I guess I'm a little surprised that Debian or Ubuntu didn't rush in to try and fill this gap. Or at how quickly everyone flocked to Alma Linux.
I know Ubuntu is viewed as more of a desktop distribution (it's what I use on my desktop) and I know they have a server version, but perhaps they should have repackaged that as a different name to try and get beyond the "desktop only" label that Ubuntu has.
Ubuntu using more up-to-date packages and not relying on backported fixes like CentOS/RHEL would seem to be a benefit for Ubuntu.
Ubuntu allowing for in place OS upgrades from major version to major version would also seem to be a benefit. (Although, I don't know how well this would work in a multi-user server environment. I've done it in the desktop environment though).
Debian might also fit in with all of this. Ubuntu was born out of Debian, but at some point they branched away from each other. When Ubuntu first came out it was kind of viewed as the easier to use, less scary for new users alternative to Debian. It's been a while since I've used Debian, probably 90s or early 2000s, so I'm not sure what all has happened in it's development. I'm still much more of a command-line person even with Ubuntu.
A totally new server OS that's based on Debian/Ubuntu might've been warranted as well. I just think there's some benefits that Ubuntu (and Debian?) have over CentOS/RHEL that might've warranted adoption in the post-CentOS world.
And to be honest, I'm still not sure if the landscape has truly settled on an alternative. Although it would seem that Alma Linux has taken an early lead.
I can still remember when the old RedHat (not RHEL, it was just called RedHat) became RHEL and went to a paying model. This caused quite a commotion in the hosting industry as companies looked for free OS alternatives. FreeBSD was touted as a viable alternative for a bit. Fedora was used by some. Then CentOS came out and being a basic clone of RHEL it became the industry standard. My fear, going into 2022, is deploying new servers with a new OS and then for that OS to turn out to be the loser in all of this. I'm more of a fan of a single OS driving this industry. If you put all of your eggs in the basket of the OS that doesn't win, then when you encounter problems with that OS you're going to find it very difficult to get assistance.
I know Ubuntu is viewed as more of a desktop distribution (it's what I use on my desktop) and I know they have a server version, but perhaps they should have repackaged that as a different name to try and get beyond the "desktop only" label that Ubuntu has.
Ubuntu using more up-to-date packages and not relying on backported fixes like CentOS/RHEL would seem to be a benefit for Ubuntu.
Ubuntu allowing for in place OS upgrades from major version to major version would also seem to be a benefit. (Although, I don't know how well this would work in a multi-user server environment. I've done it in the desktop environment though).
Debian might also fit in with all of this. Ubuntu was born out of Debian, but at some point they branched away from each other. When Ubuntu first came out it was kind of viewed as the easier to use, less scary for new users alternative to Debian. It's been a while since I've used Debian, probably 90s or early 2000s, so I'm not sure what all has happened in it's development. I'm still much more of a command-line person even with Ubuntu.
A totally new server OS that's based on Debian/Ubuntu might've been warranted as well. I just think there's some benefits that Ubuntu (and Debian?) have over CentOS/RHEL that might've warranted adoption in the post-CentOS world.
And to be honest, I'm still not sure if the landscape has truly settled on an alternative. Although it would seem that Alma Linux has taken an early lead.
I can still remember when the old RedHat (not RHEL, it was just called RedHat) became RHEL and went to a paying model. This caused quite a commotion in the hosting industry as companies looked for free OS alternatives. FreeBSD was touted as a viable alternative for a bit. Fedora was used by some. Then CentOS came out and being a basic clone of RHEL it became the industry standard. My fear, going into 2022, is deploying new servers with a new OS and then for that OS to turn out to be the loser in all of this. I'm more of a fan of a single OS driving this industry. If you put all of your eggs in the basket of the OS that doesn't win, then when you encounter problems with that OS you're going to find it very difficult to get assistance.