17 ms·
I clicked through to this thread because I want to know more about this. I'm a user (of both RHEL and Fedora, although I use RHEL via the free developer licens
by veidr 4y ago
I clicked through to this thread because I want to know more about this.
I'm a user (of both RHEL and Fedora, although I use RHEL via the free developer license so I am not actually a customer).
I used to be a Sun user in the same way, but when Oracle bought Sun it was really, really obvious that using Sun's stuff was something we should immediately prepare to stop doing.
It's a little less obvious with IBM buying Red Hat, though -- especially to a random user like me.
For one, IBM isn't nestled between Halliburton, Enron, and Juul on the despicability spectrum.
For two, it looks a lot like Apple buying NeXT, at least from the outside. As in old company with a lot of not-looking-so-hot-anymore tech buys the younger upstart with better tech, and the better tech seems to win.
So what, specifically, is IBM doing that is so bad? E.g. firing the team responsible for developing X, and just milking the dead husk for short-term enterprise deals, or... ??
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- op00to 4y ago> what, specifically, is IBM doing that is so bad This is just the customer facing stuff. The internal politics are more painful. - Got rid of RHV, gave customers no realistic migration path - Moved an entire BU of employees from Red Hat to IBM with no choice except to GTFO if you didn't wanna become an IBM employee (storage BU) - Each area of the business is under increased oversight due to IBM beancounters thinking they know better - IBM interference in product development (IBM has a deal, so they want feature X, even though bugfix Y and Z are more important) At first it was all "yeah, you red hatters are gonna save IBM", but Red Hat is at the point where OpenShift is being milked by IBM 100%.
- Spivak 4y agoYeah it was genuinely really sad that the deal couldn’t have been “here have OpenShift for a mountain of cash, leave us alone.”