I looked at Arctic Wolf in 2019. Was interesting, but not something the client ended up going towards. They did not feel the spend was worth it.

But I thought it was a good solution at a decent price.

@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:

Interesting Development:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/01/centos-is-gone-but-rhel-is-now-free-for-up-to-16-production-servers/

See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.

"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"

The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.

16 servers? What good is that though? Just use Oracle and you have no limit. No matter how you slice it IBM has ruined Red Hat as most people predicted.

For most SMB, that use CentOS in house, it is likely more than enough.

I have a client with 6 internal Linux systems, Proxy server, Nextcloud, Salt master (testing still, need ot get back to that), file server, jump box, and Email relay. If you add their phone system hosted on Vultr, then they have 7.

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

He was not impeached. They tried though.

He was impeached twice. He was not convicted and removed.

I see, accused, process started, but not charged or found guilty of anything.

Irregardless of which President was the cause for the proceedings, you have a severe lack of understanding of what the process actually is.

For you and @DustinB3403, kindly help each other with the application of some:

You appear to be the one trying to push an agenda. I don't care what you do or do not believe politically. Your facts were wrong.

Which facts are wrong?

Impeachment was already addressed. Get your damn head out of the sand.

The only thing being discussed was impeachment and your lack of understanding of what the process is.

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

He was not impeached. They tried though.

He was impeached twice. He was not convicted and removed.

I see, accused, process started, but not charged or found guilty of anything.

Irregardless of which President was the cause for the proceedings, you have a severe lack of understanding of what the process actually is.

For you and @DustinB3403, kindly help each other with the application of some:

You appear to be the one trying to push an agenda. I don't care what you do or do not believe politically. Your facts were wrong.

Which facts are wrong?

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

He was not impeached. They tried though.

He was impeached twice. He was not convicted and removed.

I see, accused, process started, but not charged or found guilty of anything.

Irregardless of which President was the cause for the proceedings, you have a severe lack of understanding of what the process actually is.

For you and @DustinB3403, kindly help each other with the application of some:

You appear to be the one trying to push an agenda. I don't care what you do or do not believe politically. Your facts were wrong.

@DustinB3403 said in Non-IT News Thread:

Irregardless isn't a word. The correct word is Regardless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless

According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), irregardless was first acknowledged in 1912 by the Wentworth American Dialect Dictionary as originating from western Indiana,[7] though the word was in use in South Carolina before Indiana became a territory.[1] The usage dispute over irregardless was such that, in 1923, Literary Digest published an article titled "Is There Such a Word as Irregardless in the English Language?" The OED goes on to explain the word is primarily a North American colloquialism.[7]

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Exactly, (as you and most people here know but not the general pubic it seems) is IMHO synonymous with the word indictment.

Can you try again and make a coherent sentence? Because this makes no sense

Exactly, is IMHO synonymous with the word indictment.

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:

He was not impeached. They tried though.

He was impeached twice. He was not convicted and removed.

I see, accused, process started, but not charged or found guilty of anything.

Irregardless of which President was the cause for the proceedings, you have a severe lack of understanding of what the process actually is.

@nadnerB said in Non-IT News Thread:

Keep it civil.

Random user: