4 ms·

People keep saying this all over these threads, and I can't grasp why. The difference is that a free RHEL without support doesn't exist, while CentOS does. Yo

People keep saying this all over these threads, and I can't grasp why. The difference is that a free RHEL without support doesn't exist, while CentOS does. You can get RHEL for free through various developer focused programs, but that is most certainly not the same as having an unencumbered ISO available for unlimited downloads with no EULA or sign-in requirement.

CoolGuySteve 6y ago
I'm saying either it will exist and come from Red Hat or somebody else will make it. It's inevitable. But economically speaking, it's cheaper for Red Hat to not pointlessly rebrand their own product. CentOS as a Red Hat-owned brand is stupid.
- UMetaGOMS 6y ago
  There is no evidence that RHEL will be releasing a free version to replace CentOS, and the fact that others will take over a replacement OS development is already known. My comment was focused on the confusion/exasperation at why people keep implying this is no problem, because we can just use RHEL for free, as that is not true.
GordonS 6y ago
I think you're missing the point. Nobody would argue that CentOS doesn't make sense - the argument is that it doesn't make sense if RHEL owns it, as there is a clear conflict of interest.
- UMetaGOMS 6y ago
  I think you might be replying to the wrong comment, as this doesn't really relate to my point at all. I don't disagree with the sentiment that RHEL also controlling the free alternative doesn't make sense. I do disagree with repeated assertions that people can just use RHEL for free - for the most part, they can't.
- Arnt 6y ago
  I assumed that RH hired those people because CentOS might be a threat if owned by someone else, whereas if RH owned it, CentOS would be a moat. Ie. CentOS takes those users who won't pay, RH takes those who will, RH controls both and there's no niche for anyone else. Evidently I was wrong.
  - smarx007 6y ago
    I think that was supposed to be the case but then things like https://www.cloudlinux.com/extended-lifecycle https://www.cloudlinux.com/extended-lifecycle must have upset someone at RH. Support past EOL has been traditionally a high-margin activity for vendors. And it must be so if https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432183

CoolGuySteve 6y ago

I'm saying either it will exist and come from Red Hat or somebody else will make it. It's inevitable. But economically speaking, it's cheaper for Red Hat to not pointlessly rebrand their own product. CentOS as a Red Hat-owned brand is stupid.

UMetaGOMS 6y ago
There is no evidence that RHEL will be releasing a free version to replace CentOS, and the fact that others will take over a replacement OS development is already known. My comment was focused on the confusion/exasperation at why people keep implying this is no problem, because we can just use RHEL for free, as that is not true.

GordonS 6y ago

I think you're missing the point. Nobody would argue that CentOS doesn't make sense - the argument is that it doesn't make sense if RHEL owns it, as there is a clear conflict of interest.

UMetaGOMS 6y ago
I think you might be replying to the wrong comment, as this doesn't really relate to my point at all. I don't disagree with the sentiment that RHEL also controlling the free alternative doesn't make sense. I do disagree with repeated assertions that people can just use RHEL for free - for the most part, they can't.
Arnt 6y ago
I assumed that RH hired those people because CentOS might be a threat if owned by someone else, whereas if RH owned it, CentOS would be a moat. Ie. CentOS takes those users who won't pay, RH takes those who will, RH controls both and there's no niche for anyone else. Evidently I was wrong.
- smarx007 6y ago
  I think that was supposed to be the case but then things like https://www.cloudlinux.com/extended-lifecycle https://www.cloudlinux.com/extended-lifecycle must have upset someone at RH. Support past EOL has been traditionally a high-margin activity for vendors. And it must be so if https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432183