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.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago
    • 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.

    • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      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>”.

      • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

    • psvrh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago
      • 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.