@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.

Here's my personal account.

Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.

I think you're believing that this is tied to Redhat's Cloud offering, it's not. It's tied to your account with redhat, for sure. (So you can download it). But you can download and run this anywhere.

At least that's how I'm reading this.

You're correct. I just read that and came to post. The wording in the other article was confusing and made it seem like they needed to be deployed on a supported cloud provider.

However, I still don't think it's worth going through the trouble to download from Red Hat vs just downloading Oracle and not needing to do anything.

One thing I wonder is if you have a paid subscription for something like Gluster, Ceph, Satellite (not that you would for 16 servers but I mean any subscription) do you now have to pay for the host it's on? Do the terms of any of those pieces of software require the systems they're on to have a valid license?

Just thinking about that took more time than downloading the Oracle ISO.

Why wouldn't they? They sure do in the Windows World.

So you're saying that no one anywhere should use centralized anything.. pretty sure that's not what you are saying...but maybe.

@stacksofplates said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

Well the math isn't just math, its emotion that you have to try and take out of the equation. Then you can have a costs discussion.

Again, this is their fault. If taxes go up, do they get emotional and try to fight it? No they pass the cost on to the customer like every other business. Same in this scenario. If you have to subscribe now and it costs more, the costs get passed on. It's no one's fault but their own.

yeah, the emotion part is what needs to be pulled out..

I'm definitely not innocent of the emotional part.. so I get it.. but really, when you show the math.. that should be all that matters to the business.

And as Stacks said - if your costs go up, then your sales price have to increase generally as well... just the way things work.

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@stacksofplates said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

tough choices because of the past

It's not a tough choice. You either want the updates and features or not. If you do, you pay for a subscription or you use an open source version that gets constant updates. It's not tough at all. They might not like it, but it's not tough.

You may not see it as a tough choice, but it is rarely an easy one.

Changing platforms from Microsoft Excel to LibreOffice for example might include weeks or months of restructuring and rebuilding to use the different platform.

I don't see it being that hard - other than guessing the costs of that migration... weight the cost of the migration (and assumed continuation of the project) against the subscription cost of something like O365.
it's just math.. fuzzy math, sure, but still math.

Well the math isn't just math, its emotion that you have to try and take out of the equation. Then you can have a costs discussion.

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.

The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.

Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.

At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.

They rarely got new features in the past without buying a new version... so I don't see the problem. They continue to pay their one time huge fee for locally installed office on one computer and be done with it.
If they want new features, they'll have to buy it again and again, or just subscribe.

Yeah that's not the issue that I was describing. What I was trying to point to is how businesses made a choice to use a specific product (in this case Microsoft Office Excel) and are now having to deal with the decision process of the past and are making tough choices because of the past.

Sadly - I rarely see them willing to "make" those tough choices.. they push back and say no - we're not changing... getting themselves stuck.
I have a client on a 22+ year old AS400 because of this. An AS400 that died a month ago, they were super lucky that their support vendor for that device had a spare old junker on the shelf just for such an occasion, and that they could restore their backups to it ( or move the drives, I'm not sure which).

I need to ask them how much the spend on that? Money that should have been spent moving to a new platform earlier... of course the push back is - well time value of money, I didn't spend anything for 15 years on this system - we've saved a bundle... I don't really know how to combat that argument yet.

Exactly, I have a customer with an AS400 as well that they use to this day because "it still works and I know it and I haven't had to spend a penny on it".

and what happens when it does eventually die? No seriously - everything does eventually.. so what then? when there is no backup hardware, no personal who knows how to recover it, etc, etc, etc... I know - I'm preaching to the choir.

Yup... I had the very same question with the person who is attempting to retire.. . . he said "Well I have enough time left to try and sort this out". . .

Does that imply that he's actually going to look into a new platform and migrate?

@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

He was not impeached. They tried though.

He was impeached twice. He was not convicted and removed.

Isn't impeachment basically just an indictment? i.e. still have to have a trial to prove they are guilty?
Nevermind - I'm behind the JB train I see.

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.

The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.

Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.

At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.

They rarely got new features in the past without buying a new version... so I don't see the problem. They continue to pay their one time huge fee for locally installed office on one computer and be done with it.
If they want new features, they'll have to buy it again and again, or just subscribe.

Yeah that's not the issue that I was describing. What I was trying to point to is how businesses made a choice to use a specific product (in this case Microsoft Office Excel) and are now having to deal with the decision process of the past and are making tough choices because of the past.

Sadly - I rarely see them willing to "make" those tough choices.. they push back and say no - we're not changing... getting themselves stuck.
I have a client on a 22+ year old AS400 because of this. An AS400 that died a month ago, they were super lucky that their support vendor for that device had a spare old junker on the shelf just for such an occasion, and that they could restore their backups to it ( or move the drives, I'm not sure which).

I need to ask them how much the spend on that? Money that should have been spent moving to a new platform earlier... of course the push back is - well time value of money, I didn't spend anything for 15 years on this system - we've saved a bundle... I don't really know how to combat that argument yet.

Exactly, I have a customer with an AS400 as well that they use to this day because "it still works and I know it and I haven't had to spend a penny on it".

and what happens when it does eventually die? No seriously - everything does eventually.. so what then? when there is no backup hardware, no personal who knows how to recover it, etc, etc, etc... I know - I'm preaching to the choir.

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@stacksofplates said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

tough choices because of the past

It's not a tough choice. You either want the updates and features or not. If you do, you pay for a subscription or you use an open source version that gets constant updates. It's not tough at all. They might not like it, but it's not tough.

You may not see it as a tough choice, but it is rarely an easy one.

Changing platforms from Microsoft Excel to LibreOffice for example might include weeks or months of restructuring and rebuilding to use the different platform.

I don't see it being that hard - other than guessing the costs of that migration... weight the cost of the migration (and assumed continuation of the project) against the subscription cost of something like O365.
it's just math.. fuzzy math, sure, but still math.

@stacksofplates said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

You're assuming that there was a plethora of choices in cases like this. For a very long time there was 1 "choice" Microsoft Office.

That's simply not true. LibreOffice, OpenOffice, WPS Office, Google Docs, Lotus SmartSuite, Lotus Symphony, IBM Works, Calligra, WordPerfect Office, etc. Many had to have existed around the time you're speaking of or even MS Office wouldn't have existed.

Times change, the business needs to adapt. That means adapting mindset like using proper RBAC. Them not wanting to pay for the yearly fee is inconsequential. That's the cost, end of story. If they don't like it, they're stuck with their decision or they migrate to something else. There's not much to argue.

This seems to be a continual problem of SMB - they just don't want to spend on their IT to move things forward, keep them current, specially if they aren't an IT based company...

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Dashrender said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

@Obsolesce said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

If they already have and use Excel, then what's the issue? Obviously it not being cross-platform isn't an issue there.

The issue comes from the desire to upgrade to newer versions. Microsoft, while they offer stand-alone installations of Office 2019, now require yearly upgrades if you need those new features.

Many organizations simply don't or won't pay for upgrades year after year for something that has traditionally been supported for several years at a time.

At the same time, they won't pay for O365 to just get access to Microsoft Office (ueo to the total monthly cost increase) from $0 to $12-22 per user.

They rarely got new features in the past without buying a new version... so I don't see the problem. They continue to pay their one time huge fee for locally installed office on one computer and be done with it.
If they want new features, they'll have to buy it again and again, or just subscribe.

Yeah that's not the issue that I was describing. What I was trying to point to is how businesses made a choice to use a specific product (in this case Microsoft Office Excel) and are now having to deal with the decision process of the past and are making tough choices because of the past.

Sadly - I rarely see them willing to "make" those tough choices.. they push back and say no - we're not changing... getting themselves stuck.
I have a client on a 22+ year old AS400 because of this. An AS400 that died a month ago, they were super lucky that their support vendor for that device had a spare old junker on the shelf just for such an occasion, and that they could restore their backups to it ( or move the drives, I'm not sure which).

I need to ask them how much the spend on that? Money that should have been spent moving to a new platform earlier... of course the push back is - well time value of money, I didn't spend anything for 15 years on this system - we've saved a bundle... I don't really know how to combat that argument yet.

@DustinB3403 said in Is Open Source Really So Much More Secure By Nature:

The argument you're making is "Well you shouldn't have picked QuickBooks" as if other options are well known enough to work for a businesses use case.

Well - this is the argument that Scott makes all the time - you as the business owner of said plumbing shop are 100% responsible for FINDING those solutions.. and if you're not willing to spend the time yourself doing it - then you should hire professionals to do it.. sad part about that, many/most places would likely just push you down the given path. Finding that one shop that actually considers all the aspects that we sometimes consider more often today is difficult at best.

And that said - just because you made a decision in the past, doesn't mean you need/should stay on that decision forever.

I know I'm trying to move us to O365 completely, files, online apps, etc.. for some, they will go kicking and screaming, for others, they will like the new found freedom/flexibility compared to onsite file shares.