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.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.eeEnglish
      36·
      5 months ago

      There’s always been the risk of confusion and openSUSE project seemed to have understood that SUSE could disallow the name at any moment. A name change does make sense for both. Especially now that even Leap might be distancing itself from SLE and whatnot.

      • Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org
        12·
        5 months ago

        A name change does make sense for both. Especially now that even Leap might be distancing itself from SLE and whatnot.

        Agreed, but GeekOS or whatever it was they had on that oSC slide … Cheesus, they can do better than that.

        Yeah, I get the mascot’s name is Geeko, so maybe that is where they’re getting GeekOS. But I think I read that the mascot has to go together with the name anyway.

        • MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml
          14·
          5 months ago

          Cheesus, they can do better than that

          On recent performance, no they can’t. I mean, they had the chance to use Driftwood and went with Slowroll.

          • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
            4·
            5 months ago

            What about the proposal to just drop the name openSUSE with no replacement? And let each distro just be called Tumbleweed, Leap, Aeon, etc.

            • fr0g@piefed.social
              7·
              5 months ago

              That could be a branding strategy, I guess, but the community project behind it will still need a name of some kind obviously. Unless they only want to show up at conferences/have a website url etc as “the project whose name shall not be mentioned”.

      • Drasglaf@sh.itjust.works
        134·
        5 months ago

        There’s always been the risk of confusion

        A name change does make sense for both

        Then make SUSE become ClosedSUSE. It couldn’t be easier.

    • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
      101·
      5 months ago

      To be fair, OpenSUSE is the only project with a name like that, so it makes some sense that they’d want it changed.
      There’s no OpenRedHat, no OpenNovell, no OpenLinspire, etc.

        • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
          10·
          5 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.mlEnglish
            5·
            5 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.

            • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
              1·
              5 months ago

              And it’s still entirely unrelated to my point, since SUSE will remain the trademark in question regardless of what’s actually contained in OpenSUSE.

              But yes, the free/open-source spins of things tend to have somewhat differing content compared to the commercial offering, usually for licensing or support reasons.
              E.g. CentOS (when it still was a real thing)/AlmaLinux/etc supporting hardware that regular RHEL has dropped support for, while also not distributing core RedHat components like the subscription manager.

        • psvrh@lemmy.ca
          21·
          5 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.