Hacker News Reader

Comment by MereInterest | Hacker News Reader

Ubuntu has 5 years of “standard support”, with EOL after 10 years. RHEL has 10 years of “production”, with another 3-5 years of “extended support”.

View on HN

That's just corporate speak. They are all the same. If you use RHEL after 5 years or after the .5 release, it becomes plainly obvious that it's begging you to pull the plug. It's only half assed security fixes after a few years, no matter where you are. If a customer asks for 13 years, I'm sure Canonical will oblige.

Edit: I'm talking about Ubuntu Pro that is 10 years.

It's that "corporate speak" that wins paid contracts for software that needs to run for a decade or more.

RHEL competitor in the market is Windows, not half supported hobby distros.

Ubuntu PRO is a subscription with 10 year support for Ubuntu main and Universe repos, so more than 10 thousand packages. It's also much cheaper, and comes with more features like kernel live patching.

Ubuntu is not a “hobby distro”. I do not even like Canonical but let’s be real. First, Ubuntu is used as the basis for just a giant fraction of enterprise software in the cloud and in embedded. Second, companies pay Canonical big money for even their managed Kafka offerings and such. Canonical is a legitimate business alternative. They are not peddling 10 year support for the hobbyists.

I can't find numbers, but an awful lot of customers are still on RHEL 7 which was released in 2014. It's old but it's way more up to date than Ubuntu 14.04.

I myself only switched (to CentOS Stream 9) last February for my personal servers.

Canonical started that 10 year thing only recently (maybe around 18.04). Also, you need to be on the pro subscription to get updates beyond 5 years. So a more accurate comparison would be 18.04+pro and RHEL 8, accounting for the fact that RHEL 8 is a year newer. Or 22.04 and RHEL 9.

Still on RHEL 7? We upgraded to RHEL 7 from RHEL 6x three months ago :-)

Ah, that makes sense. As somebody outside the RHEL ecosystem, my main experience is needing to argue that maintaining compatibility with whatever ancient version of gcc ships with the oldest “production” version of RHEL isn’t worth it. (E.g. that it is okay to require C++14 support)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com