Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat, IBM Expand Linux Deal
jukal writes "From ZDNet "Red Hat and IBM have expanded a partnership, with Red Hat bringing its top-end version of Linux to all four of IBM's server lines and with IBM's services and software divisions supporting Red Hat's software. "" The NYTimes also has a version of the story, as does the News-Observer.
[...]Lotus e-mail and calendar software works on Advanced Server[...]This is a very good thing!!
I am quite pleased. As more and more open source project become so mature they can be run in a large corporation, the need to run on big iron emerges. This is the kind of deal that will enable Linux to nicely scale further into the corporate everyday life.
Stop the brainwash
Id love to run linux on these IBM Monsters ...
... and now it can run linux! ... perfect!!!
as someone said,I dont trust a computer that I can lift
------- The last Sig. got fired.
bull... Red Hat is NOT the Microsoft of the Linux world, and it is this divisive, self-defeatist attitude that only serves to besmirch all Linux users...
.iso images, or other distributors who don't release source?
Red Hat gives a lot back to the Linux community, bonehead...
why aren't you criticizing SuSE for not distributing free
I guess I could rephrase the question into what's in it for me?
Dear Troll,
I help the community by writing free software. If this issue is important for you, perhaps you could help the community by providing packages in your favorite format? You pay me nothing, so please don't ask for anything in return.
Sincerely,
The Anti-Troll
Why don't these companies ever partner with Debian? As much as people try to deny it, Red Hat is the Microsoft of the Linux world.
I think not
Yeah, right...Somehow, I don't see them running on closed software to begin with, among other "Non-*nix" like proprietary stuff just thought of and trying to be different, when it actually hurts. Basically, an open system based of Unix(Minix) is nothing like MS. I might understand what you're saying, but don't compare the two, it's oranges and apples my friend. :)
(Typing this on Win2K, lol!)
-NS
"Red Hat is the Microsoft of the Linux world..."
Close eyes, hands ovr ears, open mouth, insert splif"
trying to partner with Debian would be like Onanism with both hands tied behind your back - the sound of one hand of Linux clapping in the forest - how could a company *ever* get a consensus on features, updates, etc.?
.iso images, and not just an FTP directory of software packages for a net install)
mind you, this is not a criticism of Debian - it's a feature - thank heavens Debian will be around long after Linux goes mainstream, and other Linux vendors abandon free distros (what most people seem to want are pre-built
I miss Jon Katz, damn it! I never had the patience to read his lengthy drivels of prose, but the resultant comments that invariably ensued gave me hours of entertainment at work (plus he was a welcome target for my own rants).
Slashdot editors, please give us an explanation of what happened to Katz.
Shouldnt we stop it. Just because somebody is successful, we cannot make it M$ of linux world. Ask yourself this
- Does Redhat violate GPL
- Do they refuse to divulge source code
- Do they steal code and then commercialize it?
Agreed RPMS are common but whats wrong. People who want tar gz always get it, its all there. Just because something makes things for lesser mortals easier does not mean that it is EVIL. User freindly does not EQUATE with evil , neither does sucess, the sooner people learn it the betterMy Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
They might not be the fastest, the most secure, , but they have the best chance (to me) of being successful.
Many of the other Linux companies seem like garage-based outfits, and some of them are. Not to leave the little guy out, but personally I think RedHat has the best shot out of any Linux vendor. Besides, it's probably worse to have 5-6 distributions duking it out with each other.
.DEBs lack integrity checks - that means that the contents are not public/private encrypted. .RPMs have this ability. That is a very important ability in an internet setting.
.RPMs have their troubles, too.
That said,
Stop the brainwash
Er, hasn't HP chosen Debian? I can't find any recent links, but I'm pretty sure I heard something about that...
quote from the zdnet article
The multiyear deal, which will be announced on Monday, boosts Red Hat's Advanced Server version, which comes with higher-end features than Red Hat's other versions of Linux. Red Hat, the top seller of the Linux operating system, has already signed deals under which IBM rivals Hewlett-Packard and Dell back Advanced Server.
Those are the 2 longest sentences I've ever seen outside of Slashdot. And I'm not entirely sure the second one makes sense.
Well, considering that I use Redhat Linux almost exclusively, it's not hard to discern what my opinion might be. The reality is, this claim is so far offbase that it's ridiculous. Most of the people making this claim are elitist goons who probably don't use Linux anyway, they just read on some newsgroup that it makes you sound 1337 to bash Redhat and so that's what they do. The only thing that makes Redhat any different from any other distribution is market share. People claiming that Redhat is the Microsoft of the Linux world are arguing against capitalism. These people would bash any company that was successful. Redhat remains open source, and contributes a great deal to open source software and to the community at large. This is VASTLY different from the proprietary software development model employed by Microsoft. I get really sick of elitist Linux users trying to put down everything successful, user-friendly, or even remotely easy to use. It's these people that will prevent Linux from every truly becoming successful on the desktop. Too many people hear these goons claiming how hard Linux is to use, and how you have to be a genius to even install Linux. They do this simply to puff themselves up and try to gain some semblence of self-esteem. Sorry guys, Linux really isn't that hard to install OR use. You don't have to be a hard-core computer geek use Linux for all of your normal computing tasks. This is a figment of your wannabe-1337, s'kiddie imagination.
"Herbivores eat well cause their food never, ever runs."
Ok i'm in a wierd mood today but here's my response...
Blah, Blah Blah, Blah!
Stupid dog! You made me look bad! Oggglabooglagoogla!
From memory I recall HP announced that they would run Debian on their internal network, but offer Red Hat as the linux distro with their server.
I think I'll be buying their Intel servers in place of Compaq in future.
Speak with your wallets, people.
Get your own free personal location tracker
and other Linux vendors abandon free distros
I don't know about you, but I'd glady pay $99 or $199 for a Linux Distro if it were as good as Mac OS X and had a set of programs like the Mac i-programs.
Just because something makes things for lesser mortals easier
Typical Linux elitist arrogance... you just couldn't let it go could you?
Guess what dork. The fact that you know more about Linux than I do (at least you think you do) doesn't make me a "lesser mortal".
And YES.. that IS what you said. But I suspect you will just blow me off by saying some typical arrogant elitist Linux comment like "You just don't get it."
Seems to me I've seen a bunch of articles on companies opting away from MS products. Dell offer Linux, IBM offering Linux, Dell (and other companies?) offering Word Perfect instead of some variation of Office.
In my opinion, this looks like the start of a stance by companies against MS. Time more than ever for ALL Linux distros to be more user friendly. Don't get more wrong, I think Linux is a great thing, but I still use OS X because I get a stable OS, PLUS the ability to futz with *nix.
The Linux "collective" needs to start making Linux less configurable (yes I said LESS) for the average user. The average user just doesn't care about all the configurability of Linux... heck, I'm a slightly above average user and I don't care!!! When the learning curve is less steep for Linux, or when somebody offers a distro (Lycoris?) that has less of a learning curve (a sort of Linux Home edition), then Linux will make some major inroads into the home.
That would be great to see... because everybody should have access to the world of computers and everybody shouldn't have to buy a new one ever 2 years to keep up with the low quality stuff MS puts out.
-AHow can Red-Hat Linux or any open-source operating system become the "Microsoft" of anything? Yes, some things only come in an rpm, but that dosen't force you to use RedHat.
If you are using open source software, you can by definition - get the source. You can even make all the Debian packages you like and provide them to anyone you wish.
If you choose to use software that isn't open-source, it's not RH's problem if rpm the only package it's released in.
At worst, RH is the "AOL" of the Linux World... but that really isn't all that bad.
It has always seemed to me that there is more money to be made in services than RedHat has ever been able to squeeze out of them. Every hardware manufacturer of any significant size derives large percentages of their revenues from their Global Services (enterprise consulting) divisions so why couldn't Redhat manage it? IBM seems to think they can do it bu supporting and integrating the same products redhat was.
Perhaps the key is that the hardware manufacturers are offering the services as a value added feature of their core products. This raises the question, why did VA Systems abandon Linux based PC hardware in favor of becoming a software shop, and at that, not even one that provides Linux software integration consulting? Well, in the case of VA it was probably due to their content holdings, but again, if the combination of hardware sales and software integration services can work for IBM, why wouldn't it work for Redhat or (in the past) VA? It just seems to me that, while having IBM enter what is esentially a reseller agreement, is not the most lucrative means for generating a revenue stream from Redhat's distribution; although it does have vary low overhead, which is parhaps a key for redhat at this point.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Your privacy has been invaded? Would you mind explaining how? Did someone crack your server and put a link to the NYT there? Did they spam you with a link to the NYT? Call you up on the phone while you were having dinner or engaging in some other important activity and tell you about it?
/. and saw the link there?
/.?
/., and they invaded your privacy by putting the link there.
No?
What's You visited
Did someone hold a knife or gun on you and force you to visit
No?
What? You came there of your own free will and saw the link? OK, I think I'm starting to a get a handle on the situtation? You must own
No? You're just a visitor?
Oh.
Pardon me, but I think I'm having a hard time believing your privacy has been invaded.
\
People thing Windows is the computer, they don't realize it is just one way of doing it
Right. Red Hat is so evil. That's why Mandrake can base their whole distribution on it -- i.e., clone the Red Hat distribution and then enhance it for their own purposes.
So who gets to do the same thing with a product from Microsoft?
Guns don't kill people -- people kill people.
But the guns seem to help a bit. (apologies to Eddie Izzard)
People thing Windows is the computer, they don't realize it is just one way of doing it
right..... because "people" aren't as smart as you?
Debian has clearly pointed out that it will start using HURD kernel in the future. That's why! Linux business has no business in Debian business. At least not in the future. If you wanna support Linux, stay away from Debian. Gentoo is the best distro anyway.
"Red Hat is the Microsoft of the Linux world."
Yeah, I can kinda see that. Compared to OpenBSD, Debian, or Gentoo, Red Hat seems bloated, bland, and corporate. When using the newer versions of Red Hat, I don't quite know what's installed on my system and I feel alienated from my computer and from my OS -- which is one reason why I don't like running Windows on my machines. I can't explain it, but Red Hat just isn't fun anymore. Lately, when I screw around with computers, I'd rather screw around with Gentoo or BSD.
But that's where the comparison between Red Hat and Microsoft ends. Sure, Red Hat can act unilaterally and piss lots of people off (GCC 2.96), but they're generally good corporate citizens. They make their ISOs freely available for download, even though they aren't obligated to do so (hell, even OpenBSD refuses to release official ISOs on their FTP site). They don't launch campaigns to embrace-and-extend Debian and Gentoo into existence. They don't charge K-12 schools assloads of money for site licenses and threaten to audit them if they don't pay up.
Red Hat's freely available, easy-to-use software is what enabled me to learn how to program. I'd always been interested in programming, but didn't know where to start and could never afford Windows compilers. Red Hat 5.0 provided an easy-to-use (by 1998 standards!) introduction to UNIX and Perl which ultimately led me to switch my major to CS. I know Debian is freely available, but try doing an FTP install over the phone line. I've since abandoned Red Hat in favor of Gentoo, but it's my experience with Red Hat that gave me the technical proficiency to install and manage Gentoo and, most importantly, to realize that Gentoo suits my needs better than Red Hat in the first place.
As much as I disagree with some of the design decisions that Red Hat has made, I think that their distribution is a fine product. I think RPM can be overkill for the casual user, but if you're an admin for a sizeable institution (I'm not, but I used to work for someone who was), and you've got Linux boxes scattered all over the place, Red Hat's package management is a good way to keep things syncronized. If I ever end up as a sysadmin in a similar situation, I'd very likely deploy Red Hat, just as they did.
Red Hat isn't perfect and it's totally legitimate to blame them when they do something that you think is dumb. But they aren't nearly as bad as Microsoft.
Steve
thats the "News and Observer", the Raleigh, NC newspaper. whose url is "news-observer.com" Its no wonder Red Hat and IBM are collaborating this way, with their home offices "just down 40" from eachother.
Lexmark is a somewhat owned by IBM. I still can't get my printer to go under Gentoo as the only drivers that come for the printer are RPM based binaries (rely on LPD not CUPS). My point is that we don't want a situation where many manufactures claim linux support when they only really provide RPM based distro support- I never knew a tgz and a detailed readme were so hard to organise! Clearly from my interactions with Lexmark they seem to not take RPM based distros very seriously, and, as lexmark has close ties with IBM, could this be a sign of things to come with other hardware manufacturers? Is the CUPS standard really all that hard to keep up with?
SuSE is the current "preferered" distribution for both PPC iSeries & pSeries platforms in addition to the mainframe zSeries. With the imminent release of UnitedLinux at the same kind of cost the SLES version distribution seems to be competing with the consortium.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered.....my life is my own.
from the 'one distribution-to-rule-them-all-and-in-the-darkness- bind-them' dept ?
I remember the days when IBM was the Evil Empire.
Beware suits bearing gifts!
You are obviously part of the grand conspiracy! I know that because you linked to MSN. Die commie!
Even if something "only comes in an RPM" it is easy to change it into a gzipped tarball with alien . RedHat has even been including alien in their distro, even if not part of the default install (does anyone actually not take the time to add a few libraries and utilities to the defaults?).
# Do they refuse to divulge source code well according to the article you can't download (Advanced Server)for free. How can that be, I thought redhat released it's own code as GPL, and used GPL s/f for the rest ?? How how can it be
It's not surprising. the $1 billion spent on Linux last year has been entirely recouped at the beginning of this year. This is a big deal in this economy.
So who gets to do the same thing with a product from Microsoft?
* Scratches head
* Installs Windows 2000
* Installs Mozilla 1.1 and makes it the default browser and e-mail client* Installs Litestep as the shell
* Installs Magellan Explorer(free) or Opus Directory(rather expensive but kicks ass)
* Makes disk image
* Distributes disk image
* Hides in cave for 20 years
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
From the article:
I guess I have to concede that my suggestion is somewhat offtopic, but this is an opportunity to drop a hint for Lotus/IBM to produce a native Linux Smartsuite.
If this is considered too much effort [meaning too expensive] how about at least releasing an opensource filter for
The partnership as announced though is great news, and seems to be going over well and generating a lot of market enthusiasm.
give me a
..Scott McNealy is updating his resume.
I love SUN and Solaris, but this is yet more really bad news for them..
Now if IBM would just port the Notes client (and designer) to Linux - then some big blocks of clients would start thinking Open Office and Linux on the desktop ...
... (odd chrashes, a pain to set up, etc. - not territory for your typical windows user) ...
I know they have a how-to on using Wine to support
the client on Linux, but it just isn't the same
Very good points but I think RPM's are better for the casual user (note I think of casual as inexperienced). RPM's give a person new to linux to set up apps that actually make their computer useable, and makes a transition from windows a little less painless..
Um, no. NY Times doesn't invade anyone's privacy either. They don't force you to use their site (you're perfectly free to not use it, and I am one of those who choose not to), and they do not secretly take information from you. At least one of those conditions must be met for it to be invasion of privacy.
Spyware, for example, is (or at least can be, if the spyware doesn't tell you what it is doing) invasion of privacy. I hope you understand the difference between that and a site that requires registration for access. Somehow, though, I suspect that perhaps you don't.
Your assertion that the parent AC's argument is that one sacrifices privacy is, therefore, completely wrong. The parent stated most clearly that it was an invasion of privacy, but it is nothing of the kind. If you give up information voluntarily, that is a sacrifice of privacy (your words) but it is in no way an invasion of privacy (AC's words).
It's all perfectly clear to me. Maybe it is to you now, too. But who cares? I can't really give the time of day to anyone who has to call me an asshole because he can't beat me in an argument, and doesn't even have the guts to do it out in the open, choosing to hide behind AC instead.
One of the nice things about not living in North America is I don't know what Donald Rumsfeld sounds like. He doens't get much coverage far from home. Apparently, though, he and I must have one thing in common: we're both better at argument than you are (and I don't mean "being argumentative" - you're clearly better at that).
I think I'll be buying their Intel servers in place of Compaq in future.
Do yourself a big favor and DON'T. I've run a Compaq Proliant shop for more than half a decade. The last time we purchased some new servers we decided to give IBM a try and not only did they fail to ship the stuff on time like they promised, they screwed up the order and sent us the wrong stuff. It's now been 6 months and we still haven't gotten all what we ordered (it's now obsolete and off the market, yet they won't give us the next version of the hardware and we've already paid for it) and the machines run poorly (slow and sometimes unreliable) on top of that. The Proliants kick their buts quite badly.
Now IBM *does* make a wonderful RS6000 series RISC processor unix (AIX) machine. Those are bulletproof. I have 5 of those, but will never again buy a PC server from them. In my opinion, they should give me another RS6000 to make up for the horribly bad experience we went thru buying three of their piece-of-crap PC servers.
...not just "News-Observer"
You may, however, feel free to call it the "News & Fishwrap"
>Yeah, I can kinda see that. Compared to OpenBSD, Debian, or Gentoo, /var/log/rpmpkgs. It's updated every day.
>Red Hat seems bloated, bland, and corporate. When using the newer
>versions of Red Hat, I don't quite know what's installed on my system
>
Try looking at
field. SuSE is really strong in europe and will continue to be dominant. But in the US its anybodys game.
You sure showed me. I bet people all around the world are talking about how you put me in my place. I better give up now, I could sure never win any argument with you. I'm so scared.
I fail to understand how IBM continually can just think about penguins and get such great press. Especially when Dell has already certified all of their appropriate hardware on RH Advanced Server.
"I think RPM's are better for the casual user (note I think of casual as inexperienced)."
./configure, make, make install. But for the inexperienced user (who doesn't care much about flexibility), RPM and Red Carpet can be just want they need.
I suppose that the word casual does imply a lack of experience. By casual use, I meant that you use Linux on your computer, but you don't want to fool with it too much. For the experienced user who uses his computer casually, RPM can be overkill. Instead of searching rpmfind.net for the correct RPMs, you could just download the tarball from SourceForge and just
Steve
This is a job for the distros. Lindows is having some success by bundling Wine and giving you a windows look & feel. RedHat is moving more towards an "official RedHat default desktop", while preserving your choice, if you want to do the expert installation.
Debian, Gentoo, and the other "hard-core" distros, I imagine, will never do this, because that's not the what their users want.
This is an excellent illustration of how you make money off free software. You put in the effort of selecting a single CD player, a single web browser, a single email client and so on, lay it down on the users hard disk with a minimum of flashy install screens. Then people buy it more than they buy those other distros that didn't want to make a decision.
--
E_NOSIG
Using anything but Red Hat will become harder and harder, and when the Boss says "Install Redhat or IBM won't give us support" you will do it or train your "do you want fries with that?". Just because the source might be free (mostly) doesn't mean there is a free spirit going on (or ease of use for that matter. I can recognise the reason why GNU came to be).
Why just today I looked at drivers for one of HPs RAID cards. Whoppie, they had drivers for Red Hat 7.1. Thank you very much...
There need to be a standard so that anyone can make a distribution that is supported, or Red Hat will 0wn Linux soon enough.
Some might consider this a blow against United Linux, but I don't think so. I read last month that IBM and most of the other big guys are supporting United Linux because they don't want to have to support 5 or 6 distributions, but they also don't want to have Red Hat completely dominate the market. They think having two competing distributions for the corporate area is just about right, so they are going to hellp United Linux along and make sure it gets some business.
Allright, so this music is protected from copyright violation by glue. Does this mean that solvents are now illegal? Start stockpiling acetone now.
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
One thing that I noticed hadn't been discussed is security. If you go to http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories and look at each distro you will notice that by far Redhat has had the largest number of advisories. I haven't done any research to see if the distro's that go to companies like IBM and Dell for servers are more secure, but I would certainly hope so. Redhat, although not quite as bad as Microsoft, seems to have advisories ALL the time, as apposed to Slackware or freeBSD, which can go for months at a time without a single advisory. IMHO, I would never run a Redhat server because the chance of it being compromised is a lot greater.
i do like where you're going with this, but for my $.02 worth:
windows/internet explorer 5.5 is actually OK. note, i did not say good, nor did i mean it, but it is SO integrated into the windows OS that it actually IS the fastest browser for Win2k...
of course, NT/2K is the ONLY windows OS in my book, since all the others are either cartoons or just glorified DOS
mechanicos ergo cogito
5.5 is ok. 6 works out fine for me too. However, I still consider Mozilla to be superior, due to having an e-mail client that isn't the prime target of every half-crazed virus writer on the planet, an irc client I can sneakily use at work :P and the glory of tabs.....not to mention the possibility to disallow Javascript to open up new Windows...
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
fucking christ, why is it so hard for people to understand what the GPL means
it does not mean that all of your software licensed under the GPL must be given away.
it only means that if you have a product that is GPLed, then you must offer the source code at no additional cost.
read it again: it does not mean that you offer your product for free. it means you must offer the source code at no additional cost.
if you buy advanced server, you can get the code for free. you can't download SuSE images last time i checked. why isn't suse the redmond of the linux world?