Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th Feb 2007 18:53 UTC, submitted by WillM
Databases "At the time, most of us thought Oracle undercutting Red Hat's Linux business with its Unbreakable Linux was a big deal. Would customers flock to Oracle's cut-rate version of RHEL? Would Red Hat be pounded by Larry Ellison's minions? After a few months, the answers appear to be: No, it wasn't a big deal; and no; and no."
Order by: Score:
Not that suprising
by flanque on Mon 5th Feb 2007 19:58 UTC
flanque
Member since:
2005-12-15

Red Hat is a proven vendor of Linux. Oracle is not. The cost savings aren't worth the risk if a disaster hits.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Not that suprising
by butters on Mon 5th Feb 2007 20:25 UTC in reply to "Not that suprising"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

According to CIOs, it goes even further than that. Apparently Red Hat is a proven service provider, whereas Oracle sits near the bottom of the list. If Oracle can't support their own bread-and-butter, then how are they going to take on Linux?

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Not that suprising
by flanque on Mon 5th Feb 2007 20:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Not that suprising"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

That's very true. Seems as though our team knows more about Oracle AS than they do. Typically we log a support request, then figure it out and tell Oracle how we fixed it.

Reply Score: 4

Robert Escue
Member since:
2005-07-08

I found this on ArsTechnica the other day, and despite the lack of downloads of Oracle Linux, I don't think this is a trivial issue:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070130-8737.html

One of the things we are looking at is the cost of RHEL when it comes to patches. Maybe people are starting to balk at $10,000.00 per server minus subscription fees per machine for Satellite Server. And if Oracle can provide the same service for less and provide the same QOS, why not?

Reply Score: 2

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

10K? Isn't RHEL AS with the top support level $2499 per server with RHN?

Definitely still expensive, but for 24/7 support, it's a reasonable deal for SMBs that really rely on their IT infrastructure.

Reply Score: 4

DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

"10K? Isn't RHEL AS with the top support level $2499 per server with RHN?

Definitely still expensive, but for 24/7 support, it's a reasonable deal for SMBs that really rely on their IT infrastructure."


True, not a bad price. Just remember that is $2499 per year.

RHEL AS - $2499/year for 3 years = $7497
Oracle Premier Linux - $3597 per every 3 years = $3597

Savings of $3900 for the first 3 years right there. for 24/7 support. Figure server life is about 5 years when possible, that takes RHEL over $12K total cost, with Oracle Linux at $7194 for 6 years total. Huge cost difference, and mostly what SMB's look at, not name behind it.

http://www.redhat.com/rhel/details/faq/#10

Edit: Added RHEL FAQ link

Edited 2007-02-05 20:50

Reply Score: 3

jessta Member since:
2005-08-17

I'll support your server for $1000 a year.

Reply Score: 1

DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

"I'll support your server for $1000 a year."

Hell, I support it at my salary. The bean counters however insist on the support as they want someone outside the company to blame if things go wrong. I have yet to actually use that support over the last 2 years, and when I pointed that out they still want to purchase it. Go figure.

Reply Score: 2

Robert Escue Member since:
2005-07-08

If you cannot connect all of your machines to RHN (we can't) and you want to apply patches, then you have to purchase Satellite Server in order to deploy patches which requires additional fees in addition to the cost of Satellite Server.

Reply Score: 2

fsckit Member since:
2006-09-24

That's not quite true. You can set up one proxy server to cache the updates and put them in a yum repo. Then add the yum line to your /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources file on the other servers.

Reply Score: 3

Robert Escue Member since:
2005-07-08

Thanks, because the impression RedHat gives our management is that you have to use Satellite Server to handle patches.

Reply Score: 2

Told you so...
by TheBadger on Mon 5th Feb 2007 20:15 UTC
TheBadger
Member since:
2005-11-14

Here:

http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16294&comment_id=175674

But then industry analysts like to play toy soldiers in public.

Reply Score: 1

SQL category?
by Joe User on Mon 5th Feb 2007 22:06 UTC
Joe User
Member since:
2005-06-29

This is misleading. It's a Linux article, nothing to do with Oracle's core business.

Reply Score: 2

Terrible mistake from a billion company
by Joe User on Mon 5th Feb 2007 22:13 UTC
Joe User
Member since:
2005-06-29

The director of Marketing at Oracle must be an idiot. Did they do a market survey?! This decision is a flop.

People who need mission critical support won't find the extra cost of RH a problem, compared to the level of reliability. People who don't need mission critical support will find community support (Centos) good enough. Makes sense.

Reply Score: 2

spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

speaking of somebody who has used centos in various situations, i can say this without hesitation: RHEL and its derivatives are seriously awesome.

Reply Score: 1

How I read it
by fretinator on Mon 5th Feb 2007 23:15 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

1. I can purchase a product with support from the company who has the engineers that made the product.

2. For a cheaper price, I can purchase a product from a company that did not make the product, but promises they will support it anyway.

Doesn't sound like a tough choice to me. And that is not even considering any moral implications.

Reply Score: 3

RE: How I read it
by kaiwai on Tue 6th Feb 2007 07:59 UTC in reply to "How I read it"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Based on what evidence? I mean, Oracle have worked with the kernel extensively along with their own products; so they're hardly a novice company when it comes to understanding the in's and out's of GNU/Linux.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: How I read it
by fretinator on Tue 6th Feb 2007 14:53 UTC in reply to "RE: How I read it"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

Neither company "make" Linux or the kernel. But, Redhat does create the RHEL distribution, with all of its tools and integration. This is the product that Oracle has so kindly repackaged.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: How I read it
by kaiwai on Tue 6th Feb 2007 18:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: How I read it"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Not to sound argumentative, but whose to say that Oracle isn't going to make their own version based off Fedora? if they were still 'lifting' a version off Red Hat and merely rebranding it, I would have concerns.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: How I read it
by atari05 on Tue 6th Feb 2007 16:41 UTC in reply to "How I read it"
atari05 Member since:
2006-06-05

2. For a cheaper price, I can purchase a product from a company that did not make the product, but promises they will support it anyway.


Reminds me of IBM. When we have a big issues there is so many channels to get to the Novel its not even funny. With this I can't see it being any better. Why not get your support straight from the source!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Not that suprising
by Tuishimi on Tue 6th Feb 2007 06:05 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

"That's very true. Seems as though our team knows more about Oracle AS than they do. Typically we log a support request, then figure it out and tell Oracle how we fixed it."

Oh man, I hear you on that one. I can't go too into it, but we had a pretty disastrous project a couple of years ago that went nowhere with Oracle consultants until our IT Development department took over got the work done. I admit that part of it was that our business is complex, but still... they came in claiming it could do X Y and Z and it could only do X.

[edit]

This has nothing to do with Linux, btw... we actually use RHEL. But with Oracle's services in general.

Edited 2007-02-06 06:06

Reply Score: 4

be mindful of ORACLE's strength
by jango on Tue 6th Feb 2007 10:53 UTC
jango
Member since:
2006-11-22

i don't think we've seen the last of unbreakable Linux, they'll be back.

remember that ORACLE is more business savvy than even Microsoft.

Reply Score: 1

spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

their business savvy ought to be telling them that this was a retarded idea to begin with, right about now.

Reply Score: 1

The Real Point of Unbreakable Linux
by WillM on Wed 7th Feb 2007 18:50 UTC
WillM
Member since:
2007-01-19

Steven Vaughn-Nichols has added to his original eWeek story. See http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2090899,00.asp.

Reply Score: 1