CentOS - Dec 2020 - What are the differences between CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream?

On 12/15/20 1:24 PM, R C wrote:
> What I meant was that MS basically, for the longest while, had their 
> OS pre-installed on computers sold, so it "felt" free to the
buyer, it
> came with the machine. Universities and colleges did receive bulk 
> licenses and .NET pretty much for free in their 'Developer
Programs'
> and also have students keep using it. That "faillure to
implement"
> obviously was a marketing move indeed, as was students "allowing"
to
> keep using it on their laptops after graduation. 
This is way off-topic, but there are two aspects of home users using 
unlicensed copies of Windows:
1.) Users who bought a machine with Windows Home Edition on it who 
wanted either Professional or Ultimate;
2.) The enthusiasts who were building their own machines from parts.? 
That group is small, but they also tend to be very vocal; IT 
professionals often fall into this group, and MS wanted to keep them 
happy for all the reasons previously posted.

But the Red Hat-based ecosystem version of that second group is 
on-topic, as the same sort of enthusiast exists here and has been very 
vocal about this change.

On 12/16/20 8:11 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On 12/15/20 1:24 PM, R C wrote:
>> What I meant was that MS basically, for the longest while, had their 
>> OS pre-installed on computers sold, so it "felt" free to the
buyer,
>> it came with the machine. Universities and colleges did receive bulk 
>> licenses and .NET pretty much for free in their 'Developer
Programs'
>> and also have students keep using it. That "faillure to
implement"
>> obviously was a marketing move indeed, as was students
"allowing" to
>> keep using it on their laptops after graduation. 
> This is way off-topic, but there are two aspects of home users using 
> unlicensed copies of Windows:
> 1.) Users who bought a machine with Windows Home Edition on it who 
> wanted either Professional or Ultimate;
> 2.) The enthusiasts who were building their own machines from parts.? 
> That group is small, but they also tend to be very vocal; IT 
> professionals often fall into this group, and MS wanted to keep them 
> happy for all the reasons previously posted.
>
> But the Red Hat-based ecosystem version of that second group is 
> on-topic, as the same sort of enthusiast exists here and has been very 
> vocal about this change.
>
Well yes it is, but it started with a remark about licensing. I don't 
use Windows much, not even a handful of times in the last decade. Thing 
is that MS has something called their "Developers Network" (named 
something along those lines). If you're in higher education, R&D etc you
can be in that network, in sortof an R&D category, for 'free'. As a 
member you get access to "development versions" of pretty much
anything
MS, and they will give you product codes, even "bulk licenses", to be 
used for R&D, and even for educational purposes. You can do whatever you 
want with it, except of course use it for commercial/production purposes.

I never found a mechanism like that for redhat, that is why I use 
Centos. It is pretty much the same thing. I have numerous netboot images 
around, a dozen and a half or so hardrives with? Centos installed (in 
trays), so it is easy? to just boot a machine for projects, testbeds 
etc, and without having to pay for a bunch of licenses? while you only 
use a handful of installs at a time.

For example, I was messing with kubernetes in a few ways.? redhat 
provides a license for RHEL, that you can use for that purpose for free, 
BUT you can have only have one license.


Of course there is the group of people like you mention, (I probably 
fall in that category by swapping hardware all the time, testbeds, R&D 
clusters etc)

I don't know how well that will be working with RHEL, if Centos and 
Redhat start 'diverting'


> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Off-topic:

On 12/16/20 4:11 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> 2.) The enthusiasts who were building their own machines from parts.?
> That group is small, but they also tend to be very vocal; IT
> professionals often fall into this group, and MS wanted to keep them
> happy for all the reasons previously posted.
In less developed countries PC's are sold without any software, even
laptops. In Serbia where I live 70+% of Windows and paid-for software
are illegal/pirated versions. If you want to live from servicing PC's
you HAVE to install pirated software. I am focused on supporting
businesses and govt made a deal long time ago with BSA for Serbian
"IRS"
to check software licenses. It was done in a way that "IRS" is
demanding
proof from businesses that they *paid taxes* on software that is not
free of charge. So if you have use software with licences you need to
pay for, show us you paid taxes on that software (20%). Even then some
small businesses refuse to pay for OS/software, calculating "IRS" has
no
time to check them.

If you buy laptop, you can use magic to write it off the books so
"IRS"
has no legal right to check it for software (they do not touch private
citizens for a reason).

Since it is illegal to install pirated software, PC resellers are not
allowed to preinstall pirated software, but no one can prevent them to
sell it without any OS/software on it, so 70-80% of PC's sold in Serbia
are sold without it. Similar is in many countries outside of "Western
countries".



-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant