Talk:Oracle Linux

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

"Oracle Unbreakable Linux"

"Oracle Unbreakable Linux" is a support program. Oracle's true distribution name is "Oracle Enterprise Linux". I hope it will change into true name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.211.19.86 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC-7)

Opinion

This article sounds like an 'opinion' piece, taking personal shots at Oracle. Thoughts? --Felipe1982 20:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC) The comments around centos are unfounded. every rpm comes straight from red hat as you can see on the distributed source code. The patches that were previously done by centos which also ended up in the Oracle version are actually documented in the changelogs of the rpms, so credit is provided in the normal mechanism. I would agree that this is a heavily opinionated article.[reply]

I would concur. There is more written in the controversy section than the rest of the entire article. --hseritt 19:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the distribution is now called "Oracle Linux" by Oracle. They recently dropped the word "Enterprise" from the name. This change should be reflected in the body of the page, and by renaming the page with a reference at the old name. Chris (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hat Enterprise Linux Derivative

Surely some mention is merited that Oracle Linux is a repackaged RHEL? Jonabbey (talk) 23:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Advertisement"

Reading the comments it seems to me this article used to be anti-Oracle POV once. However, what I see now is the exact opposite of that - the article reads like an advertisement, so I've tagged it accordingly. The article mostly consists of positive or neutral informative (e.g. tech specs) statements, completely lacking any objective comments. I guess someone should mix in some of the mentioned "controversies" into the article too.--Arny (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an "Advertisement" in my opinion -- the article is already "written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery". In fact, the whole article is technical specifications and version numbers. Raysonho (talk) 02:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen here on Wikipedia people tag things as "advertisements" for whenever they please, something too positive? advertisement, something too negative? an advertisement for another company, an article only mentions another product that is vaguely related with something else on the market? it must immediately be removed even if it's more related to the subject than the vaguely related articles because it's been implemented for advertising purposes and people are "getting paid by Microsoft", if you feel like anything here is written as an advertisement feel free to WP:BOLD remove it, but WP:IOR seems to apply way too much and personally I've read this article twice and nothing here seems like it was written as an advertisement and it's quite well sourced for a Linux article. --Hoang the Hoangest (talk) 10:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not bold enough to delete the parts I have a problem with because there wouldn't be much left of the article if I did, but I added a tag to the top of the page. A lot of statements only cite Oracle's marketing material, to give dense strings of jargon without context: "Oracle's own enhancements for OLTP, InfiniBand, SSD disk access, NUMA-optimizations, Reliable Datagram Sockets (RDS), async I/O, OCFS2, and networking"?? What do the enhancements do, why did they need to be created, why aren't they upstreamed? Do any independent sources know or care? I think WP:INDISCRIMINATE is relevant also. Call apogee say aardvark (talk) 11:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RHEL compatibility criticism

The section "RHEL compatibility" criticises Oracle's claim of compatibility with RHEL, but only cites Oracle itself, so the criticism seems to be original research. Call apogee say aardvark (talk) 10:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]