4 ms·
Well, it's the classic "We don't need support until we need support" perspective from the CFO or CIO or whomever that's looking to cut costs. I've had clients w
by AdmiralAsshat 4y ago
Well, it's the classic "We don't need support until we need support" perspective from the CFO or CIO or whomever that's looking to cut costs. I've had clients who always had some excuse for why their mission-critical production box still couldn't justify the cost of a proper RHEL license ("No! If build my PROD box on RHEL, then my DR box will have to be RHEL, and my Test box will have to be RHEL! So you see it's really three licenses I'd have to buy!") and always insisted on CentOS. But despite needing everything to work correctly 100% of the time and mandating several levels of redundancy, they were curiously okay with being up the creek if they ran into an OS problem. Go figure.
FWIW, clients I dealt with were universally thrilled with RedHat support, the ones who had it. I had one tell me over the phone once, "Oh yeah! Red Hat is amazing! If an issue gets assigned to an engineer, it will be resolved by that same engineer. Unlike you guys."
- freedomben 4y agoabsolutely, I saw that quite a bit as well. I was really glad to see Red Hat change their policy so that non-prod machines are free now. That makes it a lot more affordable for people doing CI/CD with staging and dev environments. The old model disincentivized good practices.