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.
You have to be kidding me. I mean, FP on a critical topic like this. Someone has to beat me to it.
You know you love me, give it up!
The CSLib menace strikes again
[...]Lotus e-mail and calendar software works on Advanced Server[...]This is a very good thing!!
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. If I see another god damn piece of software only distributed as an RPM I'm going to puke. If you're going to do that at LEAST distribute a tarball or a Debian package as well for those of us who choose NOT to sell our souls to big business yet still like to run packaged software once in awhile.
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
then why don't you buy the stock and shut your fucking mouth, if RH takes over M$ then all the better, we will all have access to the code still and linux will remain free from other venues even if it doesn't in theirs.. 3 cheers for RH the M$ USURPER!@#!?!
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.
I guess I could rephrase the question into what's in it for me?
You know what, a lot of us don't have (and don't want to have) our privacy invaded just to read rehashed news stories from elsewhere. Please stop giving nytimes.com free(?) advertising.
So RedHat has reinvented the Open Source Business Plan : :
:
:-)
instead of
1) recompile
2) sell CDs
3) support
4) profit (?)
they
1) recompile
2) let ibm install it on their own servers
3) do not support
4) let ibm profit (?)
RedHat rewlz... in their own universe
Smile, don't click...
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
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.
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
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."
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
Werd tell them how it is brother netphilter. It has been far too long that these ignant niggaz been keepin us down. Like moses said to apollo, "let a phoenix rise out of this mofo". Redhat is that shit! So tap your 40 and take one last swig to your dead homies (slack/deb/mandrake) because redhat is the bomb!(!
Dont dis a nig cuz hes in a 3 peice suit trying to make something for himself. Shit, at least hes got a job, mofo and not hanging out watchin mad tv like your punk lazy ass.
Big ups to my redhat nigs()@#*#(*#
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.
-AIt 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
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.
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!
# 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.
Did somebody put a gun to your head and make you misread the parent comment?
No? You're just a self-righteous asshole?
Does somebody take all their rhetorical cues from Donald Rumsfeld?
If by rhetorical cues, you mean asking stupid rhetorical questions that totally evade the issue, yes.
So allow me to clarify for you. Parent AC's argument is that one sacrifices privacy in order to read the nytimes.com. That's pretty god-damned incontravertable. Many slashdotters complain about it. So why do slashdot editors persist in linking to nytimes stories, even when they appear to be rehashing wire stories??? The parent suggests there is financial arrangement. Nothing else seems to makes sense. Is that clear to you now?
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
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"
'I feel alienated from my computer' waaaaaawaaaa
field. SuSE is really strong in europe and will continue to be dominant. But in the US its anybodys game.
this may be slightly OT, but I want to buy a laptop, and the IBM Thinkpad is near the top of the list, but I won't buy it if I have to pay for WinXP. The laptop will run Linux only.
When will IBM offer a 'naked' laptop, or just one with Red Hat preinstalled? (I'll throw Slack on it once I get it) Nice that they're offering this on servers, but what about laps and workstations to the 'general public'?
P
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.
It's true.
You can't download a support contract for free.
Dickhead.
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.
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?