[joombaga]

To invert the question then: Why, now, would I choose CentOS over RHEL with this new free development license?

[krylon]

You can put CentOS on production machines. If I understand the news correctly, the free developer license only applies to ... well, developer machines.

[rilindo]

You would choose CentOS if you need to run enterprise-level software (example, Oracle), but you can't pony up the operational money to buy Red Hat Enterprise Linux licenses on your server fleet.

[caf]

If you can afford Oracle licenses, RHEL licenses are a rounding error.

[hrez]

Oracle supported way would be to use Oracle Linux for that.

[simplemath]

You wouldn't. Seems like the whole idea.

[ptrincr]

Are there no limitations at all with this then? No limit to the number of machines it can be deployed on? Any stipulations about it being for development only purposes?

Reading the article suggests it's developer only and so for low cost production deployments, Centos is still much cheaper(free).

[simplemath]

Presumably if you dev in rhel or particularly rhel/.net, you'd want to run the same in prod.

[hulahoof]

For the first few years perhaps not to force current systems to move in order to keep receiving updates?