Then she blew me away by then asking, "Why would IBM want to buy them for $30 billion dollars?"
As a software developer that has worked almost exclusively on Linux in his career, it was a huge announcement.
After sitting back and pondering it for awhile, I was beginning to think about the move and it was a good move by IBM.
In my opinion, it is a great move for IBM. But the probability of it being a success is low.
In one article I read, a Redhat engineer said: "I can't imagine a bigger culture clash." I think that pretty much sums up the thoughts of myself and many other engineers.
Here were some differences I thought about after the sale was announced:
- IBM engineers are typically told to be wary of the GPL to avoid potential code pollution, Redhat engineers work with the GPL all of the time
- IBM often requires signed license agreements for code contributions to their code base, Redhat works with the open source community on tons of things as is
- IBM legal likes to get their hands into the middle of many things
I read a tweet (which I'm having trouble finding), but it said something to the effect:
- IBM just paid 30% of their market cap for Redhat
- Redhat's headcount is only 3% of IBM's
- Unlike IBM, Redhat does not really have much intellectual property (IIRC, IBM has the largest patent portfolio of any US company)
- Unlike IBM, Redhat does not really have much capital assets
- Unlike IBM, Redhat gives away its product for free
- Unlike IBM, Redhat employees can leave Redhat and take leadership of their product with them