Slashdot Mirror


IBM To Buy Red Hat, the Top Linux Distributor, For $34 Billion (bloomberg.com)

International Business Machines (IBM) is acquiring software maker Red Hat in a deal valued at $34 billion, the companies said Sunday. From a report: The purchase, announced on Sunday afternoon, is the latest competitive step among large business software companies to gain an edge in the fast-growing market for Internet-style cloud computing. In June, Microsoft acquired GitHub, a major code-sharing platform for software developers, for $7.5 billion. IBM said its acquisition of Red Hat was a move to open up software development on computer clouds, in which software developers write applications that run on remote data centers. From a press release: This acquisition brings together the best-in-class hybrid cloud providers and will enable companies to securely move all business applications to the cloud. Companies today are already using multiple clouds. However, research shows that 80 percent of business workloads have yet to move to the cloud, held back by the proprietary nature of today's cloud market. This prevents portability of data and applications across multiple clouds, data security in a multi-cloud environment and consistent cloud management.

IBM and Red Hat will be strongly positioned to address this issue and accelerate hybrid multi-cloud adoption. Together, they will help clients create cloud-native business applications faster, drive greater portability and security of data and applications across multiple public and private clouds, all with consistent cloud management. In doing so, they will draw on their shared leadership in key technologies, such as Linux, containers, Kubernetes, multi-cloud management, and cloud management and automation. IBM's and Red Hat's partnership has spanned 20 years, with IBM serving as an early supporter of Linux, collaborating with Red Hat to help develop and grow enterprise-grade Linux and more recently to bring enterprise Kubernetes and hybrid cloud solutions to customers. These innovations have become core technologies within IBM's $19 billion hybrid cloud business. Between them, IBM and Red Hat have contributed more to the open source community than any other organization.

46 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. Damn. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm going to have to switch to Ubuntu.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Damn. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm going to have to switch to Ubuntu.

      Why? Is there some specific IBM behavior you object to? If so, please explain it here.

      If it’s just a dislike of corporate involvement with Linux... Red Hat was the wrong distro for you in the first place.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re: Damn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IBM license fees are predatory. Plus they require you to install agents on your servers for the sole purpose of calculating use and licenses. IBM exploits workers by offshoring and are slow to fix bugs and critical CVEs (WAS and DB2 especially)

    3. Re:Damn. by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IBM buys a company, fires all the transferred employees and hopes they can keep selling their acquired software without further development. If they were serious, they'd have improved their own Linux contribution efforts. But they literally think they can somehow keep selling software without anyone with knowledge of the software, or for transferring skills to their own employees. They literally have no interest in actual software development. It's all about sales targets.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    4. Re:Damn. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If so, please explain it here.

      IBM Rational DOORS: Starting at $5,460.00 USD
      IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation: Starting at $164.00 USD per user per month

      And that's pricing I can find. I don't even want to know what we're paying for IBM ClearCase.

      IBM buys companies (Like Rational) and milks by exorbitant fees. They're only slightly 'better' than Oracle.

      I expect anyone that doesn't have an IBM RedHat Certification(tm) won't have the 'full warranty'. Here let us direct you to one of our training centers.

    5. Re: Damn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      IBM license fees are predatory.

      I don't know about that, none of the open source IBM software I use has any license fees, predatory or otherwise. Some are GPL but I don't count that as predatory.

      Dragon is a pretty nice OpenStack backup system I've been using in house for some time now.
      Got it off github too

      LLVM in the kernel is pretty amazing stuff for managing LVM, RAID, and other similar systems.
      Far more stable than ZFS has ever managed to reach.

      I've even played with their Watson speech-to-text stuff, which is a service offering not a software download, and even that is free as in doesn't cost money if you aren't going to be sending them a massive number of API requests every minute.

      Plus they require you to install agents on your servers for the sole purpose of calculating use and licenses.

      Simply not true, I've never had to do this. The closest "evil software" I've ever had to install to run some IBM software is Java, and that's Oracles fault not IBMs.

      IBM exploits workers by offshoring and are slow to fix bugs and critical CVEs (WAS and DB2 especially)

      So does RedHat, and many companies for that matter. If you are against off shoring, then nothing at all has changed here.

      I can't comment on "WAS" or DB2 bugs, never used them. But I guess sure, RedHat fixes CVEs damn fast and is a high bar to stand up to.

    6. Re: Damn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Debian is not a public company. They are a community of developers, authors, artists, etc. There are not an entity in the business sense to be acquired. Debian will be one of the last distros left that is not commercialized. Slackware is another. Perhaps Arch and Gentoo.

      I've been giving thought to switching over to OpenBSD and NetBSD for my personal needs, as Linux is really balkanized these days. systemd and the new CoC are really icing on the cake for my decision.

    7. Re:Damn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      My advice to Red Hat engineers is to get out now. I was an engineer at a company that was acquired by IBM. I was fairly senior so I stayed on and ended up retiring from the IBM, even though I hated my last few years working there. I worked for several companies during my career, from startups to fortune 100 companies. IBM was the worst place I worked by far. Consider every bad thing you've ever heard about IBM. I've heard those things too, and the reality was much worse.

      IBM hasn't improved their Linux contribution efforts because it wouldn't know how. It's not for lack of talented engineers. The management culture is simply pathological. No dissent is allowed. Everyone lives in fear of a low stack ranking and getting laid off. In the end it doesn't matter anyway. Eventually the product you work on that they originally purchased becomes unprofitable and they lay you off anyway. They've long forgotten how to develop software on their own. Don't believe me? Try to think of an IBM branded software product that they built from the ground up in the last 25 years that has significant market share. Development managers chase one development fad after another hoping to find the silver bullet that will allow them to continue the relentless cost cutting regime made necessary in order to make up revenue that has been falling consistently for over a decade now.

      As far as I could tell, IBM is good at two things:
      1. Financial manipulation to disguise there shrinking revenue
      2. Buying software companies and mining them for value

      Yes, there are still some brilliant people that work there. But IBM is just not good at turning ideas into revenue producing products. They are nearly always unsuccessful when they try and then the go out and buy a company the succeeded in bring to market the kind of product that they tried and failed to build themselves.

      They used to be good at customer support, but that is mainly lip service now. Just before I left the company I was tapped to deliver a presentation at a customer seminar. The audience did not care much about my presentation. The only thing they wanted to talk about was how much they had invested millions in re-engineering their business to use our software and now IBM appeared to be wavering in their long term commitment to supporting the product. It was all very embarrassing because I knew what they didn't, that the amount of development and support resources currently allocated to the product line were a small fraction of what they once were. After having worked there I don't know why anyone would ever want to buy a license for any of their products.

  2. A Cloudy argument. by Ostracus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IBM said its acquisition of Red Hat was a move to open up software development on computer clouds, in which software developers write applications that run on remote data centers.

    It's all open source. What's stopping them from developing to the Cloud, NOW?

    --
    Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
    1. Re:A Cloudy argument. by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you are saying that IBM has been asleep at the wheel for the last 8 years. Buying Red Hat won't save them, IBM is IBM's enemy.

    2. Re:A Cloudy argument. by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      IBM engineers aren't actually crappy. It's the fucking MBAs in management who have no clue about how to run a software development company. Their engineers will want to do good work, but management will worry more about headcount and sales.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
  3. Re:I don't get this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's more for Red Hat's cloud infrastructure, than the Linux distro itself.

  4. systemd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The next version will be branded IBM(R) SystemD/2.

  5. They’ll be rebranding the distro by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Henceforth, it’ll be known as “Big Blue Hat”.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  6. Re:Please God No by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Depends on the state. Non-compete clauses are unenforceable in some jurisdictions. IBM would want some of the people to stick around. You can't just take over a complex system from someone else and expect everything to run smoothly or know how to fix or extend it. Also, not everyone who works at Red Hat gets anything from the buyout unless they were regularly giving employees stock. A lot of people are going to want the stable paycheck of working for IBM instead of trying to start a new company.

    However, some will inevitably get sick of working at IBM or end up being laid off at some point. If these people want to keep doing what they're doing, they can start a new company. If they're good at what they do, they probably won't have much trouble attracting some venture capital either.

  7. All Redhat employees over 50 to be fired! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    IBM hates the olds! All People aged 50+ will be fired and replaced with coders fresh out of blockchain bootcamps! Also, all operations will be moved to a shanty town in India, those not willing to take a pay cut and relocate will be replaced with Indians.

    1. Re:All Redhat employees over 50 to be fired! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      How long till IBM ships Poettering to India? weeks/months? Can we buy futures based on his declining health? This is great news.

  8. Re:Please God No by gtall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "A lot of people are going to want the stable paycheck of working for IBM instead of trying to start a new company. "

    Errrrmmm....I see you haven't been getting the memos. IBM has been bleeding their U.S. personal as fast as they can. Red Hatters would do well to eyeball their exit strategies.

  9. Goodbye Redhat. by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IBM acquisitions never go well. All companies acquired by IBM go through a process of "Blue washing", in which the heart and soul of the acquired company is ripped out, the body burnt, and the remaining ashes to be devoured and defecated by its army of clueless salesmen and consultants. It's a sad, and infuriating, repeated pattern. They no longer develop internal talent. They drive away the remaining people left over from the time when they still did develop things. They think they can just buy their way into a market or technology, somehow completely oblivious to the fact that their strategy of firing all their acquired employees/knowledge and hoping to sell software they have no interest in developing would somehow still retain customers. They literally could have just reshuffled and/or hired more developers to work on the kernel, but the fact they didn't shows they have no intention of actually contributing.

    --
    Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
  10. possible outcomes by radux · · Score: 3, Funny

    the possibilities ... OS/2 compatibility, Presentation Manager instead of Gnome/KDE, systemd for AIX?

    --

    Kanga: That's not a fish, that's a bird.
    Pooh: Yes, but is it a starling or a mackeral?
  11. Re: It all by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So, sadly, I"M guessing IBM will acquire and fuck up RHEL just like they've done with every other tool they've bought and "IBM-ized"......

    :(

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  12. Re: It all by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nuh uh, look at the market share of OS/2 and AIX. /s

  13. Re:Well at least we'll still have Cent by quantaman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fedora is fully owned by Red Hat and CentOS requires the availability of the Red Hat repositories which they aren't obliged to make public to non-customers..

    Fedora is fully under Red Hat's control. It's used as a bleeding edge distro for hobbyists and as a testing ground for code before it goes into RHEL. I doubt its going away since it does a great job of establishing mindshare but no business in their right mind is going to run Fedora in production.

    But CentOS started as a separate organization with a fairly adversarial relationship to Red Hat since it really is free RHEL which cuts into their actual customer base. They didn't need Red Hat repos back then, just the code which they rebuilt from scratch (which is why they were often a few months behind).

    If IBM kills CentOS a new one will pop up in a week, that's the beauty of the GPL.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  14. Re:Well at least we'll still have Cent by infolation · · Score: 4, Informative

    requires the availability of the Red Hat repositories which they aren't obliged to make public to non-customers

    ...and this is why Richard Stallman Calls Open Source Movement 'Amoral'. But RH must make the source publicly available under the GPL.

  15. Re:Who still uses Red Hat?!?? by quantaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oh, wait, /. is a US joint. Ok, forget about what I said.

    And now attention:
    Getting modded into earths core in 3,2,1 ... :-)

    Virtually anyone running an actual production system.

    I hope IBM keeps them pretty separate. One of the reasons RHEL is so successful is they've done a good job of maintaining a good relationship with the hobbyist crowd. They're not as cool as Ubuntu but they have a lot of fans in the community, both devs and users, and that helps them get into the server rooms.

    Probably Red Hat's biggest liability has been their size, the more Free Software aligned crowd is very nervous about big corporations. If they ever start losing the community some other distro is going to start popping up in the server room.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  16. Re: Please God No by wyattstorch516 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The people getting handed 34 billion dollars are the stockholder not the employees. The vast majority of that money goes to people who do not work at the company.

  17. Re: It all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lennart already fucked up RHEL, I hope IBM will get rid of him and systemd.

  18. Re:Please God No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Look on the bright side: Poettering works for Red Hat. (Reposting because apparently Poettering has mod points.)

  19. AIX Redux by DougDot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oh, good. Now IBM can turn RH into AIX while simultaneously suffocating whatever will be left of Redhat's staff with IBM's crushing, indifferent, incompetent bureaucracy.

    This is what we call a lose - lose situation. Well, except for the president of Redhat, of course. Jim Whitehurst just got rich.

    1. Re:AIX Redux by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Redhat is damn near AIX already. AIX had binary log files long before systemd.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  20. Re:Lol by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With systemd how can they fuck it up worse than it already is?

    Well, it *is* IBM....I'm sure they can still make it worse.

    The only company I know that ruins software they acquire worse than IBM, is CA.....it may survive IBM, but if CA buys them, it is an instant mark of death for the software.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  21. Now watch by TheDarkener · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Microsoft will next merge with IBM.

    Think about it. Makes sense. Microsoft couldn't purchase Redhat directly, that would make too many people upset.

    But if IBM purchases Redhat, then Microsoft purchases IBM, they get Redhat by proxy. Then they have what they want - direct control over one of the most important Linux distros in the world. That, along with Github, gives them a pretty strong position in the F/OSS ecosystem.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  22. Re: It all by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Indeed. Maybe they will even sack Poettering. If so, they will do a ton of good.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  23. Re:Lol by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

    You forgot Oracle.

  24. Re:Why all the hate? by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They were top notch you mean. Current IBM management only knows about acquiring companies and outsourcing development work.

  25. Welcome to Big Purple Hat by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 5, Funny

    What do you get when you add a Red Hat to Big Blue? You get a big purple hat, obviously. I wonder if they're thinking of adding an ostrich feather? Heheheh

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  26. The end of Redhat's anti-patent stance by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So much for Redhat's fight against software patents, IBM is the biggest patent troll of them all. Traditionally goes easy on open source projects but some flipping idiot might decide at any time that monetizing patents is the new get rich quick scheme of the month.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  27. Re: It all by HanzoSpam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed. Maybe they will even sack Poettering. If so, they will do a ton of good.

    Surely you jest. Knowing IBM, as I do, they're more likely to make Poettering the head of the division.

    --

    Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
  28. Re:Pay your licensing fee by red+crab · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Footnote: $699 License Fee applies to your systemP server running RHEL 7 with 4 cores activated for one year. To activate additional processor cores on the systemP server, a fee of $199 per core applies. systemP offers a new Semi-Activation Mode now. In systemP Semi-Activation Mode, you will be only charged for all processor calls exceeding 258 MIPS, which will be processed by additional semi-activated cores on a pro-rata basis. RHEL on systemP servers also offers a Partial Activation Mode, where additional cores can be activated in Inhibited Efficiency Mode. To know more about Semi-Activation Mode, Partial Activation Mode and Inhibited Efficiency Mode, visit http://www.ibm.com/systemp or contact your IBM systemP Sales Engineer.

  29. Gee by the_archer666 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Here I was, trying out some new stuff which didn't work on my Ubuntu test system. Manager looks over my shoulder and asked what it takes to get the thing running, to which I replied "we need to buy Redhat". Guess I should have added "licences".

  30. Re:Well at least we'll still have Cent by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "... RH must make the source publicly available.."

    That's not what the GPL says.

    You only have to distribute the source code, or an offer to the source code to the recipient of the object code. It doesn't need to be public. RHEL's been good about making it public, especially since they do not publicly distribute the object code.

    For CentOS to continue receiving the complete source code from IBM, they would need to subscribe to every single product that they republish the object code for.

    This is not to say they couldn't get it from someone else who subscribed, but if IBM doesn't distribute RHEL in a similar omnibus form, it could be very difficult to set up reliable relationships with all the organizations which subscribe to every component of what is now RHEL.

  31. Re: It all by execthis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, sadly, I"M guessing IBM will acquire and fuck up RHEL

    I think the more accurate term is 'ramp up' not 'fuck up' - more and more Open Source is about vendor on-ramps.

  32. Breaking News! by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 4, Funny

    Real news is: wow! IBM has $34b!

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  33. Novell is not SCO by jjohn_h · · Score: 3

    The UNIX code belonged to Novell not to SCO. SCO had nothing else than hot air and bluff. Or so the courts decided without consulting you.

  34. Re:Please God No by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Informative

    The core CentOS leadership are now Red Hat employees. They're not clear of nor uninvolved in this purchase.

  35. Re: It all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My feelings exactly. As a former employee for both places, I see this as the death knell for Red Hat. Not immediately, not quickly, but eventually Red Hat's going to go the same way as every other company IBM has acquired.

    Red Hat's doom (again, all IMO) started about 10 years ago or so when Matt Szulik left and Jim Whitehurst came on board. Nothing against Jim, but he NEVER seemed to grasp what F/OSS was about. Hell, when he came onboard he wouldn't (and never did) use Linux at all: instead he used a Mac, and so did the rest of the EMT (executive management team) over time. What company is run by people who refuse to use its own product except for one that doesn't have faith. The person on top of the BRAND AND PEOPLE team "needed" an iPad, she said, to do her work (quoting a friend in the IT dept who was asked to get it and set it up for her).

    Then when they (the EMTs) wanted to move away from using F/OSS internally to outsourcing huge aspects of our infrastructure (like no longer using F/OSS for email and instead contracting with GOOGLE to do our email, calendaring and document sharing) is when, again for me, the plane started to spiral. How can we sell to OUR CUSTOMERS the idea that "Red Hat and F/OSS will suit all of your corporate needs" when, again, the people running the ship didn't think it would work for OURS? We had no special email or calendar needs, and if we did WE WERE THE LEADERS OF OPEN SOURCE, couldn't we make it do what we want? Hell, I was on an internal (but on our own time) team whose goal was to take needs like this and incubate them with an open source solution to meet that need.

    But the EMTs just didn't want to do that. They were too interested in what was "the big thing" (at the time Open Shift was where all of our hiring and resources were being poured) to pay attention to the foundations that were crumbling.

    And now, here we are. Red Hat is being subsumed by the largest closed-source company on the planet, one who does their job sub-optimally (to be nice). This is the end of Red Hat as we know it. Without 5-7 years Red Hat will go the way of Tivoli and Lotus: it will be a brand name that lacks any of what made the original company what it was when it was acquired.