2 ms·
Also a totally wrong "hot take". This decision was made by Red Hat alone.
by rwmj 3y ago
Also a totally wrong "hot take". This decision was made by Red Hat alone.
- doctor_eval 3y agoSure, but the perception exists - whether you like it or not.
- rwmj 3y agoPeople have wrong ideas about all sorts of things, that doesn't mean we need to perpetuate them.
- pjmlp 3y agoJust like people feel entitled to use for free, stuff that only exists because, Facebook, Google, Apple, Oracle, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, ARM, Intel, AMD, NVidia,.... put engineering time to make it happen in some form or function. Then they come to online forums, 70's style, showing the finger to the man, while taking the fruits of that work. Yes, they don't do it out of interest for the community, rather as a path to shepherd devs into their ecosystems. Yet, angry forks of their products usually die a slow death, as bills have to be paid and doing long nights isn't for everyone. Because like it or not, many FOSS products only exist thanks to big corps money. Even GNU/Linux itself, only really took off, as big corps decided it was a cheaper way to develop UNIX like OSes, than their own, and not tainted by BSD lawsuit.
- AshamedCaptain 3y agoSo what? I have been through some big company mergers -- the absorbed (or should I say assimilated) company managers would immediately start enforcing the larger company's stereotype policies, out of self-censorship... because they guessed, often correctly, that the writing was on the wall. E.g. managers would start firing to make their units appear to be more profitable, or remove work-from-home policies, etc. way before the merger was completed, in an effort to avoid being the first units to get the axe by the new parent.
- dsr_ 3y agoIf IBM tells Red Hat to do something, Red Hat will do it. If IBM tells Red Hat to not do something, Red Hat will not. That's the difference between being enslaved and being an independent entity.