So.... Chris you realize your the reason Redhat killed off CentOS since you were not only deploying it, but also not deploying it into companies that would contribute back to CentOS. So you were freeloading. We knew Redhat was gonna do something like that again why are we all suprised redhat went and did something about Alma, Rocky, and Oracle Linux? Shoot, you can look at Git logs, there are ZERO commits froma rocky and ciq contributor in the CentOS Stream git repo nor upstream. Ive been looking since the annoucement, and their as toxic as toxic can be.
Yes, but Red Hat is freeloading on all the stuff they put in the distro. Those authors released it under a licence that specifically encourages free-loading.
Freeloading? Isn't redhat freeloading by using the Linux Kernel? or by using the GNU user space? or by the countless other non-redhat programs that is bundled in RHEL? Microsoft can lock away their OS because they own everything end to end. RHEL does not get that privilege because they "freeload" a bunch of components to the RHEL distro. This argument just doesn't hold any merit in my eyes.
I would agree as far as that the Alma/Rocky/... move was not terribly surprising as a follow-up to them killing off Centos. However, this "freeloading" spin that they came up with doesn't really fly... It rather just highlights the problem with what Redhat is turning into.
@@TitusTechTalk Also - Red Hat Workstation - $299 per year, or $179 per year for what looks like the equivalent of an OEM licence. Windows 11 Pro - $199.99 retail for the life of the product [5 years after Windows 12 is released], OEM a lot cheaper. Why is Red Hat so much more expensive than Microsoft?
@katrinabryce Not to mention, Red Hat / IBM is in violation of the GPL for putting restrictions on redistributing GPL licensed that they didn't create. If you are a user of GPL code on your system, then according to the GPL, you cannot be restricted from exercising the right to redistribute the code under the same licenses, and you cannot stop others from doing the same. The FSF could sue Red Hat / IBM for GPL violations. Technically, so could Linus Torvalds or anybody whose GPL licensed software is included in RHEL. If Red Hat / IBM used a BSD base for their OS and only used BSD/MIT licensed code, or code they created that wasn't under a copyleft license, then this would be absolutely allowed. However, they cannot just pick and choose what terms of a license they want to follow, especially if Red Hat / IBM didn't create said software. Either they comply with the terms of the license or they stop using the software they don't want to comply with the license for. Otherwise, they can, should, and will be sued. Not to mention, by using the GNU coreutils and the Linux kernel, _they_ are freeloaders. Heck, even Valve has done more work for Linux than Red Hat has done for anything but themselves since 2020. I wouldn't be surprised if by 2030, Red Hat is nothing more than a footnote in the Linux history books and is absorbed into IBM.
@@amint6403 RHEL these days is continually rebased off of CentOS Stream, which itself is rebased off of Fedora. The only parts that don't trickle down are the enterprise-specific hot-fixes, which can hit RHEL first and be later added to CentOS / Fedora at RHEL's discretion.
Red Hat is the company, RHEL is the distro. Fedora is funded and primarily developed by red hat, like RHEL, as a testing ground. So it is upstream but not in the same way debian is for example the upstream of Ubuntu but it is independent from Canonical.
@@ddangelobr i believe Red Hat would agree with me, but would mention, that is was built on top of Red Hat Linux and that they are the biggest sponsor and contributor to Fedora, where i agree
It's awesome but doesn't Red Hat kinda controls/own it? I would reaaaaaally love something like Fedora or Tumbleweed (up to date, rolling release-ish, POLISHED) but run by a non-profit like the one that runs Debian.
@@nimlouth Fedora decisions are transparent and democratic, without community and especially the way Fedora decision making works (elections, voting etc) it just wouldn't be as relevant in my view.
@@nimlouthRed Hat is separate from it and if there is any Red Hat employees on the Fedora board of governors they have to sign a contract stating they will make decisions of their own freewill and are not influenced by Red Hat/IBM.
Nonprofits (like Debian) can't sustain themselves with up-to-date package testing without monetizing their business processes somehow. Debian contributors are pretty "downstream" to where Fedora developers are in the dev production lifecycle.
You say Fedora is dead to you, and yet it is one of the distros that innovate the most when it comes to gnome, it was one of the first if not the first to implement systemD and many other Linux things that are a standard today. That is caring for open source last time I checked. Community distros are until the community either fight among themselves or disagree on something. And sometimes the community makes a distro get stuck and not able to advance.
Dude, don't use Gnome. Forget about Gnome forever. Gnome is horrible, Gnome is ugly, Gnome simply doesn't work. Gnome is a legacy without future, which everyone should stop using.
With Debian and arch and any community driven distro it’s still a big problem of the open source world that so many things are run by red hat. They can pull out their support from one day to another and make projects implode.
That's what's probably going to happen to Fedora. I don't think Debian, Arch, or Gentoo will just die though, especially Debian thanks to a huge community and Arch because of Valve's work on Steam OS.
@@cameronbosch1213 no that’s not what I meant, I mean projects that red hat runs and that are packaged by those distros. Many huge projects come from them or are maintained by them with various degrees of community support. Think gnome, systemd…
@hansdampf2284 systemd is not the only init system. There are several other alternatives that could be used if Red Hat / IBM stopped supporting it. For example, Deuvan, Gentoo, and MX Linux all have other init systems by default. Not to mention, they cannot take away any current versions of systemd due to them being licensed under the GPL. Also, GNOME isn't the only DE. If GNOME suddenly stopped existing, I think COSMIC (the DE being built by System76) or KDE Plasma could get more attention. Not to mention some of the GNOME developers'... Self-centered comments and viewpoints about the project. I'm pretty sure KDE 3 was for a while considered the more stable distro, and it was only because of Ubuntu, Fedora (both of which shipped GNOME by default), and KDE 4 (which was a train wreck in terms of stability) that GNOME became the de facto Linux DE. Unfortunately, that led to Linux missing the mark when Windows 8 was released, as one year before that was when GNOME 3 was released, and to say it was even _more_ controversial than KDE 4 was an understatement, as at least KDE 4 didn't reinvent the UI and UX!
@@hansdampf2284 GNOME just received 1 million EUR of grant funds. For the near future at least, this project is safe, or I hope so. But your concerns are absolutely real. The big tech is involved deeply into the Linux world, and we don't know what's the next plug they'll pull off.
@@cameronbosch1213lol their fix bugs are so slow please don’t compare to like what RH. They are the first who fix the squid bug. First on Fedora than Centos and back-ported to RHEl8/9. I love how they act when is high vulnerability
I'm exactly one of the people you're talking about. I upgraded a fleet of 30 servers from CentOS 7 to 8 just prior to the announcement. Looking back at their decision, I think it is one of the biggest self-owns I've personally witnessed in tech. Red Hat's historical business model was to stand by the value of their paid support for RHEL, which our company used for mission critical systems, and if you don't need the support, go ahead and use CentOS, which is under their control. Once they killed CentOS, Rocky and Alma took its place in the market, but they offered their own paid support, which I'm sure is eating into IBM's profits. Couldn't happen to a better company.
Tell the same when you go to a bank or to a hospital or an airport. Tell them I don’t care strategy services and all the works redhat puts to delivery a reliable and secure products, I need to make money out of centos and that’s only I care
@@mrwhitebp I literally have no idea what you are trying to say, so I'll try to clarify my position for you. Red Hat is the one that said they were going to support CentOS 8 for 10 years and then reneged after 2. The idea of keeping CentOS free of charge was that their business model centered around the value of their support offering for the paid verson of RHEL. If you don't see the value in that support, you were encouraged to use CentOS. The irony of their rug pull creating/empowering their competitors in Alma and Rocky. If I'm looking for a supported version of EL, I'm looking to them. Why would I put my trust in Red Hat when they already rug pulled me once?
As a home user Fedora is fine. As a business most businesses are fine with a red hat service agreement. its just another cost of business. The ones that aren't have the it department big enough to handle another distro and the requirements to keep updated.
Fedora is ran by red hat though. They control Fedora just dont choose to exercise their power over it that much. But they easily could if they wanted to with no resistance.
@@vendetta.02 Why worry about what they might do in the future for desktop usage? I agree with that mindset for a server/enterprise deployment, but for the average desktop user just don't worry about hypotheticals and act on problems if they actually happen. I also don't necessarily agree that they could start locking down Fedora with no resistance. If RedHat started messing with Fedora people would definitely move to alternatives, after all we're not Windows/MacOS users that just take whatever they're given and move on. We don't like a controversial decision/feature? We switch to something else. And Fedora with less users means less testing for RHEL, which in the end makes it harder for RedHat to deliver a solid product to their customers. Leaving Fedora alone is beneficial for both users and RedHat's bottom line.
I'm here because I sub to James O'Kee'fe OMG. Wow. I'm on Windows 10... didn't want ten and certainly don't want Windows 11. No way going back to Apple. Seems we are totally screwed though. Totally agree that as companies get bigger they get more corrupt.
Not sure Red Hat /IBM have or will be affected as much, but remember when the industry rebelled / backlashed against Sco and their antics, it didn't end well for them. Own goal!!
True words. Community is the way when there are millions of programmers worldwide, it's sustainable if the need is big enough (Linux servers for sure, desktop is more about enthusiasm). ~ a beardy former IT guy
This hurts so much because I love fedora. I love being on the cutting edge of technology while being stable-ish at the same time. I love the distro and I agree Red Hat has turned evil for sure. It just hurts because Fedora is one of my favorite distros. It works amazing and performs just amazingly. I know when they force some very bad changes I will be forced to switch like I was with windows but I hope that day isn't soon bc I love the distro.
Fedora is indeed impressive for all of the reasons you outlined. Until the politics starts seeping into the desktop experience, I plan to keep using it. Fedora is the first distro I used that truly surpassed the Windows experience.
I used to support the idea of Red Hat, since I liked the idea of having formal support for an OS. But when I started to learn about what was happening with CentOS, and basically anything else connected to RHEL, I started moving away from any distro that had anything resembling Red Hat or Canonical. I'm now installing FreeBSD on my newest computer. Already did once, but I kind of messed up some stuff with the video driver (heh...). So now on to round two.
They are not going to provide free support - as a business why would they do that? They are the opposite of the opensource / it's all for free community. Their engineers are on salary and need to get paid. The opensource guys do it in their spare time for free and don't expect to get paid for their work, but the downside of that is - they are not held to account if things go pear-shaped. You are paying to have that level of accountability and support.
The two distro's I've settled in on are Arch & Deb without knowing any of what you talked about in this vid. Those distros just seem to work best for my needs and they are powerful distros. They continue to amaze me. Informative vid Chris, Thamks!
The bigger, more successful a company gets the more predatory they act toward their users. Hmm. It's almost like the system of free market capitalism is incentivizing this unethical behaviour. Odd.
There's always people trying to corrupt what isn't theirs to corrupt known as bribers and lobbiests and scammers so before we assume who is faulty we need to know everything.
"Everyone" is a very relative term in these circumstances. I can't remember the big hurray, at least from those of us that remember the closed nature of IBM.
Red Hat pissed me decades ago with RH7, they were charging for auto updates and sabotaged the Linux Standard Base initiative (which they claimed to support) by putting out an experimental version of GCC which changed the C++ ABI. Their KDE support sucked too, which was a very solid desktop on SuSE.
Titus at least they are maintaining a lot in Linux so u can use it in your lab. Kinda sad for bashing them for what they are doing for Linux community. Fedora is never being changed anyway people have their opinion. Sad to see this. We should be glad big company help community to maintain the stability of applications. Intel, Red Hat, Conical even Microsoft
I was a big Red Hat fan back in the day until Red Hat discontinued their free line up after Red Hat 9 and moved to RHEL. These days I mostly run Debian 12 and I have an old T420 Slackware 15 Thinkpad. I'm hopeful that the other players in the Linux ecosystem do not go for the pay for view model. Curses Big Blue!!! Heh. :) I'm a long time Linux hobbyist since 2002.
@@fossrules i see I won’t stop you. It’s your decision. You could still use centos stream I am still using RedHat for my vm servers and fedora for workstation. Maybe I am stubborn but I don’t like deb or apt packages. Don’t follow what people are doing now here on RUclips or media. Just do what you like to do Trust me without RH there is no kernel support or openjdk or gnome. the bug fixes with debian are slow as hell
IT pro here, the little tricks RHEL/IBM has played has zero impact on our negotiations for support renewals. We are looking to diversity and setup contracts with Canonical but they have been a bit more difficult to get things moving.
Chris, fully agree and sadly this did happen (exactly as you say). I work for a major telephone provider that was 90% based on Centos7 based servers. As soon an IBM bought them up. we had no option but to upgrade to Redhat based Operating System in order to maintain support and compliance. Project has cost millions and is still not yet complete. Does seriously bring into question that the principal of Linux being an open source and stable operating system for the good of the computing industry.... just became victim of another land grab for profit!!!
CERN used CENTOS7, but now they moved to ALMA9 due to the thing that happened with CENTOS8. Most institutes have had to move away from CENTOS, e.g. Cambridge uses Rocky9
Whatever shit Redhat does, they also do a SHITLOAD of FOSS development. So many prodigious FOSS devs are under their pay scheme, keeping absolutely major and crucial projects alive and fresh and progressing. For me, although it makes me hate a lot of their business decisions, that makes it hard to truly *hate* them, the way I might do with Oracle. At a time when every third youtuber and blogger asks about "the financial viability of FOSS", they sure are a hidden beacon that everybody ignores when convenient. It is sad to see what looks like signs of IBMness poisoning their strategic decisions though. Realtalk though, 10 years of Centos servers is ten years of RH getting 0 ROI on their work. They big business, paying FOSS devs big bucks, they need ROI.
The realization that (desktop) distributions become less significant comes when you understand that you can install any window manager, file manager, or other necessary tools. The crucial factors are licensing and compatibility, with the added expectation that these elements will do the work.
RHEL going closed source isn't a big deal this change is pretty much only going to effect the enterprise space but the vast majority in that space can afford it and red hat knows this, regular desktop users don't need to care about this. The Upstream distro like Fedora is always going to be free and open source
They aren't. You need to do some more research there. Also, it's a massive corporation; ethics are the last thing they'll care about. What did you expect? I am not personally a fan of this either, but it's not a major concern for ordinary people who don't even depend on RHEL stuff. That's like saying Windows users should riot because Apple's M1 silicon only works on Macs. It makes no sense.@@cameronbosch1213
It depends on what GPL is used by whoever wrote that specific software etc. Linus himself has no issue with someone charging for their software they make. As well as them keeping it private. The words right from the horses mouth. The issue is people confuse Stallman and his cult with Linux. Same reason Linus put a lot of work in pushing as much of the toolkit made by GNU out of linux as possible. idk why people do not know their history. @@cameronbosch1213
@@cameronbosch1213 it's doubtful if they are actually violating the GPL saying "only source code access if you have a contract" is the same as "only source code (and program in general) if you give me 5 bucks" which even Stallman himself said is ok
@@kuhluhOG It _is_ allowed to release source code to customers only. What isn't allowed is preventing them from redistributing the source code under the same license.
You really have to start using the BSDs (FreeBSD and OpenBSD to more specific) at production. It's community based, but companies contribute. It's stable, but always innovating. I feel like you're being held back by Linux :))
While it's true that the BSDs are the "unsung heroes" of computing for what they've done and Linux has taken a LOT from them, I do not in anyway feel like I'm being held by Linux.
@@gwguxI think it depends on who you are. Linux has surely held me back in many ways on the server and desktop front. But the BSDs hold me back in other ways. Like, I can’t just plop proprietary commercial software like Steam or Spotify on my desktop, some GPU features are lacking too. Actually now that I think about it, aside from the GPU stuff, one big edge Linux has today is it gained commercial, proprietary software support
I love FreeBSD and use it as a daily driver, but I don't think it's going to be a perfect drop in replacement for a lot of people who are using Linux at home. I was able to setup my father and mother in law on Mint & Ubuntu respectively without them having much trouble (aside from the occasional problem if needing a special windows only software). I wouldn't ever dream of trying to get my family members to use FreeBSD. Driver compatibility a pain and getting it setup on a laptop can be very inconvenient, especially for a new *nix user. Not to mention the lack of support from 3 parties providing proprietary software. If Linux is the OS for people who like to to tinker on things, BSDs are for people who want to build their own garage first. That said I love it as a workstation OS. Developing on it is fantastic, especially when I want to test something in an isolated jail. It's an incredibly good OS, but you're going to have to put in the effort to learn
I recently installed Garuda Linux and it seems to be the most feature complete version I have tried, it came with everything I needed for the most part, like OBS, Mangohud, Blender, cad software, image editors like gimp and Krita, custom firefox browser with searxng, multiple custom and downloadable themes, Lutris and Heroic Launcher and Steam and discord, you name it it was all there, I stuck with the default windows like UI and everything seems to just work for the most part 90%, literally the closest to windows like environment as I could get, I have a few gripes, but the major one is no AMD control panel to use things like anti-lag and boost and all those features, if you know of one that would be great, other minor issues are some apps fail to launch correctly(mainly certain games). I tried Red Hat a while ago and it was good, frustrating they messed it up.
@@nunyadambidniss nope... which is HIGHLY frustrating, I know AMD makes drivers for linux, so why is it so hard for them to make the software to go with it that can be installed separately? ..boggles my brain, lol
RedHat is what Akamai used to run on when I worked there. That is huge. So I really wonder what is going to happen if Akamai is like "uh ok time to switch". People might be more familiar with the product than the company, so linode. that is akamai.
RedHat did not screw those who used Centos, the Centos community screwed over those using Centos by selling to RedHat. Redhat was not the one promising Centos had a 10 year guarantee, that came from the Centos community. RedHat and Centos were separate. Why blame RedHat when they did not make the promises?
Some of us IT Professionals, have no say in what large government clients use. Is it in the list of preferred vendors and do they provide professional support? No? I would love to use Debian instead, but we are stuck with RHEL And then we are also stuck with using RHEL 8 to run Satellite 6, because RHEL 9 doesn't support it yet.
I haven't seen this yet, but the title is old news dude. I went to Debian, and my machine with all the games remains popos because im too lazy to change it
It's both. IBM bought Red Hat, and then proceeded to ruin Red Hat slowly. This 💩 started in 2020 with the CentOS 8 embrassment and has only gotten worse. I would never trust Red Hat unless MAYBE IBM spins them off. But they'll probably just absorb the company into IBM proper rather than do that.
My analysis says that RH/IBM wants to capture $$$ from the development space and medium-sized business space-greedy, greedy. They will ultimately subsume or eliminate Rocky and Alma in the process. If IBM’s history is any guide, they will mostly succeed. Then support and innovation will quickly fall off a cliff thereafter-always does with IBM. Time to begin moving on from RH/IBM.
I have to agree with you about Centos 8 short life span, shocked. I notice you were into Microsoft as well. My beginning was with all versions of UNIX/Berkley HPUX SUN, and something calls VMS. Anyway, big Corp brings in MS/NT in the early 90s I never had to work on that shit, but I ended up in huge fights with these Admin because I had to tell them what was broken on the network related to MS/NT servers. I will defend all versions of UNIX/LINUX etc just because it so stable compared to anything else. Even the big Corp had their limits when it came to service/support & most in the Silicon Valley mainly stayed on Win 7 years past it support. What I am saying is that learning one version of UNIX/LINUX is like learning about them all if you think about. If you're not happy with one type it's not that hard to change!!!
There are an awful lot of companies who just take from Linux and give nothing back, Red Hat does very nicely out of Linux but it also invests very heavily and without their investment (both financial and expertise) many other Linux projects, including the Linux Kernel, simply would not be where they are today.
Hi Chris, is NixOS vulnerable to being consumed by a corporation? I hear there is a nixos foundation and hearing this video makes me sceptical. Interested to hear your take on it
Foundations are generally less prone to these things. For one, they aren't allowed to "take money out of the foundation". They MUST reinvest it (how strong these requirements are depends on country legislation). A lot of countries also have legislation about how much a foundation can "save up" for bad times. Second, they have founding principles. They are legally bound to uphold them and changing them retroactively (even as a founder) is harder than trying to make your politicians change a law the way you want it to as a normal citizen.
Debian and Arch... thanks for existing. I personally wouldn't want to use a distro where a company such as Red Had or Canonical with their dumb decisions is behind it.
Good to know. I am windows user and the few version that I try or hear were Red Hat, Ubutu, Fedora, OpenSuse, Debian*... looking to try Linux again but there are so many now.
There's nothing wrong with Debian, it's what I'm using since I understood that Redhat is going to kill Rocky & Alma. I just wish Debian add good support for SE Linux though.
There’s still tons of Red Hat, Debian, and Ubuntu Server use. In my circles, I didn’t see people drop RHEL based distros. When CentOS 8 died, they went to Rocky or Alma. Learn on Debian and some RHEL-like distro. Ubuntu does a lot of hand holding so I don’t recommend learning on it. Also try out FreeBSD. I’ve seen more people pick up FreeBSD and FreeBSD-based products in my circles and I see a slow trend, or at least more garnered interest. I learned a lot about operating systems learning FreeBSD. And it made me a better Linux sysadmin I feel
If anyone should've paid for a RHEL license (let's be nice and assume pre EL8-crackdown and even pre-IBM) it's the goddamn united states government. Like it or not, they have a lot of essential desktop linux people on payroll who's work also ends up in every other distro.
@@simpan197Yeah, that's the first step in figuring out what's best for you. Though if you're going to use EndeavourOS, I would wait until the new ISO launches, as it will be a significant change (and with the Linux kernel 6.6, because 6.5 in upstream Arch is pretty broken).
@zyxiw OpenSUSE is community based. SUSE Linux Enterprise is commercial Linux based. And because Red Hat is *the biggest backer of Fedora,* given what they've been doing the past few years, that would concern me.
Using mint I switched to lmde just to distance myself from possible hinky changes in canonical. On changing to linux I switched during the whole WGA fiasco in xp. I am absolutely shocked by the trash I see people have to deal with under windows. I game in linux. Hell years ago I was using pclos and my hdd died in WOW i pulled out my usb backup drive popped in a live cd after quickly installing wine I was back in before they kicked me out of raid. Those were the good old days.
With server production, for an ISP it's ended up going, in my case. Debain -> (Let's be professional) RHEL -> CentOS 5 - CentOS 7 -> now considering Debian again.
A year late but better late than never -haha I'll never forgive them for kicking CoreOS to the curb after acquiring them. Thankfully flatcar was born from that...
If Red Hat dies, Linux dies too. Change my mind. Most of the big dev leads on the major Linux projects are Red Hat employees who do it as their day job. Red Hat also pays Torvalds. Without Red Hat, those devs will be out of a job, and you can't live off good intentions. Ikey Doherty learned that when he went back to work for Intel to work (again) on Clear Linux. He quit (again) and instead of going back to Solus and finishing the Qt port of Budgie as intended, he pissed off a lot of users for leaving to make a real living, and now he's working on yet another distro. How long before he earns real pay again? This kind of crap is what you get with open source software when there's nobody to take over the lead. This is how the Linux OS platform falls apart.
Linux foundation pays Tolvalds... even if redhat died tomorrow it wouldn't change the development of the Linux kernel. It would impact other things like systemd, but alternatives exist that can be swapped in, but overall it would be a net negative if redhat does disappear.
@@TitusTechTalk IBM is the top sponsor of the Linux Foundation. Before that, it was Red Hat when they were independent. When the top sponsor of an organization stops funding it, you can be guaranteed that development will change when the rest are told they'd have to pick up the tab, or else staff are going to be cut. Ask any enterprise company if they could just "swap in" an alternate container package or a system manager into their enterprise-scale systems. They'd either crumble, or drop that platform like a wet rag if that was the kind of vendor support they got. There would have to be another major corporate software vendor willing to port in something that is completely compatible with the competition, and that just doesn't exist in the software world. Even on OSS platforms, the real corporate-level software is stuck behind incompatible licenses.
ja right but some company must try now to break through into the "real" world market place with Linux somehow: it wont be easy, it wont be fair and it wasnt fair back in the day in Billy Long Fingers case too ...
I run Ubuntu for me its the Goat, it was the first Linux Distro that pretty much installed itself and where i started, tried many other but still end up here... Debian based of coz not RedHat shit.
I've seen a lot of shit said but you overcame it, imagine putting a security service in a community that says it has 5 years of support but only delivers 2 years, RHEL promises 10 years and delivers 10 years, their decision is their problem, I don't trust a community that says a lot but doesn't guarantee it
Between RHEL and Windows 11, a take RHEL 100%, first, open your mind for development and control of ur own stuff, second, there is a whole community of young people and the amount of knowledge you gain with linux or bsd is unmatch.
this is what you get with ibm buying red hat, they can be as bad or worse than M$. you don't need rhel anymore anyway the selinux work has been rolled into mainline now I believe or has been available to debian based systems, I've more a debian / dpkg person whether it's debian proper or ubuntu server
I am more than ready to be ABLE to install Linux and be able to use and explore it, but I am always defeated by the unnecessary difficulties that seem to be Microsoft's doing that prevent things from working. I have installed Linux virtually, but having things set up and having it startup again that way so it is necessary to start over means I don't progress. I'm not a hacker, I am not an IT pro, and I enjoy tinkering a little with my desktop, but every change Microsoft makes inevitably means at some point wiping out everything or having some glitch tank my system, and if it is not that, then it that they changed something and I hate it but can't do anything to revert the change. I am sick of Microsoft interference, shoving things down my throat or digging at my pocket for money; they don't need it, they have enough and then some. I have set up a dual-boot windows 10/windows 11 situation that worked but in spite of Microsoft. i have also used Visual Basic 5 to write my own programs so I can mess with fractals or make a database. If you know of a utility that will infallibly install Linux on my PC i'd love to see it :) Best wishes mm
...Yes? pick a distro (it really doesn't matter which one), flash the installer file to a USB flash drive, and boot from it. If you're trying to dual boot, remember to make a new partition for linux or you'll wipe the whole disk. When you're done, boot into the new install.
6:10 Well, “companies”… We (most by numbers) have told/taught each other for FOUR decades that anything “government” sucks. Private “enterprise” is more efficient and all that… So here we are? The “companies” have been REALLY efficient, while we backed “freedom” for our own sake. I guess we didn’t understand that corporate freedom also tagged along. Government still sucks backed by corporations, and now both our public and personal economy also suck. It’s time to reevaluate what “growth” or a “good economy” really means. Shouldn’t meat-and-blood people be PART of “the economy” - not increasingly OUTSIDE of it…? 😅👍
Government may suck, but when corporations have that power they are a lot worse. FDR told you that, but I guess you forgot. The propaganda was composed to benefit people with a lot of money -- a big surprise.
So what's left for Enterprise Linux? Just offering Debian?? (Or convince them that artix/void and the BSDs are awesome tee hee). Before you know if we can have them running a whole company on window managers, train the tax team on neovim and our productivity goes up 5000% ...after that -1000% productivity hit while they learn vim.
been using nix for 20 years, still hate vim. and your not changing grandma excel users off excel, its like 90% of office ladies work. and enterprises will just pay redhat or run whatever their larger it department wants to run. Most will pay redhat because its worth it for the real support.
@@msolace580 I’m sorry that my joke didn’t get across. It wasn’t a serious statement. Although, I’m appalled that you hate vim you heretic. Repent.
The boss keeps buying us cheap Linux workstations. We have to reformat them and put Windows 10 on them. It's not that we like Windows 10, we h8t3 it, but we actually have to get work done. And Linux doesn't run any of the apps we need... to get work done.... and the Gnome UI is uncomfortable and unsuable. If we had our choice, we'd be using an old Mac OS System 7 before Apple went nwts off the deep end with PowerPC and a BSD kernel.
I think we are not thinking like the Redhat team is thinking??? The money 💰 is coming from???? 'their service fees' very good business model, if you can sell a service then you my friend is Awesome 👌 'think outside the box' 👍or if you can sell a pencil to anybody??? rock on dudes 😅 you'll know the saying 'don't hate the player, hate the game 😊'
Excuse me sir! Fedora is a strong independent distro and does not take orders or rely on....hahahaha, sorry, couldn't resist. Quarterly profit standards as the measure of success as report cards to shareholders who just buy and sell to make money on the share causes the enshitification of all things enslaved to it. Remember, it doesn't matter that a publicly traded company is profitable, only that they have an ever increasing rate of said profit. How you get that rate for a quarter doesn't matter as long as it makes this quarters report have bigger numbers. Holy shit, Intel is looking lean and getting those quarterly gains! So they sold a kidney and a few other organs to get there, who cares, look at that bottom line, yowza! I see you trying IBM. Still not quite my type. You know what to do.
Even though I was primarily using Linux for many years I never liked Red Hat. [I also hate Mozilla btw]. Now that they are owned by IBM it is easier for me to tolerate them because they don't have that undeserved untouchable status. During Covid by the way I saw on reddit that Red Hat would offer some short of 'free courses'. They were shit. And the presenter appeared more like a disgusting salesperson.
Look at valve, they are company that makes lots of money, and looks like they are still sticking to their principles. And yes, steam is not open source, but they never said that they are, check, they are drm company...
At least Valve gives a lot back and never pretended to care about the Linux community only to ditch them and even break the GPL in the process (the redistribution clause).
@@cameronbosch1213 pretty sure redhat devs have been giving back for years. which is why the company wants to pull that back a bit into their paywall, and I am not worried as the fixes they have done, somehow still manage to come out anyway. But if your using the RH or its child ya you are going to be hurting now...
That's exactly what we do. We take none of these online community serious. Never been screwed over by an operating system either. We use whatever is there. Don't care if it's CentOS or RHL8. Everything, I can do in these server OS I can do in Windows. A lot of time we build are own OS from scratch. Most of you are professional grifters.
So.... Chris you realize your the reason Redhat killed off CentOS since you were not only deploying it, but also not deploying it into companies that would contribute back to CentOS. So you were freeloading.
We knew Redhat was gonna do something like that again why are we all suprised redhat went and did something about Alma, Rocky, and Oracle Linux?
Shoot, you can look at Git logs, there are ZERO commits froma rocky and ciq contributor in the CentOS Stream git repo nor upstream. Ive been looking since the annoucement, and their as toxic as toxic can be.
Yes, but Red Hat is freeloading on all the stuff they put in the distro. Those authors released it under a licence that specifically encourages free-loading.
Freeloading? Isn't redhat freeloading by using the Linux Kernel? or by using the GNU user space? or by the countless other non-redhat programs that is bundled in RHEL?
Microsoft can lock away their OS because they own everything end to end. RHEL does not get that privilege because they "freeload" a bunch of components to the RHEL distro. This argument just doesn't hold any merit in my eyes.
I would agree as far as that the Alma/Rocky/... move was not terribly surprising as a follow-up to them killing off Centos.
However, this "freeloading" spin that they came up with doesn't really fly... It rather just highlights the problem with what Redhat is turning into.
@@TitusTechTalk Also - Red Hat Workstation - $299 per year, or $179 per year for what looks like the equivalent of an OEM licence.
Windows 11 Pro - $199.99 retail for the life of the product [5 years after Windows 12 is released], OEM a lot cheaper.
Why is Red Hat so much more expensive than Microsoft?
@katrinabryce Not to mention, Red Hat / IBM is in violation of the GPL for putting restrictions on redistributing GPL licensed that they didn't create. If you are a user of GPL code on your system, then according to the GPL, you cannot be restricted from exercising the right to redistribute the code under the same licenses, and you cannot stop others from doing the same.
The FSF could sue Red Hat / IBM for GPL violations. Technically, so could Linus Torvalds or anybody whose GPL licensed software is included in RHEL.
If Red Hat / IBM used a BSD base for their OS and only used BSD/MIT licensed code, or code they created that wasn't under a copyleft license, then this would be absolutely allowed. However, they cannot just pick and choose what terms of a license they want to follow, especially if Red Hat / IBM didn't create said software. Either they comply with the terms of the license or they stop using the software they don't want to comply with the license for. Otherwise, they can, should, and will be sued.
Not to mention, by using the GNU coreutils and the Linux kernel, _they_ are freeloaders. Heck, even Valve has done more work for Linux than Red Hat has done for anything but themselves since 2020. I wouldn't be surprised if by 2030, Red Hat is nothing more than a footnote in the Linux history books and is absorbed into IBM.
Fedora is not RHEL based, RHEL is Fedora based, please do not mixup upstream and downstream. otherwise i agree
@@amint6403 RHEL these days is continually rebased off of CentOS Stream, which itself is rebased off of Fedora. The only parts that don't trickle down are the enterprise-specific hot-fixes, which can hit RHEL first and be later added to CentOS / Fedora at RHEL's discretion.
Red Hat is the company, RHEL is the distro. Fedora is funded and primarily developed by red hat, like RHEL, as a testing ground. So it is upstream but not in the same way debian is for example the upstream of Ubuntu but it is independent from Canonical.
Tell that to RedHat 😂
@@ddangelobr i believe Red Hat would agree with me, but would mention, that is was built on top of Red Hat Linux and that they are the biggest sponsor and contributor to Fedora, where i agree
I think it used to be the other way around
At least Fedora is still good
It's awesome but doesn't Red Hat kinda controls/own it? I would reaaaaaally love something like Fedora or Tumbleweed (up to date, rolling release-ish, POLISHED) but run by a non-profit like the one that runs Debian.
@@nimlouth
Fedora decisions are transparent and democratic, without community and especially the way Fedora decision making works (elections, voting etc) it just wouldn't be as relevant in my view.
@@nimlouthRed Hat is separate from it and if there is any Red Hat employees on the Fedora board of governors they have to sign a contract stating they will make decisions of their own freewill and are not influenced by Red Hat/IBM.
Nonprofits (like Debian) can't sustain themselves with up-to-date package testing without monetizing their business processes somehow. Debian contributors are pretty "downstream" to where Fedora developers are in the dev production lifecycle.
@@nimlouth openSUSE?
You say Fedora is dead to you, and yet it is one of the distros that innovate the most when it comes to gnome, it was one of the first if not the first to implement systemD and many other Linux things that are a standard today. That is caring for open source last time I checked. Community distros are until the community either fight among themselves or disagree on something. And sometimes the community makes a distro get stuck and not able to advance.
Wayland, Pipewire, portals...
Dude, don't use Gnome. Forget about Gnome forever. Gnome is horrible, Gnome is ugly, Gnome simply doesn't work. Gnome is a legacy without future, which everyone should stop using.
With Debian and arch and any community driven distro it’s still a big problem of the open source world that so many things are run by red hat.
They can pull out their support from one day to another and make projects implode.
That's what's probably going to happen to Fedora. I don't think Debian, Arch, or Gentoo will just die though, especially Debian thanks to a huge community and Arch because of Valve's work on Steam OS.
@@cameronbosch1213 no that’s not what I meant, I mean projects that red hat runs and that are packaged by those distros.
Many huge projects come from them or are maintained by them with various degrees of community support. Think gnome, systemd…
@hansdampf2284 systemd is not the only init system. There are several other alternatives that could be used if Red Hat / IBM stopped supporting it. For example, Deuvan, Gentoo, and MX Linux all have other init systems by default. Not to mention, they cannot take away any current versions of systemd due to them being licensed under the GPL.
Also, GNOME isn't the only DE. If GNOME suddenly stopped existing, I think COSMIC (the DE being built by System76) or KDE Plasma could get more attention. Not to mention some of the GNOME developers'... Self-centered comments and viewpoints about the project. I'm pretty sure KDE 3 was for a while considered the more stable distro, and it was only because of Ubuntu, Fedora (both of which shipped GNOME by default), and KDE 4 (which was a train wreck in terms of stability) that GNOME became the de facto Linux DE. Unfortunately, that led to Linux missing the mark when Windows 8 was released, as one year before that was when GNOME 3 was released, and to say it was even _more_ controversial than KDE 4 was an understatement, as at least KDE 4 didn't reinvent the UI and UX!
@@hansdampf2284 GNOME just received 1 million EUR of grant funds. For the near future at least, this project is safe, or I hope so. But your concerns are absolutely real. The big tech is involved deeply into the Linux world, and we don't know what's the next plug they'll pull off.
@@cameronbosch1213lol their fix bugs are so slow please don’t compare to like what RH. They are the first who fix the squid bug. First on Fedora than Centos and back-ported to RHEl8/9. I love how they act when is high vulnerability
I do recall a time when Red Hat was the platform to choose.
For server, I prefer Debian, For Desktop, Mint.
I went with mint but almost fedora. If this is what Redhat is doing, then they'll crap in fedora soon enough.
@@humansvd3269 I don't think so. RHEL is where all the money is.
I'm exactly one of the people you're talking about. I upgraded a fleet of 30 servers from CentOS 7 to 8 just prior to the announcement.
Looking back at their decision, I think it is one of the biggest self-owns I've personally witnessed in tech. Red Hat's historical business model was to stand by the value of their paid support for RHEL, which our company used for mission critical systems, and if you don't need the support, go ahead and use CentOS, which is under their control. Once they killed CentOS, Rocky and Alma took its place in the market, but they offered their own paid support, which I'm sure is eating into IBM's profits. Couldn't happen to a better company.
Tell the same when you go to a bank or to a hospital or an airport. Tell them I don’t care strategy services and all the works redhat puts to delivery a reliable and secure products, I need to make money out of centos and that’s only I care
@@mrwhitebp I literally have no idea what you are trying to say, so I'll try to clarify my position for you.
Red Hat is the one that said they were going to support CentOS 8 for 10 years and then reneged after 2. The idea of keeping CentOS free of charge was that their business model centered around the value of their support offering for the paid verson of RHEL. If you don't see the value in that support, you were encouraged to use CentOS. The irony of their rug pull creating/empowering their competitors in Alma and Rocky.
If I'm looking for a supported version of EL, I'm looking to them. Why would I put my trust in Red Hat when they already rug pulled me once?
Honestly Valve has been great. They seem to contribute to opensource and don't over reach.
Small wonder what can be achieved when your priority is delivering a good service rather than the next quarterly report.
As a home user Fedora is fine. As a business most businesses are fine with a red hat service agreement. its just another cost of business. The ones that aren't have the it department big enough to handle another distro and the requirements to keep updated.
I still think Fedora is fine as it's an upstream community distro and not downsream from Redhat.
Fedora is ran by red hat though. They control Fedora just dont choose to exercise their power over it that much. But they easily could if they wanted to with no resistance.
@@vendetta.02 Why worry about what they might do in the future for desktop usage?
I agree with that mindset for a server/enterprise deployment, but for the average desktop user just don't worry about hypotheticals and act on problems if they actually happen.
I also don't necessarily agree that they could start locking down Fedora with no resistance. If RedHat started messing with Fedora people would definitely move to alternatives, after all we're not Windows/MacOS users that just take whatever they're given and move on. We don't like a controversial decision/feature? We switch to something else.
And Fedora with less users means less testing for RHEL, which in the end makes it harder for RedHat to deliver a solid product to their customers.
Leaving Fedora alone is beneficial for both users and RedHat's bottom line.
I'm here because I sub to James O'Kee'fe OMG. Wow.
I'm on Windows 10... didn't want ten and certainly don't want Windows 11. No way going back to Apple.
Seems we are totally screwed though.
Totally agree that as companies get bigger they get more corrupt.
Not sure Red Hat /IBM have or will be affected as much, but remember when the industry rebelled / backlashed against Sco and their antics, it didn't end well for them. Own goal!!
True words. Community is the way when there are millions of programmers worldwide, it's sustainable if the need is big enough (Linux servers for sure, desktop is more about enthusiasm).
~ a beardy former IT guy
This hurts so much because I love fedora. I love being on the cutting edge of technology while being stable-ish at the same time. I love the distro and I agree Red Hat has turned evil for sure. It just hurts because Fedora is one of my favorite distros. It works amazing and performs just amazingly. I know when they force some very bad changes I will be forced to switch like I was with windows but I hope that day isn't soon bc I love the distro.
Keep using Fedora. Don't switch until it becomes a problem.
Resist the hive-mind.
Chris Titus is a hack.
Fedora is indeed impressive for all of the reasons you outlined. Until the politics starts seeping into the desktop experience, I plan to keep using it. Fedora is the first distro I used that truly surpassed the Windows experience.
I used to support the idea of Red Hat, since I liked the idea of having formal support for an OS. But when I started to learn about what was happening with CentOS, and basically anything else connected to RHEL, I started moving away from any distro that had anything resembling Red Hat or Canonical.
I'm now installing FreeBSD on my newest computer. Already did once, but I kind of messed up some stuff with the video driver (heh...). So now on to round two.
They are not going to provide free support - as a business why would they do that? They are the opposite of the opensource / it's all for free community. Their engineers are on salary and need to get paid. The opensource guys do it in their spare time for free and don't expect to get paid for their work, but the downside of that is - they are not held to account if things go pear-shaped. You are paying to have that level of accountability and support.
Nice video! FreeBSD on the server is a nice option to avoid all the Linux drama. And I do use and value Linux btw.
The two distro's I've settled in on are Arch & Deb without knowing any of what you talked about in this vid. Those distros just seem to work best for my needs and they are powerful distros. They continue to amaze me. Informative vid Chris, Thamks!
Chris is a hack. Fedora is the best distro if you want up to date software but bleeding edge like Arch.
@@GoatzombieBubbaWhat? Up to date but bleeding edge? What?
The bigger, more successful a company gets the more predatory they act toward their users. Hmm. It's almost like the system of free market capitalism is incentivizing this unethical behaviour. Odd.
There's always people trying to corrupt what isn't theirs to corrupt known as bribers and lobbiests and scammers so before we assume who is faulty we need to know everything.
Based
Remember when everyone said IBM buying Red Hat was a good thing?
"Everyone" is a very relative term in these circumstances. I can't remember the big hurray, at least from those of us that remember the closed nature of IBM.
@@roysigurdkarlsbakk3842 I don't remember a lot of cheering either, but there was more nail biting...
Canonical chads keep winning
I don’t recall that personally. History would tell anyone that a move like that is unlikely good on so many different fronts.
No. Most said it was bad.
Red Hat pissed me decades ago with RH7, they were charging for auto updates and sabotaged the Linux Standard Base initiative (which they claimed to support) by putting out an experimental version of GCC which changed the C++ ABI. Their KDE support sucked too, which was a very solid desktop on SuSE.
Titus at least they are maintaining a lot in Linux so u can use it in your lab. Kinda sad for bashing them for what they are doing for Linux community.
Fedora is never being changed anyway people have their opinion.
Sad to see this. We should be glad big company help community to maintain the stability of applications. Intel, Red Hat, Conical even Microsoft
I was a big Red Hat fan back in the day until Red Hat discontinued their free line up after Red Hat 9 and moved to RHEL. These days I mostly run Debian 12 and I have an old T420 Slackware 15 Thinkpad. I'm hopeful that the other players in the Linux ecosystem do not go for the pay for view model. Curses Big Blue!!! Heh. :) I'm a long time Linux hobbyist since 2002.
Just use their developer license for free and enjoy their stable experience
@@illum1n4ti I did exactly that for a while. However, I'm not comfortable supporting a Linux distro that is closed source.
@@fossrules i see I won’t stop you. It’s your decision. You could still use centos stream
I am still using RedHat for my vm servers and fedora for workstation. Maybe I am stubborn but I don’t like deb or apt packages. Don’t follow what people are doing now here on RUclips or media. Just do what you like to do
Trust me without RH there is no kernel support or openjdk or gnome. the bug fixes with debian are slow as hell
RedHat is searching the couch cushions for coins
IT pro here, the little tricks RHEL/IBM has played has zero impact on our negotiations for support renewals. We are looking to diversity and setup contracts with Canonical but they have been a bit more difficult to get things moving.
Chris, fully agree and sadly this did happen (exactly as you say). I work for a major telephone provider that was 90% based on Centos7 based servers. As soon an IBM bought them up. we had no option but to upgrade to Redhat based Operating System in order to maintain support and compliance. Project has cost millions and is still not yet complete. Does seriously bring into question that the principal of Linux being an open source and stable operating system for the good of the computing industry.... just became victim of another land grab for profit!!!
CERN used CENTOS7, but now they moved to ALMA9 due to the thing that happened with CENTOS8. Most institutes have had to move away from CENTOS, e.g. Cambridge uses Rocky9
Whatever shit Redhat does, they also do a SHITLOAD of FOSS development. So many prodigious FOSS devs are under their pay scheme, keeping absolutely major and crucial projects alive and fresh and progressing. For me, although it makes me hate a lot of their business decisions, that makes it hard to truly *hate* them, the way I might do with Oracle. At a time when every third youtuber and blogger asks about "the financial viability of FOSS", they sure are a hidden beacon that everybody ignores when convenient. It is sad to see what looks like signs of IBMness poisoning their strategic decisions though.
Realtalk though, 10 years of Centos servers is ten years of RH getting 0 ROI on their work. They big business, paying FOSS devs big bucks, they need ROI.
Creating a good quality OS costs money. Btw Fedora?
As an IT professional working for small business has always been a worse experience as working enterprise
The realization that (desktop) distributions become less significant comes when you understand that you can install any window manager, file manager, or other necessary tools. The crucial factors are licensing and compatibility, with the added expectation that these elements will do the work.
let's go temple os, the only solution
If I was forced to use that, I'd want to walk in front of a train like the creator did.
Best OS
RHEL going closed source isn't a big deal this change is pretty much only going to effect the enterprise space but the vast majority in that space can afford it and red hat knows this, regular desktop users don't need to care about this. The Upstream distro like Fedora is always going to be free and open source
Except they are violating the GPL and they are ethically wrong in what they are doing. _People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones._
They aren't. You need to do some more research there. Also, it's a massive corporation; ethics are the last thing they'll care about. What did you expect? I am not personally a fan of this either, but it's not a major concern for ordinary people who don't even depend on RHEL stuff. That's like saying Windows users should riot because Apple's M1 silicon only works on Macs. It makes no sense.@@cameronbosch1213
It depends on what GPL is used by whoever wrote that specific software etc. Linus himself has no issue with someone charging for their software they make. As well as them keeping it private. The words right from the horses mouth. The issue is people confuse Stallman and his cult with Linux. Same reason Linus put a lot of work in pushing as much of the toolkit made by GNU out of linux as possible. idk why people do not know their history. @@cameronbosch1213
@@cameronbosch1213 it's doubtful if they are actually violating the GPL
saying "only source code access if you have a contract" is the same as "only source code (and program in general) if you give me 5 bucks" which even Stallman himself said is ok
@@kuhluhOG It _is_ allowed to release source code to customers only. What isn't allowed is preventing them from redistributing the source code under the same license.
Fine, so who do you recommend for say a PostgreSQL Database server ?
You really have to start using the BSDs (FreeBSD and OpenBSD to more specific) at production. It's community based, but companies contribute. It's stable, but always innovating. I feel like you're being held back by Linux :))
While it's true that the BSDs are the "unsung heroes" of computing for what they've done and Linux has taken a LOT from them, I do not in anyway feel like I'm being held by Linux.
+1 for BSDs. Running pkg_add -u on OpenBSD -current as I type this
@@gwguxI think it depends on who you are. Linux has surely held me back in many ways on the server and desktop front. But the BSDs hold me back in other ways. Like, I can’t just plop proprietary commercial software like Steam or Spotify on my desktop, some GPU features are lacking too. Actually now that I think about it, aside from the GPU stuff, one big edge Linux has today is it gained commercial, proprietary software support
I love FreeBSD and use it as a daily driver, but I don't think it's going to be a perfect drop in replacement for a lot of people who are using Linux at home. I was able to setup my father and mother in law on Mint & Ubuntu respectively without them having much trouble (aside from the occasional problem if needing a special windows only software). I wouldn't ever dream of trying to get my family members to use FreeBSD.
Driver compatibility a pain and getting it setup on a laptop can be very inconvenient, especially for a new *nix user. Not to mention the lack of support from 3 parties providing proprietary software.
If Linux is the OS for people who like to to tinker on things, BSDs are for people who want to build their own garage first.
That said I love it as a workstation OS. Developing on it is fantastic, especially when I want to test something in an isolated jail. It's an incredibly good OS, but you're going to have to put in the effort to learn
No, I prefer to use another Linux distro rather than lose usefulness
I recently installed Garuda Linux and it seems to be the most feature complete version I have tried, it came with everything I needed for the most part, like OBS, Mangohud, Blender, cad software, image editors like gimp and Krita, custom firefox browser with searxng, multiple custom and downloadable themes, Lutris and Heroic Launcher and Steam and discord, you name it it was all there, I stuck with the default windows like UI and everything seems to just work for the most part 90%, literally the closest to windows like environment as I could get, I have a few gripes, but the major one is no AMD control panel to use things like anti-lag and boost and all those features, if you know of one that would be great, other minor issues are some apps fail to launch correctly(mainly certain games). I tried Red Hat a while ago and it was good, frustrating they messed it up.
AMD Adrenalin aint available on Linux ?
@@nunyadambidniss nope... which is HIGHLY frustrating, I know AMD makes drivers for linux, so why is it so hard for them to make the software to go with it that can be installed separately? ..boggles my brain, lol
Currently using several Ubuntu based servers.
If Ubuntu pulls something like Red Hat, I can easily swith to using Debian.
RedHat is what Akamai used to run on when I worked there. That is huge. So I really wonder what is going to happen if Akamai is like "uh ok time to switch". People might be more familiar with the product than the company, so linode. that is akamai.
it's not that Red Hat got greedy but the acquisition by IBM did
RedHat did not screw those who used Centos, the Centos community screwed over those using Centos by selling to RedHat. Redhat was not the one promising Centos had a 10 year guarantee, that came from the Centos community. RedHat and Centos were separate. Why blame RedHat when they did not make the promises?
Some of us IT Professionals, have no say in what large government clients use. Is it in the list of preferred vendors and do they provide professional support? No? I would love to use Debian instead, but we are stuck with RHEL And then we are also stuck with using RHEL 8 to run Satellite 6, because RHEL 9 doesn't support it yet.
I haven't seen this yet, but the title is old news dude. I went to Debian, and my machine with all the games remains popos because im too lazy to change it
It's Ain't Redhat... It's IBM that's bad. :)
It's both. IBM bought Red Hat, and then proceeded to ruin Red Hat slowly. This 💩 started in 2020 with the CentOS 8 embrassment and has only gotten worse. I would never trust Red Hat unless MAYBE IBM spins them off. But they'll probably just absorb the company into IBM proper rather than do that.
This is why I upgraded all my CentOS servers to Rocky Linux 8, that has version parody with RHEL 8.
My analysis says that RH/IBM wants to capture $$$ from the development space and medium-sized business space-greedy, greedy. They will ultimately subsume or eliminate Rocky and Alma in the process.
If IBM’s history is any guide, they will mostly succeed. Then support and innovation will quickly fall off a cliff thereafter-always does with IBM.
Time to begin moving on from RH/IBM.
FYI: don't forget that Ansible is another Red Hat project. Ditto for OKD, Podman, Buildah, and Cockpit, among many others.
Systemd is Redhat as well... Doesn't excuse them for doing stupid shit though!
WHATS WITH ALMA LINUX ? same shizznit or ?
why I don't know what they are complaining about with stallman and the FSF since according to their license this is fine
Many years ago, I worked at a company doing QA running RHEL on our company's enterprise-level hardware. Some of us would refer to RHEL as "Our Hell".
I have to agree with you about Centos 8 short life span, shocked. I notice you were into Microsoft as well. My beginning was with all versions of UNIX/Berkley HPUX SUN, and something calls VMS. Anyway, big Corp brings in MS/NT in the early 90s I never had to work on that shit, but I ended up in huge fights with these Admin because I had to tell them what was broken on the network related to MS/NT servers. I will defend all versions of UNIX/LINUX etc just because it so stable compared to anything else. Even the big Corp had their limits when it came to service/support & most in the Silicon Valley mainly stayed on Win 7 years past it support. What I am saying is that learning one version of UNIX/LINUX is like learning about them all if you think about. If you're not happy with one type it's not that hard to change!!!
There are an awful lot of companies who just take from Linux and give nothing back, Red Hat does very nicely out of Linux but it also invests very heavily and without their investment (both financial and expertise) many other Linux projects, including the Linux Kernel, simply would not be where they are today.
What has the romans ever done for us
Cory Doctorow calls this 'enshitification' , get a large following/ user base then slowly get worse all in the name of profits
Hi Chris, is NixOS vulnerable to being consumed by a corporation? I hear there is a nixos foundation and hearing this video makes me sceptical. Interested to hear your take on it
Foundations are generally less prone to these things.
For one, they aren't allowed to "take money out of the foundation". They MUST reinvest it (how strong these requirements are depends on country legislation). A lot of countries also have legislation about how much a foundation can "save up" for bad times.
Second, they have founding principles. They are legally bound to uphold them and changing them retroactively (even as a founder) is harder than trying to make your politicians change a law the way you want it to as a normal citizen.
Debian and Arch... thanks for existing.
I personally wouldn't want to use a distro where a company such as Red Had or Canonical with their dumb decisions is behind it.
They are still making decisions like systemd and x11 soon. U still following their roadmap.
Good to know. I am windows user and the few version that I try or hear were Red Hat, Ubutu, Fedora, OpenSuse, Debian*... looking to try Linux again but there are so many now.
RHEL is closed-source? Can they do that?
What recommendations can you give going forward for wannabe system admins?
There's nothing wrong with Debian, it's what I'm using since I understood that Redhat is going to kill Rocky & Alma. I just wish Debian add good support for SE Linux though.
Probably OpenSUSE.
There’s still tons of Red Hat, Debian, and Ubuntu Server use. In my circles, I didn’t see people drop RHEL based distros. When CentOS 8 died, they went to Rocky or Alma. Learn on Debian and some RHEL-like distro. Ubuntu does a lot of hand holding so I don’t recommend learning on it. Also try out FreeBSD. I’ve seen more people pick up FreeBSD and FreeBSD-based products in my circles and I see a slow trend, or at least more garnered interest. I learned a lot about operating systems learning FreeBSD. And it made me a better Linux sysadmin I feel
I have more RHEL updates cause outages or locking all users out than any other distro.
This delay in the release of Fedora 39 maybe is a sign of what's going on? Or maybe its a typical thing that's happened before. 🤷
The delays are typical.
This is typical Fedora's development process. It's a feature not a bug 😂
It's typical, and this time it has to do with bugs on Raspberry Pi from what I can tell.
yes its fine, fedora has been unphased by redhats sourcing. its still upstream
To quote Richard Stallman, the free means freedom, not free beer.
If anyone should've paid for a RHEL license (let's be nice and assume pre EL8-crackdown and even pre-IBM) it's the goddamn united states government. Like it or not, they have a lot of essential desktop linux people on payroll who's work also ends up in every other distro.
How could have Centos be legally sold to Redhat? Was it not work of community of developers?
Been doing nixos, its a bit much at first but overtime I can't see using anything else. Dev shells are fantastic.
I’m current on lmde but looking to distro hop for gaming. Stuck between nobara and endeavour . I really like fedora 40 user interface
Suggest me something to replace fedora workstation on my system???
Nixos, arch\arco/endeavor, Linux mint, etc
What do you want to use your system for?
@@simpan197 mostly programming and light gaming
@@simpan197Yeah, that's the first step in figuring out what's best for you. Though if you're going to use EndeavourOS, I would wait until the new ISO launches, as it will be a significant change (and with the Linux kernel 6.6, because 6.5 in upstream Arch is pretty broken).
OpenSuse tumbleweed😁
also isn't fedora community based? red hat just sponsers them
@zyxiw OpenSUSE is community based. SUSE Linux Enterprise is commercial Linux based.
And because Red Hat is *the biggest backer of Fedora,* given what they've been doing the past few years, that would concern me.
Using mint I switched to lmde just to distance myself from possible hinky changes in canonical. On changing to linux I switched during the whole WGA fiasco in xp. I am absolutely shocked by the trash I see people have to deal with under windows. I game in linux. Hell years ago I was using pclos and my hdd died in WOW i pulled out my usb backup drive popped in a live cd after quickly installing wine I was back in before they kicked me out of raid. Those were the good old days.
I don't care. Fedora is great and super stable
With server production, for an ISP it's ended up going, in my case.
Debain -> (Let's be professional) RHEL -> CentOS 5 - CentOS 7 -> now considering Debian again.
A year late but better late than never -haha I'll never forgive them for kicking CoreOS to the curb after acquiring them. Thankfully flatcar was born from that...
There was a time when lunduke was the voice of the linux community. P sure we're currently in the Titus Tech era.
Lunduke went apeshit online. Reputation never recovered.
@@JohnSmith-lk4xvReally? Makes sense. He went antivaxxer apeshit on me, so I'm p sure I wasn't watching by that point.
Ubuntu is following in Red Hat’s footsteps, IMO.
"Elitist". You mean actual professionals and experts who deal with things that matter more.
If Red Hat dies, Linux dies too. Change my mind.
Most of the big dev leads on the major Linux projects are Red Hat employees who do it as their day job. Red Hat also pays Torvalds. Without Red Hat, those devs will be out of a job, and you can't live off good intentions.
Ikey Doherty learned that when he went back to work for Intel to work (again) on Clear Linux. He quit (again) and instead of going back to Solus and finishing the Qt port of Budgie as intended, he pissed off a lot of users for leaving to make a real living, and now he's working on yet another distro. How long before he earns real pay again? This kind of crap is what you get with open source software when there's nobody to take over the lead. This is how the Linux OS platform falls apart.
Linux foundation pays Tolvalds... even if redhat died tomorrow it wouldn't change the development of the Linux kernel. It would impact other things like systemd, but alternatives exist that can be swapped in, but overall it would be a net negative if redhat does disappear.
@@TitusTechTalk IBM is the top sponsor of the Linux Foundation. Before that, it was Red Hat when they were independent. When the top sponsor of an organization stops funding it, you can be guaranteed that development will change when the rest are told they'd have to pick up the tab, or else staff are going to be cut.
Ask any enterprise company if they could just "swap in" an alternate container package or a system manager into their enterprise-scale systems. They'd either crumble, or drop that platform like a wet rag if that was the kind of vendor support they got. There would have to be another major corporate software vendor willing to port in something that is completely compatible with the competition, and that just doesn't exist in the software world. Even on OSS platforms, the real corporate-level software is stuck behind incompatible licenses.
What happened to red hat and CentOS why they are so hard now? I Just don't get it!!! why!!!
ja right but some company must try now to break through into the "real" world market place with Linux somehow: it wont be easy, it wont be fair and it wasnt fair back in the day in Billy Long Fingers case too ...
I run Ubuntu for me its the Goat, it was the first Linux Distro that pretty much installed itself and where i started, tried many other but still end up here... Debian based of coz not RedHat shit.
I've seen a lot of shit said but you overcame it, imagine putting a security service in a community that says it has 5 years of support but only delivers 2 years, RHEL promises 10 years and delivers 10 years, their decision is their problem, I don't trust a community that says a lot but doesn't guarantee it
Between RHEL and Windows 11, a take RHEL 100%, first, open your mind for development and control of ur own stuff, second, there is a whole community of young people and the amount of knowledge you gain with linux or bsd is unmatch.
this is what you get with ibm buying red hat, they can be as bad or worse than M$. you don't need rhel anymore anyway the selinux work has been rolled into mainline now I believe or has been available to debian based systems, I've more a debian / dpkg person whether it's debian proper or ubuntu server
I am more than ready to be ABLE to install Linux and be able to use and explore it, but I am always defeated by the unnecessary difficulties that seem to be Microsoft's doing that prevent things from working. I have installed Linux virtually, but having things set up and having it startup again that way so it is necessary to start over means I don't progress. I'm not a hacker, I am not an IT pro, and I enjoy tinkering a little with my desktop, but every change Microsoft makes inevitably means at some point wiping out everything or having some glitch tank my system, and if it is not that, then it that they changed something and I hate it but can't do anything to revert the change. I am sick of Microsoft interference, shoving things down my throat or digging at my pocket for money; they don't need it, they have enough and then some. I have set up a dual-boot windows 10/windows 11 situation that worked but in spite of Microsoft. i have also used Visual Basic 5 to write my own programs so I can mess with fractals or make a database. If you know of a utility that will infallibly install Linux on my PC i'd love to see it :) Best wishes mm
...Yes? pick a distro (it really doesn't matter which one), flash the installer file to a USB flash drive, and boot from it. If you're trying to dual boot, remember to make a new partition for linux or you'll wipe the whole disk. When you're done, boot into the new install.
6:10 Well, “companies”… We (most by numbers) have told/taught each other for FOUR decades that anything “government” sucks. Private “enterprise” is more efficient and all that…
So here we are? The “companies” have been REALLY efficient, while we backed “freedom” for our own sake. I guess we didn’t understand that corporate freedom also tagged along. Government still sucks backed by corporations, and now both our public and personal economy also suck.
It’s time to reevaluate what “growth” or a “good economy” really means. Shouldn’t meat-and-blood people be PART of “the economy” - not increasingly OUTSIDE of it…? 😅👍
Government may suck, but when corporations have that power they are a lot worse. FDR told you that, but I guess you forgot. The propaganda was composed to benefit people with a lot of money -- a big surprise.
So what's left for Enterprise Linux?
Just offering Debian??
(Or convince them that artix/void and the BSDs are awesome tee hee).
Before you know if we can have them running a whole company on window managers, train the tax team on neovim and our productivity goes up 5000% ...after that -1000% productivity hit while they learn vim.
been using nix for 20 years, still hate vim. and your not changing grandma excel users off excel, its like 90% of office ladies work. and enterprises will just pay redhat or run whatever their larger it department wants to run. Most will pay redhat because its worth it for the real support.
@@msolace580 I’m sorry that my joke didn’t get across. It wasn’t a serious statement.
Although, I’m appalled that you hate vim you heretic. Repent.
@@msolace580 some places still use Office 2004 (yes, really) because too many employees threw a fit about the ribbon bar...
Debian isn't an enterprise-class distro.
@@JohnSmith-lk4xv Tell that to sysadmins.
The boss keeps buying us cheap Linux workstations.
We have to reformat them and put Windows 10 on them.
It's not that we like Windows 10, we h8t3 it, but we actually have to get work done.
And Linux doesn't run any of the apps we need... to get work done.... and the Gnome UI is uncomfortable and unsuable.
If we had our choice, we'd be using an old Mac OS System 7 before Apple went nwts off the deep end with PowerPC and a BSD kernel.
In my opinion that's not a REDHAT but more an IBM screwover!?
IF anyone feels my pain . go study turtle keave me be it hurts ...hit me back....a BIG thanks on the video 1SH OF MANY
I think we are not thinking like the Redhat team is thinking??? The money 💰 is coming from???? 'their service fees' very good business model, if you can sell a service then you my friend is Awesome 👌 'think outside the box' 👍or if you can sell a pencil to anybody??? rock on dudes 😅 you'll know the saying 'don't hate the player, hate the game 😊'
Nice video Chris, I cant say I blame you, the last time I used RH for anything was a long time ago, I prefer Debian myself.
On my way to install RHEL 9 on all my systems 😂
Same
Why? Why not use Debian or OpenSUSE?
It was sarcasm bruv. @@cameronbosch1213
Red Hat is dead. It's IBM now.
What will this guy write litigating irrational fool how will you write it
Excuse me sir! Fedora is a strong independent distro and does not take orders or rely on....hahahaha, sorry, couldn't resist. Quarterly profit standards as the measure of success as report cards to shareholders who just buy and sell to make money on the share causes the enshitification of all things enslaved to it. Remember, it doesn't matter that a publicly traded company is profitable, only that they have an ever increasing rate of said profit. How you get that rate for a quarter doesn't matter as long as it makes this quarters report have bigger numbers. Holy shit, Intel is looking lean and getting those quarterly gains! So they sold a kidney and a few other organs to get there, who cares, look at that bottom line, yowza! I see you trying IBM. Still not quite my type. You know what to do.
Even though I was primarily using Linux for many years I never liked Red Hat. [I also hate Mozilla btw].
Now that they are owned by IBM it is easier for me to tolerate them because they don't have that undeserved untouchable status.
During Covid by the way I saw on reddit that Red Hat would offer some short of 'free courses'. They were shit. And the presenter appeared more like a disgusting salesperson.
Look at valve, they are company that makes lots of money, and looks like they are still sticking to their principles. And yes, steam is not open source, but they never said that they are, check, they are drm company...
At least Valve gives a lot back and never pretended to care about the Linux community only to ditch them and even break the GPL in the process (the redistribution clause).
@@cameronbosch1213 pretty sure redhat devs have been giving back for years. which is why the company wants to pull that back a bit into their paywall, and I am not worried as the fixes they have done, somehow still manage to come out anyway. But if your using the RH or its child ya you are going to be hurting now...
That's exactly what we do. We take none of these online community serious. Never been screwed over by an operating system either. We use whatever is there. Don't care if it's CentOS or RHL8. Everything, I can do in these server OS I can do in Windows. A lot of time we build are own OS from scratch. Most of you are professional grifters.
Windows users sitting here laughing at the distro wars between Linux users.
RedHad killed centOS for production use... Enough said
Amen to the greed.........the main drive of companies today..........frown
Linux Mint is my favorite
2 minutes in and I still dont know why Red Hat is bad.