Apalling

Story: Installing and Configuring CentOSTotal Replies: 9
Author Content
djohnston

Oct 19, 2013
3:29 AM EDT
Quoting:Believe it or not Red Hat has found a way to basically charge for the use of what is supposed to be a free Operating System.


Apalling! What an outrage! I am shocked that the RHEL sales force did not fully explain the concept of "free", as in speech.

Well, he did say that his "best friend in the whole wide world" is Google. With "friends" like Google ...

the_doctor

Oct 19, 2013
1:58 PM EDT
An interesting point, djohnston.

Where can you get a legitimate copy of RHEL for free (as in money)?

I know they do offer a 30-day trial version if you sign up at their website:

http://www.redhat.com/products/enterprise-linux/server/downl...

Hmmm... I'm not sure. Does anyone know?

jdixon

Oct 19, 2013
5:20 PM EDT
> Where can you get a legitimate copy of RHEL for free (as in money)?

The binaries? I don't believe you can without a Red Hat login ID.

See https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6-Beta/html/Installation_Guide/ch-Obtaining_Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux.html for the details. You used to be able to download them from their ftp site, but I don't believe you can any more.

The source is another matter: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/

I'm sure the iso's are available via the torrent sites, of course. And as long as you don't need support, I doubt Red Hat cares.

I don't support Linux for a living, so I haven't even looked at Red Hat since they dropped the consumer market.

Oh, and speaking of downloading Linux. I've made two attempts to post Slackware news to the queue, but neither has made it. I have no idea why. But the important detail is that Slackware 14.1 has reached RC1. You CAN download Slackware iso's for free.
kikinovak

Oct 19, 2013
6:34 PM EDT
I do use Red Hat Enterprise Linux for a few clients who have to run software certified for the platform. You have to have a subscription to download the installation ISOs and to access to updates via RHN (Red Hat Network).

(On all other machines I use Slackware.)
caitlyn

Oct 20, 2013
10:27 AM EDT
Quoting:I do use Red Hat Enterprise Linux for a few clients who have to run software certified for the platform. You have to have a subscription to download the installation ISOs and to access to updates via RHN (Red Hat Network).
This is correct. What you are paying for is service and support, not the code.
Quoting:The source is another matter: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/
Yep, the code is free as in freedom. That does not have to equate to free as in no cost.

The author's bio:
Quoting:John has been in the IT profession for over 20 years along with being certified in both Comptia Security + (2008 edition) and a MCP (Microsoft Certified Professional) on Both Windows XP & Server 2003 Administration, He currently works as an Windows System Administrator for Northrop Grumman in the Greater Los Angeles Area in the US and has been an avid fan and follower of Windows Home Server since Mid 2009 with Version 1
He admits to being not "Linux literate" in the article and he clearly does not understand the FOSS concept.
gus3

Oct 20, 2013
11:40 AM EDT
Paying for service and support on Free(-ly modifiable) code...

But if someone modifies the code, does that invalidate their support contract?

(I've always wondered about this, and now's my chance to ask.)
jdixon

Oct 20, 2013
12:37 PM EDT
> Does language precede thought, or does thought precede language?

Caitlyn has worked with Red Hat, so she may know off the top of her head. I'd either have to read the support contract or ask Red Hat. And given most contracts, I still might have to ask a lawyer for their opinion.

However, my guess would be that it voids the contract only on the modified code, and the rest of the code is still supported. Of course, if you modify the kernel, that becomes problematic.
caitlyn

Oct 20, 2013
12:43 PM EDT
Quoting:But if someone modifies the code, does that invalidate their support contract?
Red Hat, officially, will not support the modified package or anything it directly impacts. The remained of the OS should still be supported. Unofficially, Red Hat does a lot of things for their large enterprise customers that are not by the book.
Bob_Robertson

Oct 21, 2013
9:17 AM EDT
> Unofficially, Red Hat does a lot of things for their large enterprise customers that are not by the book.

Red Hat understands that it's the large enterprise customers that write that book.

IBM did the same thing. Every mainframe was at its heart a custom system, tailored to fit the specific needs of the customer. Teams of systems programmers lovingly hand-optimizing code over the course of years, and IBM right there to support, advise, train, but all for a price.

Progress is not made by satisfied people.
kenholmz

Nov 07, 2013
7:51 PM EDT
Although everyone has reasonably moved on, no doubt, I still come back to the statement that was not only ill considered, but was arrogant as well. Oracle was founded in 1977. Red Hat was founded in 1993. Oracle was a well established company in 1993. Linux was not even on Oracle's radar in 1993 (and likely for several more years). Red Hat, the company, had Linux as its core from the beginning, and they have built on that core to offer not only a distribution, but a considerable package. Oracle apparently added Linux to its other products and services in 2007.

Red Hat has every reason to product its brand, even as it allows Oracle to distribute the base distribution under its own brand (or CentOS or anyone else).

I attempted to respond to Mr. Keller but Disqus and I are at an impasse. I have written here so I'll just let be now.

It's as shame that one ignorant remark was made in an otherwise good how-to.

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!