Re: Current RHEL fragmentation landscape

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On 7/22/23 02:29, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 2023-07-21 00:30, Lee Thomas Stephen wrote:
But for my business, I do not want to pay Red Hat, Zimbra, or Google Workspace.
Why ?
Because the general rule seems to be
Oh! You are an individual, we will offer you affordable/free service
What! You are a business, we will offer you extremely 'unaffordable' service. Because being a 'business' by default means you have a 'lot' of money to waste.

I'm not a Red Hat employee, so I'm not positive how they would respond to that.  But, speaking as a customer who has worked with numerous enterprise support agreements over several decades, I want to suggest that the issue isn't that Red Hat assumes that businesses have a lot of money to spend, it's that they're targeting a set of the market that you might not be in right now.

From my point of view, Red Hat doesn't really sell software. They give away software.  All of their software is available at no charge, typically in an unbranded release.  What Red Hat sells is support.

Does Red Hat give away software anymore?

I don't mean helpdesk style "support-me-when-something-breaks" support.  Support isn't something that exists only during incidents, support is a relationship. It's periodic meetings with your account manager and engineers. It's discussing your roadmap and your pain points regularly, and getting direction from them. It's the opportunity to tell Red Hat what your needs and priorities are, and helping them make decisions about where to allocate their engineers time to address the real needs of their customers. It's setting the direction for the company that builds the system that sits underneath your technical operations. That kind of support is what makes RHEL a valuable offering.

If you don't need the kind of support that comes with enterprise offerings, then by all means, use the Free Software that Red Hat provides to the community.

I am confused.  Last month Red Hat announced that the source code would not be published.

But don't make the mistake of thinking that Red Hat is trying to mlik businesses simply because they're businesses.  Red Hat's offerings are expensive because they're enterprise-focused support plans.

Businesses can purchase in a tax-advantageous manner that you can not as an individual.  Companies do not pay tax on their expenses. That might partially explain the higher rates for commercial products and services.


I am not an expert network manager.  I am a physician that used CentOS 8 on my three practice servers until the big "rug pull." At the time, I had a choice between switching to the Stream or Oracle Linux 8.  I went with Oracle Linux 8 and had no complaints.  Some have suggested that the evil Oracle will execute the same IBM rug pull.  I considered that.  That concern is a non-issue now.

The spirit of GPL was meant to force sharing and prevent the commercialization of the volunteer work of many.  At the time, I was confused about why IBM purchased Red Hat for an astronomical amount.  Well, it is clear now.  As the readers know, there is a significant defect in the GPL: A Comprehensive Analysis of the GPL Issues With the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Business Model <> The terms of the license are enforceable, not the spirit

I think the Rocky Linux workaround will eventually fail.  I expect IBM already has a plan for all contingencies.

There is reason for anger.  Is there a reason for hope?

frank saporito md
CentOS mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]

  Powered by Linux