5 ms·
Just because the architecture is free doesn't mean IBM won't make a shitload of money from the future of this processor. There are a lot of other ways than lice
by narnianal 7y ago
Just because the architecture is free doesn't mean IBM won't make a shitload of money from the future of this processor. There are a lot of other ways than licensing. RHEL is free since forever and still it's the biggest income source for Red Hat afaik.
- justinjlynn 7y agoUm, yes, that's basically what I said, or rather, what I meant to say - if it wasn't clear.
- scandox 7y agoIt was clear
- solarkraft 7y agoJust longer
- throwaway8941 7y agoRHEL is free? I am missing something? I believe it's free only for developers and for development purposes. Even the desktop "self-supported" version was something like $90 last time I checked. CentOS/Scientific Linux is not RHEL.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- jdright 7y agoFree as in Open Source.
- bjornjaja 7y agoFree as in Freedom to download CentOS
- CrLf 7y agoHowever, it's important to note that although the sources for RHEL packages are available as open-source, that still doesn't make CentOS an exact replica of RHEL, and therefore doesn't make RHEL itself "free". RHEL 8 was released almost 4 months ago and there's no CentOS 8 yet. Mainly because taking the "free" RHEL sources and rebuild them isn't a simple case of removing logos and other "non-free" material. The build process itself (the sequence in which packages must be built so that all of them build successfully and with equivalent functionality to RHEL) is a major piece of what makes RHEL, RHEL, and that isn't free (or even publicly available).
- narnianal 7y agono really free as in free beer
- narnianal 7y agoThe subscription is not free of charge, the software is free of charge. If you buy a subscription and don't extend it or copy my filesystem you can use it without problems. You just won't receive official updates or official support.