They were bought by IBM a few years back, but even aside from that they’re a corporation and they care about making money above all else.

It looks like Red Hat is doing its damnedest to consolidate as much power for themselves within the Linux ecosystem.

I don’t think the incessant Fedora shilling is unrelated.

It seems like there isn’t much criticism of the company or their tactics, and I’m curious if any of you think that should change.

  • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I don’t see the problem with that. Red Hat is bankrolled by IBM. I don’t have any qualms about them facing competition, even underhanded competition which I don’t think this is. Contributing to open source doesn’t and shouldn’t guarantee financial compensation, customers, whatever.

    • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      So, you’re okay with one company taking another company’s work, contributing nothing to it themselves, then hiring company A’s employees, and finally taking company A’s customers? Not even Oracle was slimy enough to do that.

      IBM does not bank roll Red Hat. Red Hat acts and reports independently of IBM.

        • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Right, I think you’re basically saying what I think most of us would agree with. Don’t just copy the homework and poach customers. You can copy the homework and add your own value to it and earn customers. Bonus points for adding that value add back into the community like Alma does with their HPC work.

        • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Buddy, I know IBM owns them. I also know that Red Hat is basically the only thing making IBM money. Look at the financials a little more closely.

          I guess you consider the parts of open source that are contributed to be owned by the contributors?

          What would that have to do with anything? That’s not at all what I’m saying. I’m against companies that take an open source project to profit off of it without making any contributions to the community. CIQ and Canonical to a lesser extent. I have no issues with people like Red Hat, SUSE, Alma, etc…