ZDNET58%

Red Hat will support your RHEL forever now - for a price 20%

By Steven Vaughan-Nichols0%

7/10/2026, 1:44:12 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 33 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Hasty Generalization, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 44% saturation with 366 hits. Analysis detected 2,121 faulty-reasoning hits from 832 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 34.3% and a BS Rank of 20% (17,649 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 80.60% of the article peer group.

Red Hat will support your RHEL forever now - for a price 
Steven Vaughan-Nichols, Senior Contributing Editor 
Senior Contributing Editor 
July 10, 2026 at 1:44 p.m. 
PT 
DigiPub/Moment via Getty Images 
Follow ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google. 
ZDNET's key takeaways 
You can run RHEL now for as long as you're willing to sign up for annual contracts. 
This plan provides critical security patches, urgent bug fixes, and 24x7 technical support. 
There is no standard price. 
You'll need to negotiate with Red Hat for your specific case. 
Once upon a time, and it wasn't that long ago, enterprise Linux distributors offered 3 to 5 years of support. 
Then, starting in the 2020s, Red Hat , SUSE , and Canonical , the top Linux companies, started offering up to a decade or more of support. 
Now, Red Hat is offering Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Long-Life Add-On , aka "RHEL Forever." 
It does exactly what it says: it offers support for any particular version of RHEL so long as you're willing to pay the bill. 
Also: 'I'm not a programmer' anymore: Linus Torvalds on the only two tools he uses now 
RHEL Forever isn't for everyone. 
Red Hat is pitching the new offering as a way to align software lifecycles with the multi‑decade horizons common in highly regulated and capital‑intensive industries, such as finance, telecommunications, healthcare, and government. 
That said, many companies are extremely reluctant to upgrade their servers, which is one reason why the long-out-of-support CentOS still has many users. 
I expect many of these businesses will be more than willing to pay for this new subscription level. 
New add-on promises multi-decade RHEL 
This new offering comes only months after Red Hat introduced the RHEL 14‑year Extended Life Cycle, Long-Life Add-On at the 2026 Red Hat Summit . 
It seems this wasn't long enough for some customers, so the RHEL Forever, which sits on top of the company's existing RHEL Premium subscription , will now let you run RHEL for forever and a day. 
Positioned as the "ultimate tier" of the RHEL lifecycle, RHEL Forever offers customers a continuous annual renewal path to keep a specific RHEL release running with vendor support as long as they are willing to pay for it. 
Also: IBM and Red Hat launch Lightwell to defend open-source code from AI attacks 
By decoupling support from the calendar, Red Hat argues that RHEL Forever enables IT teams to synchronize modernization with business milestones rather than vendor end‑of‑life dates. 
The company says this can reduce operational friction by eliminating repeated large‑scale migrations solely triggered by lifecycle deadlines. 
What the Long-Life Add-On provides 
The Long-Life Add-On is available for any specific RHEL release, but requires an active Red Hat Enterprise Linux Extended Life Cycle, Premium subscription as a prerequisite. 
RHEL Forever is sold as a yearly extension. 
Under the new tier, Red Hat will deliver critical security patches for vulnerabilities rated Critical by Red Hat Product Security, selected urgent bug fixes, and 24x7 technical support. 
As with previous long‑tail offerings, fixes are backported to preserve API/ABI stability rather than introducing disruptive upgrades. 
This also follows in the wake of IBM and Red Hat's Lightwell Network and Lightwell Clearinghouse Premier . 
These plans offer support for numerous open-source projects. 
Extending an already long lifecycle for a price 
Long-Life builds on Red Hat's existing extended support story, which already includes a 10‑year standard lifecycle plus Extended Life Phase and the newer Extended Life Cycle Premium, which can extend support to 14 years for major releases. 
Earlier ELS Long-Life options for RHEL 6 showed Red Hat experimenting with year‑by‑year extensions beyond traditional end‑of‑maintenance dates. 
Also: Open-source security is a mess - IBM and Red Hat bet $5 billion and 20,000 engineers can fix it 
Red Hat isn't the only one offering seriously long-term support. 
Canonical now offers up to 15 years of support for Ubuntu Linux , while SUSE will support its distro for 19 years . 
I expect the other enterprise distros will soon follow Red Hat's path. 
So, how much will it cost? 
Good question. 
Red Hat hasn't publicly disclosed its pricing. 
The company positions it as a negotiated, account‑specific extension on top of existing Premium subscriptions rather than a simple price‑sheet SKU. 
I suspect it won't be cheap. 
Why this fully agentic ransomware attack is giving researchers nightmares 
Anthropic's Claude Cowork heads to the cloud as data shows 90% of sessions aren't for coding 
You can soon restore Windows 11 from scratch even if it can't boot up - here's how 
I enabled Android's new security feature that detects fake cell towers - here's why 
Linux Mint vs. 
RefreshOS: I compared the two best distros for new users - this one's better 
'I'm not a programmer' anymore: Linus Torvalds on the only two tools he uses now 
I'm a Windows user who installed Linux for the first time - here's how the experience changed me 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.6%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.4%ZDNET: 2.9%Confirmation Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.8%ZDNET: 1.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.5%ZDNET: 3.1%Availability Heuristic6.9%This article: 3.2%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.6%ZDNET: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic3.2%This article: 6.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.7%ZDNET: 0.5%Hindsight Bias6.7%This article: 1.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 2.7%ZDNET: 3.2%Overconfidence Bias1.7%This article: 29.9%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 3.2%ZDNET: 4.2%Framing Effect29.9%This article: 7.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.7%ZDNET: 1.4%Loss Aversion7.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.4%This article: 12.4%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 3.8%ZDNET: 5.2%Optimism Bias12.4%This article: 0.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.6%ZDNET: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 3.8%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 4.5%ZDNET: 4.5%Negativity Bias3.8%This article: 3.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.9%ZDNET: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias3.7%This article: 1.3%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.8%ZDNET: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error1.3%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.3%ZDNET: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 13.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.4%ZDNET: 3.9%Halo Effect13.7%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.6%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.0%ZDNET: 1.5%Recency Bias6.6%This article: 3.1%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.4%Primacy Effect3.1%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.8%ZDNET: 4.7%Appeal to Authority10.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.3%ZDNET: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.5%ZDNET: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.9%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Circular Reasoning2.9%This article: 15.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 3.8%ZDNET: 6.5%Hasty Generalization15.7%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.8%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.5%Bandwagon2.8%This article: 6.1%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.3%ZDNET: 2.0%Appeal to Emotion6.1%This article: 2.9%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.7%Begging the Question2.9%This article: 14.4%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.7%ZDNET: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.4%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.2%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Burden of Proof2.2%This article: 2.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Appeal to Nature2.0%This article: 3.8%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.3%Composition/Division3.8%This article: 6.3%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.9%ZDNET: 4.9%Anecdotal6.3%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 15.7%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.5%ZDNET: 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)15.7%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.3%ZDNET: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.2%Special Pleading2.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 1.1%ZDNET: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.9%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.9%ZDNET: 0.5%Quote-first Misdirection2.9%This article: 10.1%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 3.1%ZDNET: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice10.1%This article: 1.2%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.4%ZDNET: 3.9%Indoctrination1.2%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 44.0%Steven Vaughan-Nichols: 3.3%ZDNET: 7.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…44.0%

832 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers25%attributed speech625writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageSteven Vaughan-Nichols • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageGetty Images • 4 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 10 words • 100.0% coverageZDNET • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageLinus Torvalds • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageRed Hat • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageIBM and Red Hat • 14 words • 0.0% coverageRed Hat • 26 words • 100.0% coverageRed Hat • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageRed Hat • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageIBM and Red Hat • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAnthropic • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageLinus Torvalds • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Red Hat

100%flagged-word coverage
104 attributed words50% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +59.7 ptsWriter: 40.3%Red Hat: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-13.4 ptsWriter: 13.4%Red Hat: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.8 ptsWriter: 3.8%Red Hat: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.