CentOS-8 1911 Released As Rebuild Off Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1

[dovla091]

CentOS is the most bizarre/crap Linux distro out there! The first CentOS 8 boot (minimal) iso fails miserably! You have to change the package mirror manually to be able to proceed with the install... Just TROLOLOL!

https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16456

Then, the "Next" button is beyond the screen limits, you can't even see it. Like, WTF?! lol

Utter crap! How can they release such a broken image like that?

I assume that whoever uses RedHat-based distros, have no idea about what they're doing!

Debian is light years ahead of everybody else.

Well, I guess it is time for you to cut down that sugar intake.

Just FYI: If there is no RHEL, you would have a shitty product now in your hands. They pull enormous effort in developing support for your hardware Bub!
Please don't tell me about vendors, as Intel is a freaking mess, so are the rest: AMD, Lenovo, HP, etc, etc.

[kgonzales]

Or... you could just admit you're a cynical clueless idiot adding nothing to the conversation except low effort trolling.

One of the best things about me is not caring what you think. I am definitely trolling, often cynical, but in this case, far from a clueless idiot. I know much more about this topic than almost anyone else on this thread, and my comment still stands.

If you are not paying for the OS, and not contributing to the OS (or at least to upstream for the OS), then I have no sympathy for you.

[nomadewolf]

Well, I am not.
I don't think having my system hang at random (and hence induce anxiety) is acceptable.

But it would be a good idea to have newer versions of software, Windows/macOS-way (e.g. Flatpak, Snap or AppImage (or even packing dynamic libraries)).

You make it sound like we're in the Win95 days where a mere right-click could induce a bluescreen of death...
Nowadays there good choices that allow us to have stable desktops without having to resort to server oriented distros...
Don't get me wrong, CentOS is my goto distro when i need a server, but it maybe is overkill for desktop use (stability wise).

[kgonzales]

That is some A grade linear thinking there, if you think getting rid of CentOS would translate into more sales. Are you one of those sales suits?

If you are asking if I have worked with both more Red Hat customers and CentOS consumers than you have, the answer is yes. I wonder if after accusing me of linear thinking you will offer up your own linear thinking...

First, if there is no money or no need for support there will simply be no sale. If CentOS doesn't exist they would use Debian or something else. BUT the second that changes and they need support, and that happens all the time, if they use CentOS they will change to RHEL. If they don't use CentOS or it doesn't exist or is not compatible anymore they will most likely not.

And there is it. Well done. CentOS is for people who have "no need for support". Need support? Get Red Hat. That is as linear as it gets.

If CentOS did not exist they would NOT use Debian, because what they actually need is RHEL. They want all the free documentation, they want Red Hat fixing bugs and feeding fixes and pseudo-inheriting certifications (which it's does not but they pretend it does). Some of the largest CentOS users actually call up Red Hat asking for a roadmap presentation so they will know what will be in CentOS later... some even ask us to add features for them. They DO need the support. They DO have the money. They just don't want to pay. Sometimes this comes from purchasing. Sometimes this comes from a group of sysadmins who think this is job security. Sometimes this comes from a CTO. Regardless of where it comes from, they use CentOS because it's free RHEL, and they assume Red Hat will just make it ok for them to use free RHEL.

As you can see from this thread, a number of users are not having good luck with their free RHEL and they need support as well as a professionally maintained operating system.

As a Red Hat partner, you should know everything you get as part of a RHEL subscription which goes beyond support: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/value-of-subscription

The availability of free distros is not "money sucked out if the open source ecosystem". It is a prerequisite for that market to even exist. If the was no free distro we could as well just still be stuck with AIX, Solaris and the like and then no money would ever make its way into companies that translate that into work on open source software.

If you are not contributing to open source or paying for developers to develop open source, you are sucking resources out of the open source ecosystem. Period.

RHEL did more to kill off AIX and Solaris than free stuff did. I know this because this is what customer told me. They did not move workloads off old school Unix to a free unsupported operating system.

[ZeroPointEnergy]

And there is it. Well done. CentOS is for people who have "no need for support". Need support? Get Red Hat. That is as linear as it gets.

Yes, very linear, like a real sales suit. Completely incapable of actually realizing that there are different companies and that not every startup has the budget to get support or even has the requirement for an enterprise grade Linux. They will use free resources because they have no other choice. If there is no CentOS they will use something else and end up not using RHEL when they get to a size when they actually can afford and/or require support. There are other companies in the Linux sector you know, RedHat is not the only one and it's increasingly less attractive.

If CentOS did not exist they would NOT use Debian, because what they actually need is RHEL.

Try to understand what was said. No one cares about your sales pitch and how certain you are that everyone needs RHEL.

They want ... bla bla bla

Good job extrapolating some case that fitted your narrative to everyone. Not every company has the same requirements. Most people would be perfectly fine running a purely community driven distro.

As a Red Hat partner, you should know ...

I just work for a redhat partner, we do a lot of stuff and I don't care about what redhat offers. I'm not a fan of having to think about subscriptions when engineering a system. If it was up to me I would not use RHEL at all. i also don't recommend or push it on to the customers I work with.

If you are not contributing to open source or paying for developers to develop open source, you are sucking resources out of the open source ecosystem. Period.

How is someone using a free copy of free software taking something away from the open source ecosystem?

RHEL did more to kill off AIX and Solaris than free stuff did. I know this because this is what customer told me. They did not move workloads off old school Unix to a free unsupported operating system.

Please try not to forget that RHEL is basically the same as all this free stuff with a Redhat logo tagged on so they can sell it as a product.

Holy shit. For the first time I really think that you will just fit right in with IBM

[kgonzales]

Yes, very linear, like a real sales suit. Completely incapable of actually realizing that there are different companies and that not every startup has the budget to get support or even has the requirement for an enterprise grade Linux. They will use free resources because they have no other choice. If there is no CentOS they will use something else and end up not using RHEL when they get to a size when they actually can afford and/or require support. There are other companies in the Linux sector you know, RedHat is not the only one and it's increasingly less attractive.

I am trying to tell you what people actually told me about their use of CentOS directly to my face or to people on my team. We actually took notes to feed back to product management. It's not my narrative. I'm relating actual events to you.

The companies I were talking to had 10-11 figures technology budgets, but would use CentOS to save 6 figured so they could spend 7 figures on a completely proprietary technology elsewhere.

If Red Hat is not attractive you, then leach off another companies technology.

Try to understand what was said. No one cares about your sales pitch and how certain you are that everyone needs RHEL.

Try to listen to what I am telling you. I am trying to tell you what people actually told me about their use of CentOS directly to my face or to people on my team. We actually took notes to feed back to product management. It's not my narrative. I'm relating actual events to you.

If you don't need RHEL, stop using CentOS. They only reason you use CentOS is because you want the benefits of RHEL without paying anything or contributing. Period.

Good job extrapolating some case that fitted your narrative to everyone. Not every company has the same requirements. Most people would be perfectly fine running a purely community driven distro.

Try to listen to what I am telling you. I am trying to tell you what people actually told me about their use of CentOS directly to my face or to people on my team. We actually took notes to feed back to product management. It's not my narrative. I'm relating actual events to you.

Also, community driven my ass. Most of the people doing real work on CentOS work for Red Hat. Most people in a "community" sit around and wait for others to do things. The CentOS community is probably the worst of all.

I just work for a redhat partner, we do a lot of stuff and I don't care about what redhat offers. I'm not a fan of having to think about subscriptions when engineering a system. If it was up to me I would not use RHEL at all. i also don't recommend or push it on to the customers I work with.

So stop using RHEL and CentOS. I would prefer you told all your customers to go use Debian or Slackware or anything else. Literally anything else. You already demonstrated that you don't actually know what Red Hat does, you don't really know about RHEL... what exactly DO you know about?

How is someone using a free copy of free software taking something away from the open source ecosystem?

Free software is not free, someone is always spending time and effort in maintaining and fixing it. If you don't give back, then you are taking something away from the ecosystem. If you don't see that then you haven't really understood this market.

Please try not to forget that RHEL is basically the same as all this free stuff with a Redhat logo tagged on so they can sell it as a product.

Spoken like someone who doesn't contribute to the open source ecosystem, so they try to peg all companies in the ecosystem as freeloaders as well. Yawn. I've heard that all before.

Holy shit. For the first time I really thing that you will just fit right in with IBM

I left Red Hat already which is why I can call out people like you who literally know nothing but your own poorly-educated opinion, and not give a shit what you think in return.

And I am happy I left because now I no longer need to work with people like you.

Please feel free to respond. I won't. The best part of my day is knowing I no longer have to take people like you seriously.

[ZeroPointEnergy]

I left Red Hat already which is why I can call out people like you who literally know nothing but your own poorly-educated opinion, and not give a shit what you think in return.

Great news. Unfortunately they have many more idiot sales just like you still working there.

If someone is leeching off open source it's people like you who add no value and take away good money that could pay an actual developer.

[Hugh]

If you don't need RHEL, stop using CentOS. They only reason you use CentOS is because you want the benefits of RHEL without paying anything or contributing. Period.

You sound bitter and burnt out.

Everyone using open source contributes to it in some way.

• Some develop and contribute to the community that way. I contribute code and fixes to a critical subsystem within RHEL, without pay.
• Some create documentation.
• Some contribute bug reports. Yes, this is valuable. (As a developer, I certainly value it.)
• Some pay employees who do some of the above.
• Some pay the distro creators (like Red Hat).
• Some do none of these but still grow the ecosystem. This is what you miss. I've heard Bob Young say this (early head of Red Hat).

Even Microsoft seemed to understand this last case: market share, even unpaid, is very important.

Red Hat seems to understand this, even if you don't.

I left Red Hat already which is why I can call out people like you who literally know nothing but your own poorly-educated opinion, and not give a shit what you think in return.

I would hope that RH would correct you if you were still there.

[Vistaus]

A super solid desktop

...thanks to GNOME and Canonical, is what you wanted to say.

[Vistaus]

I left Red Hat already which is why I can call out people like you who literally know nothing but your own poorly-educated opinion, and not give a shit what you think in return.

And I am happy I left because now I no longer need to work with people like you.

Please feel free to respond. I won't. The best part of my day is knowing I no longer have to take people like you seriously.

With your attitude, I can see why Red Hat asked you to leave...