or CentOS?
-
@black3dynamite said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Who could potentially be more effected, if any, by this Fedora and/or CentOS?
I don't think either.
-
@Obsolesce said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@black3dynamite said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Who could potentially be more effected, if any, by this Fedora and/or CentOS?
I don't think either.
I agree, I doubt either will be affected.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@travisdh1 said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@travisdh1 said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Just saw this myself. What in the world? Somehow I don't see IBM as the type of company to embrace open source.
Seriously? They have been the number one open source supporter for decades. They are the ultimate open source company overall (obviously their bread and butter is hardware, which isn't sourced at all.) Red Hat has a more pure open source stance, but in dollar value, no one compares to IBM in open source whatsoever. From an open source perspective, it is an absolutely perfect marriage. IBM is the top funder of Linux, the top promoter of open source, and Red Hat is the top maker of it.
Shows you how much I actually know about the IBM of today.
My wife, who most of you know is in IT, immediately said "IBM and innovation? What?"
That's pretty much how people feel.
This was my first reaction.
The open source, thing was never my concern. I knew that IBM had done a lot with that.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
I would like to see @dyasny's feelings on this for sure.
We'll have to wait and see. Frankly, I don't believe IBM will allow the almost-startup-ish way things are done at RHT - dynamic, creative and open to continue. On the other hand - their track record isn't as horrid as Oracle's, so...
Still, I think I jumped ship right on time
-
@dyasny said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
I would like to see @dyasny's feelings on this for sure.
We'll have to wait and see. Frankly, I don't believe IBM will allow the almost-startup-ish way things are done at RHT - dynamic, creative and open to continue. On the other hand - their track record isn't as horrid as Oracle's, so...
Still, I think I jumped ship right on time
IBM's biggest challenge is cruft and an inability to dance. They want to do good things, but so moment inertia.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
IBM's biggest challenge is cruft and an inability to dance. They want to do good things, but so moment inertia.
My point exactly - they are much more rigid and there will be a huge culture clash on the inside. People will leave in droves, so you better watch for them starting new companies, and invest in the next OSS giant. Also, a lot of the open projects that haven't been making them too much money might get hurt.
-
Someone I was talking to said:
"Interesting hot take; how long until Microsoft buys Canonical and Ubuntu becomes Microsoft Linux for Servers and Workstations. If that's the war IBM is starting, it's almost a certainty at some point."
-
@stacksofplates Canonical isn't a player in the cloud space. Sure they have some products but their market share is puny.
-
@dyasny said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@stacksofplates Canonical isn't a player in the cloud space. Sure they have some products but their market share is puny.
I thought that they were the top player in the cloud space and RH was in second.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
I thought that they were the top player in the cloud space and RH was in second.
Not even close afaik, the only deals they can get are in companies that have diehard ubuntu fanboys running the show.
-
@dyasny said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
I thought that they were the top player in the cloud space and RH was in second.
Not even close afaik, the only deals they can get are in companies that have diehard ubuntu fanboys running the show.
Old, but last that I knew...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/ubuntu-linux-continues-to-rule-the-cloud/
-
@dyasny said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
@stacksofplates Canonical isn't a player in the cloud space. Sure they have some products but their market share is puny.
I don't think he was specifically mentioning cloud. Just that MS would use this opportunity to purchase them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in IBM looking to acquire RedHat:
Old, but last that I knew...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/ubuntu-linux-continues-to-rule-the-cloud/
I meant as a platform to build clouds, not as an ephemeral instance. Those aren't bringing any money in to Canonical, no matter how many of them get deployed here and there.
If you look at actual clouds built on Linux, (and really, there aren't many that are not, out there), Ubnutu is definitely very far from being the platform of choice. If you subtract the actually supported and paid for machines in that pool... well, you know what the answer will be
-
https://www.similartech.com/compare/red-hat-vs-ubuntu
It's web, not cloud, but web is a leading workload for cloud.
