ie8 fix
Click Here

Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

Red Hat turns on Oracle and other Red Hat Linux clone-makers

By | March 16, 2011, 11:02am PDT

Summary: No more Mr. Nice Linux, Red Hat is making life harder for its imitators: CentOS and Oracle.

Red Hat has decided it’s no going to be Mr. Nice Linux anymore for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) clone makers such as Oracle and CentOS . Sure, in open-source, you share the code. That’s rule one. But, that doesn’t mean you need to make it easy for your rivals.

What Red Hat has done, for the last several months, is release its version of the Linux kernel with all its own patches incorporated into the RHEL code. Before that, pre-RHEL6, which was released in November 2010, Red Hat released the vanilla Linux code with its improvements and fixes in separate patches. This method made it very easy for an Oracle or another Linux distributor to see exactly what Red Had had done and thus made it easy for them to pick and choose which patches they’d adopt. Now, it’s much harder both to do this and to copycat RHEL.

As Joe Brockmeier aptly put it, “It’s sort of like asking someone for a recipe for the family’s chocolate chip cookies, and getting cookie batter instead.” Sure you can tease out what the ingredients are, but it’s not easy.

That was by design. Bryan Stevens, Red Hat’s CTO and VP of worldwide engineering, explained in his blog,

Our competitors in the Enterprise Linux market have changed their commercial approach from building and competing on their own customized Linux distributions, to one where they directly approach our customers offering to support RHEL.

Frankly, our response is to compete. Essential knowledge that our customers have relied on to support their RHEL environments will increasingly only be available under subscription. The itemization of kernel patches that correlate with articles in our knowledge base is no longer available to our competitors, but rather only to our customers who have recognized the value of RHEL and have thus indirectly funded Red Hat’s contributions to open source that will advance their business now and in the future.

I asked Stevens to expand on this, but he wouldn’t comment. Other sources at Red Hat told me what I had already supposed to be the truth. This isn’t aimed so much at Red Hat’s main server Linux rival, Novell, or RHEL clone makers such as CentOS or the now dormant White Box Enterprise Linux. No, the real target is Oracle.

Oracle, you see, has made no bones about both wanting to replace RHEL with its own RHEL copycat Linux distribution, Oracle Linux.

Larry Ellison, Oracle’s CEO and God-King, has claimed “We [Oracle] spend a lot of time finding and fixing bugs in Red Hat Linux, and we have no problem with that-we do that with lots of operating systems. But sometimes when we fix a Red Hat Linux bug, Red Hat can take a very long time before making the fix. We’d fix the bug for our customers, and we’d send the bug off to Red Hat for them to fix, and sometimes the fix would be made very quickly but sometimes not.”

I’ve never seen any proof of this. What I have seen, as has Red Hat, is that Oracle is going out of its way both to woo Red Hat customers away with its own house-brand of RHEL, Oracle Linux.

Page 2: [Red Hat's real target: Oracle] »

Topics

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system

Disclosure

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols is a freelance writer. He does not own stocks or other investments in any technology company.

Biography

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge, PC operating system; 300bps was a fast Internet connection; WordStar was the state of the art word processor; and we liked it!

His work has been published in everything from highly technical publications (IEEE Computer, ACM NetWorker, Byte) to business publications (eWEEK, InformationWeek, ZDNet) to popular technology (Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, PC World) to the mainstream press (Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, BusinessWeek).

57
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Red Hat turns on Oracle and other Red Hat Linux clone-makers
happyharry_z 11th Apr 2011
@Loverock Davidson I don't disagree (same problem with UNIX forking), but I still don't think you've ever even installed Linux...
Perhaps it's not part of this post, but I'm curious what Oracle is planning to do once they lure all those customers away from RedHat. Clearly their model has a bit of a flaw once that goal materializes.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@MvdL If Oracle is true to from, they'll up their prices, while reducing services and support..

Truth in advertising: I have No fondness for Oracle.

Steven
@sjvn@... CentOS developers have said in their blogs that they don't have a problem with this and don't consider it hostile (i.e. "turn[ing] on [them]). Why are you stirring up trouble?
0 Votes
+ -
They will uppercase everything
RelaxWalk 16th Mar 2011
@MvdL In addition to SJVN, the entire OS will switch to UPPERCASE only. Words will be re-encoded in 7 bits so the OS could be compatible with Oracle database products.
0 Votes
+ -
They will uppercase everything
RelaxWalk 16th Mar 2011
@MvdL In addition to SJVN, Oracle will UPPERCASE everything in their OS. All words will be re-encoded in 7 bits to make the OS compatible with Oracle database products.
-1 Votes
+ -
Sounds like now linux is getting copy protection and anti-pirate mechanisms. I remember this other company that was getting blasted for doing the same thing from linux users. Oh how the tables have turned. But still, with all this inner subculture fighting between linux companies I can't use it or recommend it until all the issues are resolved. You never know where a linux company will be in 6 months.
0 Votes
+ -
Well said
Robert Hahn Updated - 16th Mar 2011
@Loverock Davidson To be safe, everyone should buy and install Microsoft Windows®.
@Loverock Davidson

Go to kernel.org and download your copy of un-copy-protected linux, devoid of any "anti-pirate mechanisms" whatever they are.
@a238324
LD I trolling, nothing new.
0 Votes
+ -
Those evil communists will be slipping code into the obfuscated binaries and eves dropping on Uncle Sam, gathering up all our industrial and state secrets.

Get windows 7, you know it makes sense. Just slip you feet into a bowl of it and your athletes foot will be history - mine was.
0 Votes
+ -
Message deleted
0 Votes
+ -
@Loverock Davidson So, you can't tell the difference between bundling patches and DRM? Boy, you really are as clueless as everyone says.
@anothercanuck
He also can't tell the difference between free speech and communism.
@Loverock Davidson I don't disagree (same problem with UNIX forking), but I still don't think you've ever even installed Linux...
0 Votes
+ -
I don't believe it. I mean SJVN
Will Farrell Updated - 16th Mar 2011
claims this doesn't happen with Linux and open source, that the beauty of it is that everone's 1 big happy family sharing everything!

Except for kernels, code, money...
@Will Farrell
What are you talking about, claim what?
0 Votes
+ -
@choyongpil Isn't this exactly the indemnification situation many anti-open sauce proponents say doesn't happen with OSS yet here it is. Red Hat is angry that some one is using their open sauce modifications.. oh how the pot calls the kettle black.
Jbencivengo,

All Red Hat is doing is keeping Red Hat specific knowledge away from Oracle and a lesser degree Novell.
@Will Farrell
Dude: even the happiest of families will start lunging at each others throats once money is involved in the argument.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux: Being dicks on the internet and making Linux look bad since '03.
look, every time something is given away for free there are going to be people that take that free thing and rebrand it, maybe making it a bit better along the way. The BS here is doing that and making money off of it. If you take a distro and make some big changes and re sell it, fine, ubuntu does this to debian, mint does this with ubuntu and to a lesser extent peppermint does this with mint, and they're all free. If oracle were doing this and giving it away fine, but they are being greedy which isn't cool and makes people for open source look bad and allows trolls like LD and WF to start crap just to spam up a blog.
0 Votes
+ -
@KBot: If oracle were doing this and giving it away fine, but they are being greedy which isn't cool and makes people for open source look bad and allows trolls like LD and WF to start crap just to spam up a blog.

To my knowledge Oracle, like Red Hat, earns money on support.
0 Votes
+ -
@ye Yes, Oracle does make money supporting OEL. I run OEL5 on all my Oracle DB boxes since we migrated from Windows. There are several support tiers available from Oracle, but I pay $500/year per box. I don't know what RH charges for RHEL support.
@KBot Oracle doesn't charge to download Oracle Linux, RedHat won't let you download without a pricey support contract. Who's being evil?

In addition, all this baloney about "Red Hat's code" is bizarre. RedHat ships a distribution that relies on thousands of open source projects giving Red Hat access to their source. Now Red Hat wants to take its additions, which are mainly the installer and some bug fixes, and make them more difficult to re-bundle? Hypocrisy at its finest.
0 Votes
+ -
@KBot Doesn't Oracle make money off Linux just like Red Hat..
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you Red Hat
iPad-awan 16th Mar 2011
for showing us that enterprise linux is just a big of a failure as desktop linux
@iPad-awan
Please do tell how Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a failure?
@iPad-awan
How is Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a failure?
0 Votes
+ -
Re-read what he wrote.
ye 16th Mar 2011
@choyongpil: for showing us that enterprise linux is just a big of a failure as desktop linux

Hint: I've highlighted the key word.
@choyongpil
Watch the mini mes
@iPad-awan
Microsoft Windows...giving hackers access to your personal information since NT!
Sorry, but where in the GPL does it say that a company must make it easy for others to copy and steal their work?

RedHat is complying with the GPL by releasing the code. No where does it say that they (or any other Linux distro) must make it easy so that others can find the changes so that they can install it in their distros.

If the competition doesn't have something like BeyondCompare ... then that is their problem.
0 Votes
+ -
Red Hat is taking a larger lead
Maarek 16th Mar 2011
@wackoae

I agree, by making it harder for their competition to use Red hat's changes for their code, people are seeing that these other version are taking longer to catch up to Red Hat. The result is that more people will drop their current distribution and purchase Red Hat's Enterprise.
@Maarek
I have to disagree to a point. While some may move to the genuine RHEL OS from a clone OS; I think many will not due to the cost involved (RHEL subscriptions aren't cheap). I have to wonder how many will just drop the Red Hat platform and move to a different distro, such as SuSE or ubuntu.
0 Votes
+ -
This is the beginning of the end
toxie 16th Mar 2011
The ideal behind Open Source was meritocracy and building on the shoulders of giants to produce the next innovation. That can't happen when corporations are hiding code from each other (and the world) just to sell more subscriptions.

I believe this signals the beginning of the end of the fully open model. Every Open Source startup today believes it can succeed by copying the "Red Hat Model". Now Red Hat is teaching them how to call themselves an Open Source company but behave like a proprietary one - and profit.

The vast majority of enterprise customers don't care about any if this - they'll just keep paying whoever can do the best job at the lowest price. This isn't the end of Open Source. But it is the end of the ideal that Red Hat was founded on in the first place.
@toxie You're right about the "standing on the shoulders of giants". About hiding code from each other and the world: I don't think that's what's going on here; instead I think the problem is that there are so many changes in each single new kernel (see for example http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_38-DriversArch , all that's in 10 weeks of development!) that a Linux distro for the enterprise market such as Red Hat has to hire lots of kernel experts so they can make expert value judgements:

Such as "we need to use this patch A so that databases are faster, that one B to improve security, but that breaks the XYZ123 joystick driver patch C but we'll assume that enterprise systems don't need a joystick anyway so we'll delete XYZ123 in favour of B"

All other corporations and the rest of the world can still see patches A, B, C (... the other 9145 patches), but they now have to figure out *for themselves* which ones are more relevant for the tasks they prioritize on (e.g. desktop, server, embedded etc.). This optimizing of the "Red Hat" kernel is what I think Red Hat sees as their own "secret sauce" value-added service that they demand to be paid for.

Oracle does a lot of kernel development, that should not be ignored, but Red Hat many times that still, and they all want to make a living doing that.

But you can always download the "vanilla" kernel from www.kernel.org and tweak and compile it yourself, it takes a bit of learning but is not very difficult as Loverock Davidson can attest because he does it a lot apparently wink
0 Votes
+ -
Naah...
dontfear 16th Mar 2011
@toxie You're right about the "standing on the shoulders of giants". About hiding code from each other and the world: I don't think that's what's going on here; instead I think the problem is that there are so many changes in each single new kernel (see for example http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_38-DriversArch , all that's in 10 weeks of development!) that a Linux distro for the enterprise market such as Red Hat has to hire lots of kernel experts so they can make expert value judgements:

Such as "we need to use this patch A so that databases are faster, that one B to improve security, but that breaks the XYZ123 joystick driver patch C but we'll assume that enterprise systems don't need a joystick anyway so we'll delete XYZ123 in favour of B"

All other corporations and the rest of the world can still see patches A, B, C (... the other 9145 patches), but they now have to figure out *for themselves* which ones are more relevant for the tasks they prioritize on (e.g. desktop, server, embedded etc.). This optimizing of the "Red Hat" kernel is what I think Red Hat sees as their own "secret sauce" value-added service that they demand to be paid for.

Oracle does a lot of kernel development, that should not be ignored, but Red Hat many times that still, and they all want to make a living doing that.

But you can always download the "vanilla" kernel from www.kernel.org and tweak and compile it yourself, it takes a bit of learning but is not very difficult as Loverock Davidson can attest because he does it a lot apparently wink
0 Votes
+ -
Its about certification
andrewjg 16th Mar 2011
Red Hat is the only Linux certified to run many Enterprise applications. Oracle wants to be the vendor the provides the whole solution. So they take Red Hat as is in order to ensure that any application certified to run Red Hat is certified to run their Linux.

As soon as most applications are certified against Oracle Linux they will develop and support their own Linux. But for now Oracle Linux has to be === to Red Hat Linux.
Redhat has done a lot for the open source community and asked for very little in return. The spirit of open source is give and take, and Redhat has done a lot of giving. Oracle, on the other hand, has done little to nothing for open source, to this point. I agree with Steven, I have not seen any of these supposed bug fixes from Oracle.

It was more work for Redhat to distribute their patches/changes separately, but they were happy to do it as a service to open source community. Oracle, as a for profit entity, has been taking advantage of Redhat's generosity with the expressed intent of taking customers away from Redhat.

I see nothing wrong with Redhat's new policy.
0 Votes
+ -
Open Source is Libre
Chaav 16th Mar 2011
If Oracle is been taking advantage of others code, it means Red Hat, in this case, is not been competitive in terms of customer retention and services (For more greater they could sound) This is Pure Competition.
I have this doubt on Redhat from the begining, i.e. way back to 1995 when I installed Slackware as the server for Internet for one of the universities and Windows 95 as clients. The issue I had was RPM. RPM is greatest but the license that Redhad sown together with its in those days was little bit way out I felt. I really never liked their products. I am happy with Ubuntu right now in addition to Slackware and I think I will be like that. And if I feel I need some challenge I would go Kernel.org and compile my own distro. Thank you Redhat. Of course I also never really liked the way Oracle operates but that is commercial entity publicly and it is their business.
0 Votes
+ -
Totally Agree
Chaav 16th Mar 2011
And there's more about their business here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXBtbamSCTA

...Again, it's all about being or not being competitive.
When UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Harold Macmillan announced the introduction of Premium Bonds in his budget on April 17th 1956, first reactions were unfavourable. The church condemned the proposed draw and opposition chancellor Harold Wilson dubbed it a "squalid raffle" that would lead to "national demoralisation". But 1950s Britain was ready for a bit of luck. After the hardships endured in World War II, many saw the opportunity to invest in the chance to win dividends of up to ?1,000 in the monthly prize draw as a welcome distraction from the daily grind.

Premium Bond
0 Votes
+ -
LOL
nomoreds 16th Mar 2011
All of these "people" are canabals anyways!
Their ugly OS should go the way of the Zune!




source:
fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
0 Votes
+ -
Don't use Red Hat?
cabdriverjim 16th Mar 2011
I saw this coming the very instant Fedora was created and I switched to Debian and then Ubuntu. I have never once regretted that decision. Debian is a much better designed system. I mean, its a designed system at all. RHEL is infinite monkeys banging on typewriters sometimes producing a combination of letters that perform a useful behavior. Their kernel engineers seemed to be very good but it sounds like that's being neutered now.
@cabdriverjim If you are going to be using linux, and say that you are using linux, you should know what you are using and how it works. Welcome to Open Source 101.

The difference between Ubuntu/debian/RHEL/Mint/slackware/SUSE/etc, is really the versions and choices of packages they bundle, the way they bundle the packages (rpm/deb/etc), and the UI that sits on top of them. They share a large portion of the codebase. Considering Linux is only referring to the kernel, they all pull from the same kernel tree. Red Hat may include some kernel patches that are not in the upstream tree, but many distributions do this, nothing new here.

The infinite monkeys comment is insulting to the open source community. Try again if you are trying to attack Red Hat.

And this change has no effect on the kernel engineering of Red Hat. They are still using the same git/svn/cvs tree they've always used. This only effects off-shoot distributions that copy RHEL. Show me how their kernel engineers are being neutered?
0 Votes
+ -
@matt10 I know very well what I'm talking about. I'm an open source developer myself and Red Hat is shipping my code. The code THEY write is awful. Their shell scripts are kindergarten. I mean to be insulting to Red Hat and not the developers of the great applications Red Hat is insulting by acting the way they do.

Also, there is a HUGE difference between RHEL and Debian that goes WAY beyond just packaging code and vomiting it out with a price tag.

edit 2: I thought this statement deserved some elaboration and this touches on many of the important points I'd bring up myself: http://toykeeper.net/soapbox/debian-redhat/

But thanks for trying...

edit 1: My point is, Red Hat is shooting one foot trying to save the other. No, they aren't violating licenses and they do have business justification but this is how it starts. They take away one "freedom" (for lack of a better term) then another, then another and eventually there's nothing left. By making it harder for their competitors they make it harder for potential (and sometimes present) customers.
0 Votes
+ -
Oracle already have a very good OS
colinmeister 17th Mar 2011
It's called Solaris, and is strong and dependable. Why don't they just concentrate on that?
0 Votes
+ -
What'll happen to the clones?
NetAdmin1178 17th Mar 2011
Personally, I could care less about Oracle - I actually praise Red Hat for doing this as far as Oracle is concerned, as I can't stand Oracle's anti-competetive business practices. In the end, Oracle will probably throw some more programmers at the source code, and stay on top of things though; but it'll be the clone OSes like CentOS that gets hurt, they don't have the resources to just put towards it. I have to wonder if these downstream OSes are heading toward their deaths with this move by Red Hat.

I know I'm personally not looking forward to it. We use CentOS on some of our servers as the company is too cheap to pay for RHEL subscriptions (and to be honest, they are pricey). I've pushed for subscriptions every year since taking the position of supporting them, and gotten shot down every year. Perhaps I will need to begin testing on other distros as a replacement; we can't stay on an unsupported platform.
0 Votes
+ -
RedHat & Oracle must ending their "strategic" partnership and like husband & wife, they squabble before the divorce.
Like any divorce, it is the children that get hurt the most and we the customers are going get hurt the most from this squabble.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix