The Heavy Element Forum

RHEL

supernova_deb

So got some thoughts here:

First I was browsing my student account at the University in which I attend (UAHuntsville if anyone is wondering) and I found out that they offer a frigging Red Hat Enterprise Linux subscription for students and I got really, really excited. Yeah, yeah, I know, "why don't you use Fedora or CentOS." It's not the same though. It's like the difference between Debian and Ubuntu.

Well anyway, that got me to thinking about something that someone asked me in a conversation as I was evangelizing LInux/ FLOSS to them. (We all try to convert people, don't we. It kind of reminds me how I am supposed to convert people to Christ as a Christian... Damn I evangalize for Linux more🙁 But in my defense, everyone in Alabama is already a frigging "Christian". Some of them be so fake tho.)
Him: Companies cannot license Open-sourced software and make money off of it.
Me: Yeah they can and they do - Red Hat Enterprise Linux.... (here I go on to explain what RHEL is)
Him: Oh I didn't know they existed. How do they make money off of it if someone can just copy their code?
Me: I am not sure, but I think that it is more of a subscription for support with the system. Also, they have a (moderately stable) testing platform release of RH called Fedora and that is free. I am sure that that helps a person decide if they want Red Hat for their business before they commit to it.

So did I give him the right answer because I am actually curious as to how RHEL can remain successful when people can just copy their code and modify it (like CentOS) did. Like, what keeps every company out there from copying the code into their own personal little RHEL?

B101

supernova_deb As someone looking for a non programming career in FOSS ATM I can tell you companies monetize FOSS through several means. Mind you, I'm speaking about the monitization of FOSS in general, not just RHEL...though your summary was pretty good.

Support
Bug fixing and software bounties
Merchandising
Advertising
Updates
Specific support
Licensing
Distribution
Installation
Promotions
Hardware development

It boils down to the FOSS software, but ultimately support, distribution, and service are the primary drivers for most. Hey you want to install an OS that's customized to your needs across 500 computers? You could have your system admins do a ton of work, or you could pay us....the creators of the software....to specifically tailor it to your needs and maintain it for a period of xyz.

Caeglathatur

That is my understanding as well. Large enterprises pay good money just for the guarantees.

Edit: Also, I think Red Hat offers other IT infrastructure services on top of / aside from the distro itself.

supernova_deb

@B101 @Caeglathatur @MrSatan

I want experience using a Enterprise Linux Distro. When I got the email from my university about using RedHat, they said that their license only covers University owned computers, so:

CentOS or Fedora?

MrSatan

supernova_deb I never used CentOS. As for Fedora – not much either. What I did use I din't like much, but for no real reason. Just the default feel of it, I guess.

Caeglathatur

supernova_deb If RHEL experience really is your highest priority, then I'd say Centos, as it's basically supposed to be RHEL without the branding.

Otherwise, for a daily driver I would recommend Fedora (of the two), because of the newer packages and probably better user experience.

(I use Fedora at work, but haven't used CentOS/RHEL much apart from servers.)

B101

Caeglathatur I have to agree with you. One thing I do love about Fedora however is that it works on basically anything I've ever thrown it on. The installer is also one of the best imo. That being said....I've never really used CentOS other than just installing it and seeing what it was about.

Generic-Eric

Caeglathatur If RHEL experience really is your highest priority, then I'd say Centos, as it's basically supposed to be RHEL without the branding.

Seconded. I use RHEL at work and the only difference is branding and support contract. I think there is some software that is only available to RHEL customers though.

orbatos

CentOS is RHEL only free, essentially, so comparing them this way doesn't make sense to me. Literally all of the differences are simply not having proprietary softeware, e.g. using L-HA vs RHCS management for clustering, Docker vs OpenShift, etc. Just talk to anyone doing NASA research or backend, they're probably using CentOS, and have been for a while, becasue it's free and they can barely get funding for hardware. Likewise, Fedora is the "desktop"/developer branch that moves a bit faster so RedHat can keep that segment happy, not intended for "Enterprise" use and not costing a huge licencing fee.

s31bz

orbatos Didn't RHEL switch from yum to dnf though? CentOS still ships with a 3.x.x kernel out of the box and yum package manager...

s31bz

That's awesome! Wish colleges in southern Ohio were more GNU/Linux friendly.

supernova_deb

s31bz I am surprised that my college has this tbh. We have to program using Windows and VS code in low level CS classes otherwise it affects your grades (because the VS Code compiler is so dumb that it [probably purposefully] compiles and runs differently than Linux software such as GCC).

Chrozayis

I'm gonna have to disagree about Fedora's installer. At best it's acceptable and on a multiboot system it's a nightmare.

supernova_deb

I somehow managed to get by using Vim and GCC though because I would run it in GCC and then when I could get access to the University's computer lab running Windows, then I would test it there and fix the problems.

s31bz

supernova_deb Sounds like something I would do hahaha nice!

Links