3 ms·
Why are people assuming this is in any way IBM's doing? I know it's easy to say "IBM bad" but everything that has been said so far indicates this was a joint de
by m4r71n 6y ago
Why are people assuming this is in any way IBM's doing? I know it's easy to say "IBM bad" but everything that has been said so far indicates this was a joint decision between Red Hat engineering and the CentOS project board members.
The cognitive dissonance in assuming every acquisition of a smaller company by a bigger one immediately results in the collapse of said small company is unreal.
- luma 6y agoIt's not small versus big, Red Hat was a $34B acquisition. It's big and bigger. People are pointing at IBM because this is 100% the predictable consequence of a company like IBM purchasing an open source software organization. Open source isn't in their business model, so of course this was going to happen.
- ghaff 6y ago>Open source isn't in their business model There's a very good possibility that Linux wouldn't have had the impact that it has had absent IBM's investments in the early 2000s. It's not an "open source company" but it has significant investments in open source.
- luma 6y agoIBM of 2020 isn't the IBM of 2000. I'll look at their actions, not their words.
- raesene9 6y agoWhilst I'm not sure that there is strong evidence for this being related to the IBM acquisition, the idea of "blue wash" where acquired products have their licensing changed to fit in with IBM's way of doing things is so common that there's even an IBM web page about it https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/what-blue-wash https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/what-blue-wash. To quote that page "Once customers upgrade to IBM?s product it is often too late to negotiate and avoid hefty licensing charges associated with changed licensing metrics? "