3 ms·
Eh, it's good. IBM didn't want to continue supporting community things and so here we are, the RedHat business model was a bit tricky and increasingly so becau
by colechristensen 3y ago
Eh, it's good. IBM didn't want to continue supporting community things and so here we are, the RedHat business model was a bit tricky and increasingly so because of cloud computing.
The great value of RedHat was supported software. You could buy one of those $10,000 per seat software packages for some engineering discipline that was guaranteed to work by RedHat and the vendor and if it wasn't they were quite motivated and helpful in fixing your problem quickly.
RedHat also was trusted to monitor and fix security problems quickly, and was in the privileged position of getting notifications about them before they were public so they could be fixed.
The question is how do you get people to fund these two things?
- eraser215 3y agoIt's been made abundantly clear by many people in many places that this isn't an IBM thing.
- colechristensen 3y agoIt is not clear what you mean.
- CaliforniaKarl 3y agoLinks pls?
- geerlingguy 3y agoThere have been numerous employees, former employees, and even VP level folks who have said this direction comes from Red Hat, and not IBM. I'm inclined to believe them, with the caveat that this reality may not have come to be had IBM never bought Red Hat. That still doesn't imply IBM forced the change. It's public record that Paul Cormier has considered the way CentOS worked a problem for years... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ITRol3YAV-E&t=360s https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ITRol3YAV-E&t=360s