Oracle Linux adopters labelled 'idiots'

Oracle Linux adopters labelled 'idiots'

Summary: Oracle Linux adopters labelled "idiots"


One of the first converts to Oracle's support for Linux has revealed the public backlash it has endured since their decision to drop Red Hat.

Melbourne company Opes Prime Stockbroking told ZDNet Australia that in the weeks following its announcement to adopt Oracle Linux, upset Linux enthusiasts phoned, e-mailed and wrote about the company online to complain at the decision.

"People called us out of the blue to tell us we were idiots," said Opes executive director Anthony Blumberg.

He also fielded a call from an unhappy Red Hat Australia and New Zealand managing director Max McLaren.

"I said, this is probably the first call I've had from Red Hat since we've been a customer," Blumberg said.

Opes received little communication from the vendor during their contract, he said, and was not about to change its stance.

Meanwhile, McLaren told ZDNet Australia Opes had acquired Red Hat support subscriptions with the purchase of two servers from channel partner Dell. The hardware vendor then was responsible for providing Red Hat support to Opes.

Nevertheless McLaren said he was "not at all" disappointed with Dell.

"It was difficult for us to prove our worth to the customer," he said. "They hadn't complained to us about anything being wrong."

Linux enthusiasts also slammed the company on bulletin board systems across the world. Most believed the Oracle offering to be inferior to Red Hat's, a vendor that has been at the forefront of Linux's gaining popularity.

However, the stockbroker is happy with the support Oracle provided. Opes has a three-year contract for Linux support, and is using Oracle Enterprise Linux, modelled on Red Hat 4.

Linux runs Opes' server infrastructure which consists: four for production, two for staging, one for development and another for disaster recovery.

Opes' use of Oracle's application server and database for an online retail system project was a key consideration in forgoing the third-party vendor support the Red Hat operating system offers.

"We only use Oracle at the moment. So long as Oracle support what we do, we're happy," said Stuart Coggins, head of IT at Opes. "The whole Red Hat offering is everything to everyone but we don't really need that."

Another benefit was to have only one support team.

"I've been doing this for a long time, and there can be a lot of finger pointing between support teams," said Coggins. "Now we have the same support group the whole way through."

Opes is one of the few known Oracle Linux customers in Australia.

Topics: Open Source, Linux, Oracle

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • True Colours

    Linux users really showing their true colours here, they cannot take commercial reality into their stride and allow companies to take their own road to success. They obviously believe their is only their way or the the hate way. Reminds me of a religious discussion which results in people losing lives
  • The windows man is back

    John, as a well know brainwashed windows 'user' and 'linux and opensource' hater in all its forms, your comments here are very predictable.
  • RedHat and Oracle

    Oracle will one day purchase RedHat and I shall read about it on ZDNet. Oracle has only moved the first piece on the chess board.
  • They're not idiots.....

    They are complete morons and they should return their computers to the store. In fact they should not be allowed to touch a computer or go around one ever again. Do you know why? Because Oracle has a hard enough time supporting their flagship product(remember the Database?) in a reasonable fashion which make sense to a normal human being highly trained and skilled in I.T.. And now Oracle is the OS vendor too? The decision to change shows a serious lack of experience, especially with Oracle products. What a lousy call. In fact it reeks of being a PR stunt. I would not be surprised to hear if they were getting paid by Oracle to make the change.
  • Its Linux who has failed,

    its a sad indication of the status of the Linux/FOSS community, when its now not if you are a "windows" or Linux user, but its what flavor of Linux you use, and if you are not in the right "camp" you are the enemy.

    why on earth would anyone want to consider using linux for/in their business.

    if it not oricle Vs Red hat, its Novell, but the end result is the same, the self destruction of the Linux/Foss movement.

    its very sad, when Linux was once an operating system/suite with some potential, now its just seperate factions of fanboys, who will ensure the destruction of the (once strong and unitied) FOSS movement.

    so keep going and show the world who the real morons are. .

    you know who the winners of this infighting will be, it will be MS, Windows and Microsofts products and services.

    linux now is more like a street gang, or mafia, you'll be pushing for 'protection money' next..
  • FUD Alert!

    OK, so let me get this straight. These guys bought two servers from Dell with RHEL on them, which means that *Dell* owns the sales and support relationship, and somehow Red Hat has dropped the ball? Please.

    Oracle has blown its cred (again) with the BS claims that they "displaced" Red Hat at Yahoo. Yahoo, not Red Hat, blew that claim out of the water. Now Oracle is claiming a "big win" with a whopping two servers. Yeah, Larry, whatever. Wow, you really pwned Red Hat today, eh?
  • Very simple reason for this

    Anyone who wants to see an end to this sort of religious fanaticism needs to figure out a way to also bring an end to the FSF.

    There is a very old saying, "Strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter."

    Richard Stallman is the single source of this kind of behaviour; he is who has inspired Linux users to behave this way. If there was a way to abolish the FSF, that would get rid of vitriolic cultishness among Linux users. That organisation is the source of the problem.
  • Don't care

    Honestly, I think most people in the Linux community doesn't really care.
  • Not all Linux users are the same

    Some us are more than able to understand commercial reality.

    Some of us even have jobs supporting Linux in a commercial environment.

    I also think there are alot of unrealistic Linux users out there, but they dont have a monopoly. There are more unrealistic windows users, even if that is only due to more people using windows.
  • Does it matter as long as it isn't windows?

    Linux is Linux all the way around. If a customer wants one throat to choke and are happy then who are we to say no? Oracle RAC is an extremely complex configuration that integrates with the OS(sysctl.conf)- and because of that overlay having Oracle support it's own OS is one less tech to talk to when your server is down. Oracle is it's own entity in most cases and stands alone. It needs to be a rock. Whether RedHat does a better job at supporting Oracle or Oracle does a better job at supporting a RedHat clone is the difference here. It's easier for Oracle to cater to an open OS, than RedHat catering to a closed database. But if Oracle slips up, and ticks people off- RedHat will reclaim those clients with ease. It's a free market folks. This is what market evolution is all about- and the customer wins.
  • Intention of Oracle

    Everyone knows the main intention of Oracle is destroy Red Hat. Oracle doesn't care their products run on Linux or Windows. They just want to sell. How much did they contribute to open source world? But Red Hat has done many to Linux and open source products. If the main supporter of Linux is gone, do you think Oracle will defend Linux any more? This is just the revenge of Larry Ellison to Red Hat. I think it is immoral what Oracle is doing!
  • Gang warfare

    But the problem is now you have gangs of Linux people tied to their RH Colours or SUSE colours or their Debian or Unbuntu colours, very quickly the "open community" has forgotten what is good about what they can achieve and fallen into an internal turf war, where only MS and the like can win.

    If you split into many camps from one collective resource you cannot achieve the sam impact
  • Linux zealots

    Irrespective of your views on the company's actions, what the heck is with calling them and insulting them?

    As an open source user and developer I'm becoming increasingly unhappy with that section of the community. They're usually unproductive, they take OSS & free software like a religion (especially the "unthinking belief" bit), and they're painful to see, deal with, or be around.

    Some of these people are giving the whole community a bad name, and I wish they'd take their "advocacy" somewhere else and let us get on with getting things done and having fun doing it. Calling and insulting people, threatening them, harasssing journalists, and the other apalling behaviour of these idiots is unacceptable and totally unhelpful. Go become soccer hooligans instead, you'll clearly be good at that.
  • Just a small group

    The worst thing is that the true idiots you refer to are just a small group of incredibly badly behaved religious zealots within a community that's usually fairly rational and decent.

    Unfortunately, from the outside it's very hard to see that, because the morons are extremely loud and disruptive, while everyone else is just trying to get things done.

    You're quite right, however, in that they're driving people away from OSS. Not just users, either, but contributors and developers who just can't face the insane zealots anymore. Eventually they'll have very little to express their zealotry about if it keeps on getting worse at this rate. They certainly don't help actually develop anything useful.
  • Religion

    You hit the nail on the head with religion.

    Like in religious discussions, a small group of insane zealots make the whole community look like dangerous crackpots, while the enormous majority are actually just quietly going about their business.

    Also like in religious discussions, it ends up being the zealots that matter. As an OSS user and developer I find this extremely depressing, because there's nothing I can do to stop these idiots.
  • Oracle Support

    As someone who actually has to use Oracle support regularly for their middleware, and infrastructure products, I pity any admin who has to deal with them regularly.

    Their products are poorly QA'd and their support staff doesnt understand how they work together. They're documentation is generally out of date or incomplete.

    Oracle has proven to me countless times that they are far more concerned with getting new "features" out the door than whether or not they work. We have a full blown Oracle 10g environment including their ripped off version of Apache (OHS), webcache, OC4j, portal, OID, DB and SSO servers running in an HA production environment as well as staging and development environments... frankly it gives me nothing but headaches and I doubt their linux support is any better.

    just my 2cents...
  • Oracle's contributions to open source

    This post shows that you aren't as knowledgeable as you would have one believe. Oracle has made a lot of contributions to the open source community. They recently open sourced their TopLink persistence layer and all of their "ADF Faces" code.
  • I love my four basic freedoms

    "Anyone who wants to see an end to this sort of religious fanaticism needs to figure out a way to also bring an end to the FSF."

    Errr, do you want me to stop using GNU software? I mean, personally? I'm hardly a 'fanatic' nor a 'zealot'.

    Why can't I enjoy these four freedoms:

    * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

    * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

    * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

    * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

    What have I ever done to you? I'm not harming anyone by using GNU software, not even myself. These four basic freedoms aren't horrible or antisocial! Freedoms 2 and 3 actually sound quite altruistic to me!

    "If there was a way to abolish the FSF, that would get rid of vitriolic cultishness among Linux users. That organisation is the source of the problem."

    Why do you want to 'abolish' the Free Software Foundation? Would you abolish a sports team because some of its supporters are anti-social?

    If you don't like the idea of these four basic freedoms (and of course the GPL (whichever version)) then you don't have to use GNU or GPL'ed software. No one forces you to use this software.

    Your real issue is with irrational tribalism, not with Stallman, nor with the Free Software Foundation.
  • The 4th "freedom" is really an obligation.

    The 4th "freedom" is really an obligation.

    You are obligated to share the changes you've made.

    A philosophy built on a lie is sad.
  • no obligation

    There is no obligation to share your modifications.
    You can modify a progrom to suit you and be happy with your modified code just for yourself.

    I think your are confused with the way the GPL work, wich is only one flawor of free software license and require you to keep your modifications free ONLY if you share them (but doesn't require that you share your modifications).