Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Oracle Software Businesses Databases Programming Linux IT

Oracle Linux Adopters Suffer Backlash 274

atbarboz writes "One of the first converts to Oracle's support for Linux said it has endured a public backlash since its decision to drop Red Hat. 'Melbourne company Opes Prime Stockbroking told ZDNet Australia that in the weeks following its announcement to adopt Oracle Linux, upset Linux enthusiasts phoned, e-mailed and wrote about the company online to complain at the decision. "People called us out of the blue to tell us we were idiots," said Opes executive director Anthony Blumberg.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle Linux Adopters Suffer Backlash

Comments Filter:
  • stupid users (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DreadSpoon ( 653424 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:08PM (#18579219) Journal
    Users who call up a company they have no relation to in order to tell them their tech decisions are bad are complete morons. Linux is an OS, not a religion. If a company wants to run Oracle Linux, Red Hat, BeOS, Windows ME, or Mac OS 7 is completely their choice to make.
    • Re:stupid users (Score:5, Insightful)

      by user24 ( 854467 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:14PM (#18579315)
      How dare you! Linux *is* a religion, the heathens shall repent!

      I can't really be bothered to carry on with that line, but I'm sure 20 other people will.

      You're right. Fanboyism, whether directed at linux, wikipedia, apple, terry pratchet, HHGTG or whatever, really only acheives the following:
      It attracts more fanboys.
      The media don't understand it (well done to apple for evading this one).
      It puts 'normal' people off.

      If you're trying to be taken seriously in, none of the above are desirable traits at all.
      That this happened can only damage Linux's reputation.
      • by zotz ( 3951 )
        "That this happened can only damage Linux's reputation."

        And who might have an interest in doing this? Not that I think it went down that way, but still.....

        all the best,

        drew

        http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=zotzbro [youtube.com]
        Strange UFO activity on the increase...
      • That this happened can only damage Linux's reputation.

        I didn't know Linux had a reputation.
      • And only four production. Why is this news even relevant? Is this the BIGGEST RH -> Oracle transition yet? I mean, eight servers... please, that's a pretty damned small Linux environment. On top of that, they even had a good reason to switch. I think the whole article is meant as flamebait. Of course none of you read it...
      • by nbritton ( 823086 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @08:36PM (#18581853)

        "How dare you! Linux *is* a religion, the heathens shall repent!"
        Yep that about sums up why I use BSD instead. IIRC the saying goes something like... "Linux Is for People Who Hate Microsoft, BSD Is for People Who Love UNIX"
    • Religion. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:16PM (#18579333)

      Linux is an OS, not a religion.
      You're must be new here....
    • Religion & Rudeness (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Linux is an OS, not a religion.
      That is where you are wrong.

      It appears that the need for religion is hardwired into human beings. If they reject religion, they tend to find a new one. Some believe in global warming. Some in their political party. Some in Linux.

      Also, remember that since the 60s we live in a society where rudeness is rewarded.
      What the Baby Boomers taught us was that you can be a total jackass and if you claim it is for a good cause it is not only excused but celebrated.
      • That is a very good point. I'm sorry I'm out of mod points. I don't think I've very met anyone that wasn't a religious about something, even the atheists/ agnostics I've known. Of course my limited experience is not statistically significant in any way, but that observation seems to confirm my experiences.
      • Religion is just one particular type of ideology.
    • A True Linux User (Score:3, Interesting)

      by lmnfrs ( 829146 )
      A true Linux user has a moral responsibility to spread awareness of Linux and all its wonders to the wandering souls of the world. Were it not for the Enlightenment brought forth from these Disciples of Torvalds we would all be condemned to an eternity in the fiery pits of welded-hood doom. Amen brothers!
    • by moochfish ( 822730 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @05:19PM (#18580051)

      Linux is an OS, not a religion.


      Exactly. It is not a religion! The nerve of some people...

      I prefer to call it a cult.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by scdeimos ( 632778 )
      Linux is a kernel.
    • Users who call up a company they have no relation to in order to tell them their tech decisions are bad are complete morons.

      Even if you aren't a customer of a company or a citizen of a state you aren't a member of, you still should have the inherent right to express your dissatisfaction of their policies towards other members of the world.

      Not that I'm going to spend my free time to send angry letters to Oracle, but I'll support the right of anyone who does.
    • Users who call up a company they have no relation to in order to tell them their tech decisions are bad are complete morons. Linux is an OS, not a religion.
      Just so we're clear here: you mean it is OK to call someone and criticize their religion? Because that sounds like more fun, actually.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by daem0n1x ( 748565 )

      Absolutely right!

      How come this is news? Just tell them to fuck off.

  • It really is sad to hear of the "zealots" that pull stunts such as calling a company and heckling them for a choice that doesn't impact the zealot one bit.

    It's idiocy like this that gives any advocacy a bad name.

  • Look, guys, going around irritating users by calling them idiots, who are really our customers and should be treated as such (whether commercial users or not) is the kind of thing that makes the Linux community look like a bunch of elitist snobs who shout things like 'RTFA' at every question.

    Want to know one of the main stumbling blocks to further widespread adoption of Linux? If you're one of the people calling Opes a bunch of idiots, look in the mirror.

    • Where is my cut? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by shaitand ( 626655 )
      'who are really our customers'

      Maybe they are your customers but my customers earn that classification by giving me some form of payment. Customers are someone you have an obligation to. Nobody has an obligation to these guys except Oracle.
    • who are really our customers

      They are not my customers. The people who call them have no relation to me. You are trying to treat people who use Linux as a single coherent body. It's a phantom, there is no Linux community, there is no coherent body, just a load of individuals.

      Want to know one of the main stumbling blocks to further widespread adoption of Linux?

      Complete rubbish. There's a huge investment in legacy systems and the added complication of a deliberately maintained network effect.

    • Want to know one of the main stumbling blocks to further widespread adoption of Linux?

      Like have time to answer that for you. You know how to google, don't you? RTFA! Damn newbs.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:12PM (#18579273)
    Linux users would never be THAT stupid, it's just Microsoft's guerrilla PR tactics aimed at discouraging linux use. Ballmer probably made half the calls himself... oops it's guerrilla not gorilla. My bad, Ballmer wasn't involved at all then.

    I can even see the marketing campaign to accompany this "Beyond idiocy - Windows vista".
    • by PitaBred ( 632671 ) <slashdot@pitabre ... org minus distro> on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:27PM (#18579473) Homepage
      Yeah, Microsoft users are much better [notebookreview.com] ;)

      There are zealots on both sides of the fence. Some of them have more sense than others.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        PitaBred wrote -> "Yeah, Microsoft users are much better ;)"

        I think you got it wrong. I read the post at the link you provided and this guy wasn't a zealot. He's *NOT* saying "contact companies that use Microsoft productsn and bash them". He said that he's tired of the zealots who bash Microsoft and their products and said "instead of complaining here in a forum that Microsoft doesn't monitor, contact Microsoft directly and complain there".

        What he said actually makes a ton of sense. Go to the sou

  • by MrWGW ( 964175 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:12PM (#18579275)
    You know, I think this kind of incident is really unfortunate, in that it really is going to do nothing other than bolster a negative perception of the Linux community. A company deploys a distro of Linux, and is immediately subject to a barrage of criticism for selecting that particular distro. Would those complaining about the use of Unbreakable Linux rather the company had instead chosen to be an all-Windows environment?

    Another aspect I don't get in all of this is the preference for Red Hat over Oracle. Red Hat is a great company that has contributed a lot to Linux, but to be fair, they are also a company that does not provide free access to downloads of their signature product (which is why we have CentOS), and a company the CEO of which once stated that Windows was a superior alternative to Linux for desktop users (admittedly a few years ago). Oracle, on the other hand, makes Unbreakable Linux freely availible to anyone who wants to download it, and additionally, also gave a major boost to Linux when it started supporting Linux as a platform in the late 1990s.

    To be clear, though, I am not saying that Oracle has a better record than Red Hat, rather, that the two have both made contributions to the Linux community, and for a large number of people to attack a company for using Unbreakable Linux as opposed to RHEL is, in my opinion, retarded.

    • Here, Here!!

      Personally, I've hated Red Hat since it was my first run in with Linux, I spent $60 on a book that came with a copy of Red Hat 9, two months later...
      I hate Red Hat. Fedora - no thanks.

      • I dont particularly like Redhat either. But Oracle is very similar from what I am told.

        Also, now that I am out in the real world of work I seem to have found myself supporting a bunch of linux servers. And guess what? they run Redhat. Not my choice, but I kinda like getting paid and replacing them is too costly to be worth bothering with.

        If Oracle supported SunOne ASP I might recommend switching but as it is, the only other option I could suggest that anyone might have supported would have been Solaris and
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by rm69990 ( 885744 )

          I dont particularly like Redhat either. But Oracle is very similar from what I am told.

          It's not similar, it's identical. Oracle simply downloading the Source RPMs from Red Hat, replaced Red Hat's trademarks and then recompiled.

          If Oracle supported SunOne ASP I might recommend switching but as it is, the only other option I could suggest that anyone might have supported would have been Solaris and that was too different from what we were used to.

          What good would switching to Oracle do, other than changing the price (which you don't personally pay for) and the brand name slapped onto the product, considering that for all intents and purposes, Unbreakable Linux IS RHEL?

    • by pembo13 ( 770295 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:42PM (#18579659) Homepage
      Please explain how CentOS exists if RedHat does not "provide free access to downloads of their signature product".

      • Please explain how CentOS exists if RedHat does not "provide free access to downloads of their signature product".


        I'm pretty sure it's clear the GP meant in "easy to install ISO form". As is well known and mentioned in other posts RedHat makes all the source, and binaries, available for their products but you have to get the pieces yourself and put them together into something usable. If you want a complete, no fuss package you go with CentOS.

        Or I guess you could go with Oracle and download Unbreakable Linu
    • Amiga Persecution Syndrome, redux. That company is lucky the calls calling them idiots didn't devolve into conference calls with the callers fighting over RedHat vs. Debian GNU/Linux vs. Gentoo. It's a worrisome trend in OS devotees, as I remember people being VMS partisans, or OS/360 worshippers (which is fair, since miss a sacrifice to a 3090 and it's likely to eat a programmer or two in retribution), but very few systems inspire this rabid, lunatic-fringe, behaviour. Amigas, OS/2, and Linux. There is
  • by Fulcrum of Evil ( 560260 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:12PM (#18579281)

    How dare you not drink our koolaid!" /froth froth froth

    We use Linux for a lot of things here where I work, but if we moved to some other OS, or some other comapny changed platforms, I wouldn't take it personally. I only care if they offer inferior service or compromise data, which is more a matter of ops.

  • Get a life!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Blahbooboo3 ( 874492 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:14PM (#18579297)
    Seriously, this is what gives Linux a bad reputation. To take time out of your day to harass a company for changing Linux support/distro is just insane. People wonder why getting companies to switch to LInux is so hard? It's this crazy rep that Linux has of being filled with "maverick/crazy" users. Way to go guys in further perpetuating a negative Linux stereotype. Thanks for helping get Linux accepted in the enterprise as a professional system(s).
    • by kv9 ( 697238 )

      Thanks for helping get Linux accepted in the enterprise as a professional system(s).

      you're welcome.

  • This is not good at all for getting Linux used more often. It seams Linux are the most difficult users to please. If each "getting-Linux-implemented-somewhere" project is backslashed like this one, it becomes harder to get Linux implemented anywhere.
    • by init100 ( 915886 )

      And thus, it would make sense for such a campaign to really have been orchestrated by a certain Redmond, WA-based software company.

  • by jimicus ( 737525 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:15PM (#18579325)
    What on Earth does anyone think contacting some organisation (that they probably have no contact with in day to day life) to tell them that they're idiots is going to achieve? More to the point, if it's not a public sector organisation and the people calling aren't shareholders, what the hell business is it of theirs?

    A common selling point of open source is "if you don't like the support, you have the freedom to go elsewhere". Reading between the lines of the article, it seems like Opes have done just that. So as soon as someone decides they don't like the support and they want to go elsewhere, this is what they get? One thing I'm sure of, it certainly isn't going to encourage anyone to adopt Red Hat.

    I bet the reaction would be totally different if they moved to Oracle Linux from some other commercial Unix.
    • What on Earth does anyone think contacting some organisation (that they probably have no contact with in day to day life) to tell them that they're idiots is going to achieve?

      Raise public awareness? Change? Admittedly, on the face of it, I'm eager to dismiss actions are juvenile but, then again, I smirk at the folks in Starbucks buying or selling "fair trade" coffee. None of them, I'd bet, has ever travelled to Latin America or even seen a coffee bean before it's been picked and roasted, or met a coffee
      • The key difference here is those who called and insulted the company were not activists. They were fanboys.

        Activists lobby, actively promote change or raise awareness for things that will make life better. if not for themselves, for many other people. Fair trade activists wish to preserve ways of life and local economies. Electronic freedom activists lobby against restrictive copyright laws and promote freedom across digital mediums.

        These assclowns wanted to belittle a company because the major corporati
        • by kv9 ( 697238 )

          It's not like either Oracle or RedHat are Monsanto or something. Both have done massive contributions and offer a distro of Linux.

          it looks to me that Oracle did a massive "me too". a bad one [linuxplanet.com]. so now people left and right are pissed off. fucking surprising.

  • What a nice selling point for Gnu/Linux. "Choose our software and when you switch vendors we will summon the power of the fanboys." This is insane, I use free software as much as I can, everywhere it fits. Behaviour like this just states that while OSS is ready for the enterprise, the community is not. Grow up, let Unbreakable Linux either thrive or die. Either way the community improves for it. You really think it's impossible for Unbreakable to contribute back to Red Hat, or supply something different wit
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by PTBarnum ( 233319 )
      Indeed, having fan boys call people up to ridicule them is unprofessional. Proper, enterprise ready companies just throw chairs.
  • by StikyPad ( 445176 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:22PM (#18579423) Homepage
    Linus >= Jesus, therefore [insert convoluted defense for childish behavior here]. Mods, mod this insightful.
    • "Mods, mod this insightful."

      You are doing it wrong. If you really want to karma-whore properly, you need to start the post with "I know I will probably be modded down for this, but "
  • Hardware support? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by C3ntaur ( 642283 ) <panystrom@gmai l . c om> on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:27PM (#18579467) Journal
    Hardware support is going to be an issue for anyone that chooses to run Oracle Linux. Hardware vendors certify only certain OS makes and models on their boxes, and so far I haven't seen Oracle Linux on the certified lists. It's no fun fighting with your vendor for support and being told you have to install a supported OS before they'll acknowledge that the error you're seeing is caused by their hardware and not the OS that you chose to run.

    Oracle might think they're onto something here, but I doubt it's going to catch on until they either A) sell their own hardware and support the entire stack from top to bottom, or B) get their OS certified by most or all of the major hardware vendors -- including card manufacturers like QLogic, EMC, Emulex, and Intel, who like the box vendors, only certify to certain OSes.
  • Hang on for a second... I thought that one of the MAIN REASONS that Linux people push Linux so hard is because it avoids scary lock-in. Linux is Linux, right? Switching should be no big deal for customers, since there's no worry about lock-in using Linux... right? I honestly have no idea because every time I've tried Linux, I've never gotten it set up to the point of being functional.
    • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:45PM (#18579709) Homepage Journal

      I thought that one of the MAIN REASONS that Linux people push Linux so hard is because it avoids scary lock-in. Linux is Linux, right? Switching should be no big deal for customers, since there's no worry about lock-in using Linux... right?

      Linux is not the problem. Oracle is the problem. But then, Red Hat fanatics are bar none the worst fanboys in my ever-so-humble opinion. Gentoo users are often like rice boys, but they're using the system and I have no beef with them. I'm a Ubuntu user these days, so clearly I have nothing against Ubuntu users (I'm not one of them self-hating types.) But Red Hat users, which I stopped being around 6.1, are clinging desperately to a distribution that doesn't care about them unless they have shitpiles of money. That goes for Fedora, too. ObDisclaimer: This is all my opinion. You may feel differently. If I think you're being a bozo in your reply to this comment, I may flame you. You have been warned.

      Oracle is one of the great anti-freedom evils of our time simply because they backed the national ID database. Corporations have no heart - Oracle is willing to get behind such a proposal simply to sell their product.

      You are welcome to forget! Everyone else does anyway. But Oracle is bad and wrong and supporting Oracle is therefore bad and wrong.

      • by oGMo ( 379 )

        Red Hat fanatics are bar none the worst fanboys in my ever-so-humble opinion. Gentoo users are often like rice boys, but they're using the system and I have no beef with them. I'm a Ubuntu user these days, so clearly I have nothing against Ubuntu users (I'm not one of them self-hating types.) But Red Hat users, which I stopped being around 6.1, are clinging desperately to a distribution that doesn't care about them unless they have shitpiles of money. That goes for Fedora, too

        Odd... I've never met anyone

        • by doom ( 14564 )

          Sadly they also make a solid product. Painful, archaic, requiring a lot of support work, but solid. The alternatives are what: Microsoft (far more evil), and PgSQL (not there yet, but coming along).

          Postgresql is perhaps not yet at the point where I would tell an Oracle installation they needed to drop what they're doing and switch, but Postgresql is definitely far enough along that there's no way that any one should set-up a new system using Oracle -- which is to say that Oracle is already a legacy produ

        • by init100 ( 915886 )

          Ubuntu I have heard nothing but good things about.

          That may be true, but I'm turned off of Ubuntu by all the Ubuntu fanatics that criticize every other distribution for "not being Ubuntu", and calling people stupid for using a distribution that isn't their beloved Ubuntu. I'm happy that they found a distro that they like, but their aggressiveness towards users of non-Ubiuntu distros can periodically be intense.

        • by slamb ( 119285 ) * on Monday April 02, 2007 @08:01PM (#18581617) Homepage

          All of the people I know who use Gentoo use it because of the amazing build toolset and customizability. I can compile everything with "-g" and debug anything on the system through glibc... and see source listings at any stack frame. That's incredibly valuable

          You should try a more mainstream distro again. They've anticipated this need, so you don't need to rebuild anything. RedHat-based systems (and I believe SuSE and Debian/Ubuntu as well) all have a build system which extracts debugging symbols from binaries, placing them in -debuginfo packages along with the source code. gdb has been modified to look for debugging info in this location. You can run gstack on a coredump, realize you don't have the right debugging symbols, do a yum install foo-debuginfo, run it again, and get the right information. (And even have list do the right thing.) You can audit exactly how much disk space these packages use with a simple du -sk /usr/lib/debug and remove them without rebuilding. There's more information on the Fedora wiki [fedoraproject.org].

          CFLAGS customization makes Gentoo users (particularly ricers) feel superior, but in practice, I don't see any advantages. (I've never seen a situation where it made a worthwhile performance boost. There was an interesting thread about this on pgsql-performance a while back.) One major disadvantage is obvious: long compile times. A couple less so: it's harder to reproduce bugs affected by compiler options, and you need a separate scheme for updating systems which can't do the compile themselves.

          I used to recompile the kernel with flags for my hardware. Now the system has been modularized, so unless I'm writing kernel code myself, I just use the RedHat vendor kernel which has been extensively QAed. In time, the same thing will happen to userspace binaries with optional dependencies: instead of detecting at configure time that I have support therefore modifying the base package's code, we'll move toward add-in modules that get dlload()ed in to provide the external functional that dependencies are needed for.

          Odd... I've never met anyone who was actually fanatical about RedHat. Or even really liked it. It usually comes down to either "we can buy support for it" or "it installs and is hands-off after that." Back when I still used Fedora, I fell into the latter category... tolerating it, because it worked.

          RedHat makes a good system, and they make contributions that benefit everyone [fedoraproject.org]. That you don't know anyone fanatical about it is not surprising. You're a Gentoo guy who hasn't used any other system in a while, so your sample's pretty skewed. And it's rare for people to get fanatical about the dominant system, particularly people who have an irrational fear of companies with working business models.

      • drinkypoo wrote: >Oracle is one of the great anti-freedom evils of our time simply because they backed the national ID database.

        I don't think it's quite fair to condemn Oracle for supporting national ID cards. There are some privacy/anonymity violations that I think are serious problems, but the national ID card doesn't seem to me to be much of a problem. The GPS tracking devices required in everyones phone for the obviously bogus emergency call excuse, cameras being installed everywhere to track peopl

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by jack455 ( 748443 )
        Oracle IS the problem. It would've been nice if the poster(one who posts) or the article had explanied that while this is childish, there's more to it than first appears.

        Red Hat is huge for a Linux distro but has nowhere near Oracle's $$. Microsoft, who Red Hat directly competes with, has more $$ than anyone.

        Now Oracle decides to compete with...Linux(?!)
        Fine, they should because the competition will only make the community stronger. Except maybe they should've put some work into developing a distro. They di
        • Full disclosure; I'm typing this in Firefox, running on Fedora Core 6, an OS Red Hat gave me for free.

          Well, if you want to be a red hat beta tester, that's up to you. I mean, I want to be a Ubuntu beta tester, but in order to become one I had to edit my apt-sources and s/edgy/feisty/ and do a dist-upgrade. All Fedora users are beta testers.

          and I'm genTOO busy to use a distro that eats all my time. (It's a terrible pun but i WANT you to flame me!)

          Gentoo is useful for three types of people: those who have

          • by slamb ( 119285 ) *

            Well, if you want to be a red hat beta tester, that's up to you. I mean, I want to be a Ubuntu beta tester, but in order to become one I had to edit my apt-sources and s/edgy/feisty/ and do a dist-upgrade. All Fedora users are beta testers.

            If you don't like Fedora, don't forget that it's not the only free-as-in-beer RedHat system. My servers run CentOS [centos.org], which is essentially RHEL recompiled. I don't have "shitpiles of money", but I still use a solid system that RedHat built. The only practical difference i

  • Er, Houston? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 87C751 ( 205250 ) <sdot@NosPam.rant-central.com> on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:31PM (#18579521) Homepage

    "People called us out of the blue to tell us we were idiots," said Opes executive director Anthony Blumberg.'"
    And there's no chance at all this could be astroturf, right?
  • Kind of off topic, but related.

    Why does the disto seem to matter so much. I'm a developer and I get the idea of linking to some extent, but why is that I can have a Windows app that was desinged for 95 that still runs fine in 2003, but when I get a binary of for an older version of Linux I have to recompile it for newer other distros.

    We recently wanted to run Snort, but we didn't want to use a support distro. We ended up recompiling the code, but it seems like a bit much to me.

    Part of Windows draw is the in
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @04:42PM (#18579663) Journal
    Near the end of TFA is the important reason for them to get their support from Oracle:

    They're running Oracle's application server and database on some of the mission-critical servers.

    With Oracle supporting both the application and the OS under it there's no time and money lost to finger-pointing when something gets hosed. Instead a single team buckles down and fixes it immediately.

    (Presuming they ever need service. One of the comments from Red Hat indicates that they may never have actually had to USE the service contract. Take THAT, Microsoft! B-) )
  • Anyone has a right to bundle and sell a Linux distro and more choice is better for the future of the platform. I venture a wild guess that with Oracle Linux, you might have less problems installing Oracle software. Let RedHat come up with some other advantages.
  • by puppetluva ( 46903 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @05:55PM (#18580399)
    RedHat support is some of the worst support I've ever seen in the marketplace. Indeed, it is far worse than Microsoft's (which is pathetic). All the companies that I'm affiliated with use Suse if they want support nowadays. (and I HATE the patent deal that Novell did with Microsoft, but Redhat is so damn miserable at support, there isn't much of a choice).

    Novell's support isn't great, but at least they call you back. I don't think I've ever gotten Redhat to call back on any support issue over the 4 years I was a customer. (The only reaction I've ever seen from their customer support is to quietly close my tickets that stayed open for more than a year -- without ever putting in an explanatory note or fixing the problem, of course)

    If that company wants to go with Oracle so they can actually get real support, more power to them. They could switched to using Microsoft Windows. . . but they didn't - and for that I'm glad.

  • by Cal Paterson ( 881180 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @05:59PM (#18580431)
    Surely if people feel strongly that something someone is doing is wrong they should be able to talk about it and protest about it?

    There's a lot of talk here about "How dare they tell Opes that they're being idiots!" Like there's something wrong with making your opinion of something heard.

    If people only took an interest in something that directly affected them, this world would be a far shallower place. Surely inconvience is a price to pay for the chance to say what you want to say? As far as I can see, no one's being a jackass - there's no direct impairment of the companys trade - people are simply calling them up and telling them they're idiots.

    It's called freedom of expression.
    • It's called freedom of expression.

      Its one thing to go on Slashdot and say they are idiots. Its another to complain directly to a company who is running child labor camps in 3rd world countries. Its another ENTIRELY when someone who has no business relationship with a company calls this company to tell them they are idiots for choosing a particular OS support company.

      The latter is not only a complete waste of time for everyone involved, but it shows a real lack of civility for those trying to make the case f
  • Bah! Simpletons! Infidels! Heretics! Everyone knows that the one true religion, computingwise at least, is the Church of Emacs [dina.kvl.dk]. Repent!!!
  • by kernelpanicked ( 882802 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @06:35PM (#18580863)
    Meanwhile, McLaren told ZDNet Australia Opes had acquired Red Hat support subscriptions with the purchase of two servers from channel partner Dell. The hardware vendor then was responsible for providing Red Hat support to Opes.

    I guess nobody reads the articles anymore, but appearently they weren't even RedHat customers. The ran RHEL but only by way of Dell. It would seem to me that if they wanted the best support maybe they should actually have tried paying RedHat for a frickin support contract. RedHat is a mighty generous company but they're not going to call you up out of the blue and offer you support just for the hell of it.

    My personal opinion is that they are going from one bad support situation (DELL) to another (Oracle), but it's their business and they have every right to make dumbass decisions. As for people calling them out of the blue to tell them how retarded they are, I have to call bullshit. I don't think anybody knows or cares who these people are or what distro they run.
  • And how many of these were actual customers ? I bet few, if any.
  • by bl8n8r ( 649187 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @08:34PM (#18581829)
    I know a lot of people in the linux community (as well as being a LUG pres.) and I've only run across one person in the last 15 years that was a complete asshole about using Linux and nothing else. Actually, he didn't limit that idealism to just linux - it was basically whatever he was doing was the right way, and everyone else was wrong. That's a pretty small percentage of nut jobs. Take a good look through Bruce Peren's petition*, you'll see the exact opposite of what Opes is talking about. This is also something that has upset and angered a lot of people, but the vast majority of signees (3000+) have kept their comments reasonable. This seems to be more in line with the Linux community I know of.

    [*] - http://techp.org/p/1 [techp.org]
  • by drachenfyre ( 550754 ) on Monday April 02, 2007 @09:15PM (#18582157) Homepage
    The problem is this. In the United States, RHEL is the standard Linux Distribution for business. Whether you like it or not, those are the facts. They have the market penetration. They, as a company, survive off of support licenses. This is for patches, upgrades, whatever. This includes the guarantee to backport security fixes into dead software (Have RHEL3 and support, you are getting fixes for packages that the original coders have long since abandoned as they've moved forward with releases). It gives you the ability to tell your boss that 7 years from now an RHEL 5 system will *STILL* have vendor support for all security issues. That is something that Microsoft isn't doing. (Want a DST patch for Win2k - you'll have to pay MS for it, even though it is only a 7 year old OS). The problem is. Unbreakable linux is *NOT* a distribution. It is a support agreement to provide support for RHEL systems. They are directly support RHEL3 and RHEL4 via a separate patch path. This undercuts Red Hat and their pricing, basically taking a company that while strong, is hardly rock solid (I believe they made somewhere around $450 million dollars and had a $50 million dollar annual profit). The fall of Red Hat will also (quite obviously) mean the fall of RHEL, and quite possible the Fedora project (Their supported test ground). Where does that leave Oracle? Oracle will no longer have anyone to support, since they are basically using the GPL to abuse the Red Hat porting process and merely paying for an alternate distribution path. When Red Hat dies, Oracle Unbreakable will die as well. The end result? They kill the goose that laid the golden egg. This is why the move by Oracle is dangerous. Getting into the business is one thing, but they are taking direct aim at Red Hat, and abusing the GPL by taking Red Hat code modifications and redistributing them via their own network and charging for it. This is also why there is a general disdain for what Oracle is doing among the linux community. Now, how much of this paragraph turns out to be true, and how much is fud is where the crux of the issue lies. Perhaps Oracle will have their own teams doing backports, and perhaps they will eventually move off of RHEL support onto their own distro, but until they make this move, you can be certain the RH crowd is going to continue these unfortunate tactics.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...