Spyke

How SUSE Is Replacing Red Hat as the Linux and Open Source Enterprise Standard-Bearer

It’s become clear to many that Red Hat’s recent missteps with CentOS and the availability of RHEL source code indicate that it’s fallen from its respected place as “the open organization.” SUSE seems to be poised to benefit from Red Hat’s errors. We connect the dots.

How SUSE Is Replacing Red Hat as the Linux and Open Source Enterprise Standard-Bearerhttps://fossforce.com/2024/07/how-suse-is-replacing-red-hat-as-the-linux-and-open-source-enterprise-standard-bearer/Open linkView original on lemmy.ml
lemmy.world

Also SUSE: OpenSUSE needs to change their name because we say so

88
Kusimulkkureply
lemm.ee

There's always been the risk of confusion and openSUSE project seemed to have understood that SUSE could disallow the name at any moment. A name change does make sense for both. Especially now that even Leap might be distancing itself from SLE and whatnot.

36
Boxscapereply
lemmy.sdf.org

A name change does make sense for both. Especially now that even Leap might be distancing itself from SLE and whatnot.

Agreed, but GeekOS or whatever it was they had on that oSC slide ... Cheesus, they can do better than that.

Yeah, I get the mascot's name is Geeko, so maybe that is where they're getting GeekOS. But I think I read that the mascot has to go together with the name anyway.

12

Cheesus, they can do better than that

On recent performance, no they can't. I mean, they had the chance to use Driftwood and went with Slowroll.

14
fr0greply
piefed.social

There is no "current proposal" at this point.

2
pmkreply
lemmy.sdf.org

What about the proposal to just drop the name openSUSE with no replacement? And let each distro just be called Tumbleweed, Leap, Aeon, etc.

4
fr0greply
piefed.social

That could be a branding strategy, I guess, but the community project behind it will still need a name of some kind obviously. Unless they only want to show up at conferences/have a website url etc as "the project whose name shall not be mentioned".

7

There’s always been the risk of confusion

A name change does make sense for both

Then make SUSE become ClosedSUSE. It couldn't be easier.

9
Ananacereply
lemmy.ananace.dev

To be fair, OpenSUSE is the only project with a name like that, so it makes some sense that they'd want it changed.
There's no OpenRedHat, no OpenNovell, no OpenLinspire, etc.

8
lemmy.ca
  • OpenLinux

  • OpenUnix

  • OpenJDK

  • OpenWatcom

  • OpenWebOS

  • OpenVMS

  • OpenOffice

  • OpenTF, briefly.

I think OpenNovell was a thing too.

Thing is, 'Open-' was the prefix for a LOT of derivations about 20 years ago. I'm surprised you've never heard of any.

4
Ananacereply
lemmy.ananace.dev

Not at all what my point was. There's indeed plenty of Open-something (or Libre-something) projects under the sun, but no free/open spins of commercial projects named simply "Open<Trademarked company name / commercial offering>".

10
Dingalingreply
lemmy.ml

Definitely getting into pedantry now, sorry - but OpenSuse isn't strictly a free version of Suse. Like RHEL, there are some proprietary and commercially restricted software in Suse that doesn't reappear - verbatim - in OpenSuse.

5

And it's still entirely unrelated to my point, since SUSE will remain the trademark in question regardless of what's actually contained in OpenSUSE.

But yes, the free/open-source spins of things tend to have somewhat differing content compared to the commercial offering, usually for licensing or support reasons.
E.g. CentOS (when it still was a real thing)/AlmaLinux/etc supporting hardware that regular RHEL has dropped support for, while also not distributing core RedHat components like the subscription manager.

1
  • OpenLook
  • OpenMotif
  • OpenTransport on MacOS
  • SCO OpenServer
  • HP OpenMail
  • HP OpenView

You couldn’t throw a ball without hitting something branded as “Open” in that era.

1
lemmy.ca

Debian Stable.

It's always the answer to "what distro do I want to use when I care about stability and support-ability.

67

And, unlike CentOS, it can't be legally taken over by a corporate entity and changed into something entirely different. Debian is owned by Debian.

22
BCsvenreply
lemmy.ca

Maybe just not for corporate enterprise that wants phone and tech support? unless Debian has an Enterprise vendor? The PLM systems and other enterprise level software are certified on SUSE and RHEL, personally I haven't seen Debian listed anywhere.

8

I know at least of Freexian. But also, Ubuntu tends to cover the "Like Debian, but with enterprise support" niche.

11

In my homelab I have Debian VMs originally set up with Debian 6 in 2011 which were upgraded another 6 major releases to now Debian 12 over the years. When I think about Debian I always get a very warm cozy feeling.

6
Dingalingreply
lemmy.ml

How come? I'm using it on a laptop now, and on quite a few servers. It does both things pretty well now.

13
lemmy.ml

Because it's not updated often enough. Fedora is stable and up to date. Especially fedora atomic has a huge added value compared to debian.

20

Stable means different things in different contexts.

Debian being stable is like RHEL being stable. You're not jury talking about "doesn't crash", you're talking about APIS, behaviours, features and such being assured not to change.

That's not necessarily a good thing for a general purpose desktop, but for an enterprise workstation or server, yes.

So it's not so much that Debian would replace Fedora, it's the Debian would replace RHEL or CentOS. For a Fedora equivalent, there's Ubuntu and the like.

9

No because the caption under the first image says that SUSE's mascot is a 'gecko named Geeko' -- which cannot be farther from the truth, for it is a Chameleon named Geeko, that is the mascot of SUSE. Aye.

5
lemmy.world

This seems like a PR release and has zero proof or data in the article to back itself up.

46

Yep. I've seen nothing of the sort in the wild. Still Ubuntu and RHEL/Centos/Rocky/AMZ2 in the DC almost exclusively. The only things I've seen making a few inroads for practical applications are CachyOS and Clear Linux.

9
Dingalingreply
lemmy.ml

Mmm, maybe. "Joining the dots" also can be read as "taking a lot of bad feeling about X, and some good activity about Y and exaggerating both"

EL is pretty dominant still, although much of that seems to be Rocky/Alma rather than RHEL, but there's no way to get real numbers.

What I have seen is a lot of uptick in Debian and Ubuntu servers. We are moving away from EL towards Debian now because of what we perceive as ongoing instability in the EL ecosystem caused by Redhat. Our business depends on a reliable Linux OS so we're doing the maths.

1
lemmy.world

Strange, I've not really seen that. Where I work we've just transitioned to RHEL. And Rocky/Alma are nowhere near as popular as RHEL.

1

Interesting, thanks. Those I've spoken to moved from Centos to Rocky when that was killed, and I know of more that moved to Debian.

1

I actually use a decade old version of this to control a very expensive machine at work which is simultaneously surreal and validating of all the time I wasted spent learning linux from my teens onward

1
lemmy.zip

Rocky Linux and possibly Alamalinux are the future if openSUSE is anything to go by

22
sh.itjust.works

Rocky doesn't support the range or products needed to be "the" enterprise suite.

Heck you could even go Liberty Linux and have the same bins as Rock but support under SUSE, plus k8s, plus update management, plus security tools, plus k8s multi cluster, plus some ai thing to convince investors you are doing something with it.

Like, and all that's great, but honestly still not "enough" all under one roof for some enterprise costumers who are just looking to turn a problem into an expense.

6

I mean use Rocky all the time. Its good for me as a Dev and engineer. Its just not what I would spend a lot of time trying to convince management to spend money on for support and such.

2
lemmy.zip

OpenSUSE isn't enterprise friendly for a many reasons. It lacks the features of rhel like systems and the simplicity of Debian. It somehow manages to be more complex and confusing than both

-2

OpenSUSE isn’t enterprise friendly for a many reasons.

Isn't SLE targeted towards enterprise anyways?

It lacks the features of rhel like systems and the simplicity of Debian. It somehow manages to be more complex and confusing than both

I'm by no means an expert, but I don't recognize this. Would you be so kind to elaborate?

5
dinoreply
discuss.tchncs.de

wow you are anti opensuse bullshit is so tiresome, first time I am thinking about blocking someone on lemmy, congrats.

2

Chill out you don't need to take it personally. I just wouldn't use based on my experience

2

It has “become clear”. Has it?

Red Hat contributes more to Open Source than pretty much anybody. Certainly more than SUSE. That seems self-evident. If you want to debate, bring receipts.

As per the article, SUSE gets most of its money from SAP. SAP was founded by a bunch of ex-IBM people in Germany. They make IBM seem like cowboys.

The new SUSE CEO is ex Red Hat. Again, according the the article, the hope was that he would bring some of the Red Hat “open source magic” but SUSE has proven too “corporate”. Not exactly supporting their own argument there.

I am not close enough to the situation to know, but I doubt SUSE is taking over anything from Red Hat soon. RHEL is so far ahead that they have multiple distros trying to be “alternate” suppliers of RHEL by offering compatible distros. SUSE themselves are doing that now. If the world is looking to SUSE, why isn’t anybody trying to clone SUSE Enterprise?

SUSE is making some smart moves, given that they are the underdog. But let’s not confuse that with SUSE pulling ahead of Red Hat.

13
lemmy.ca

Thing is, the last time I saw under the hood while collaborating with suse, the packaging was a freak show and the culture was abrasive.

Rocky until PCLinuxOS gets a decent VM template.

4
lemmy.ca

I'm sure enterprises are just running for the door, just like they did when IBM bought Red Hat. Also Hashicorp. Enterprises are going to dump Terraform because it's closed source and owned by IBM

4
Nomecksreply
lemmy.ca

Why replace Hashi if you're in the RH or IBM ecosystem? Why replace it at all if you're an enterprise? They have enterprise support.

6

Terragrunt provides enterprise support for OpenTofu last I was looking into it.

Why invest around IP you have no control around if you don't have to?

1

Downsizing the number FOSS developers every couple of years is pretty much the standard in enterprises, yes.

1

Saw the thumbnail and for a second I thought a new backrooms video dropped.

1