One half of my comment was actually about how you most likely have a better performing alternative option right where you already live. And even if you didn't, they're not asking you to move. You could argue they're not even asking you to use their software, you're electing to.
There's a good chance you have other options. Regardless of how you feel about the company's head, Starlink would probably be one of them, with likely better performance than you're dealing with on ADSL.
But you cannot just sue a company because their network connected software doesn't work well on slow networks. Let alone a project like OpenSSH. It would be like me suing a game studio because my PC doesn't meet their listed minimum requirements to play the game.
So it's AWS Fargate with a different name? That's cool for cloud hosted stuff. But if you're on prem, or manage your own VPS' then you need SSH access.
Telling someone they're biased must be the most low-effort comment there is. Everyone is biased about any subject where they have even a nuanced self interest in. And in your case, you didn't even specify which part of their comment was allegedly being affected by bias. Nor did you acknowledge your own bias.
"which cost almost nothing for low traffic" you invented the retort "what about high traffic" within your own message. I don't even necessarily mean user traffic either. But if you constantly have to sync new records over (as could be the case in any kind of timeseries use-case) the internal traffic could rack up costs quickly.
"vastly superior to self hosting regarding observability" I'd suggest looking into the cnpg operator for Postgres on Kubernetes. The builtin metrics and official dashboard is vastly superior to what I get from Cloudwatch for my RDS clusters. And the backup mechanism using Barman for database snapshots and WAL backups is vastly superior to AWS DMS or AWS's disk snapshots which aren't portable to a system outside of AWS if you care about avoiding vendor lock-in.
I think there's a bit more to it than that. Being mean in a friendly way is sort of a sport, for some people finding a good quip is about the mental challenge of wordsmithing. It's easy, and not all that creative, to say "don't be late" and also with certain people can come across more negatively than just jokingly berating them, believe it or not. It sounds more serious. Something like, "glad you made it, Leland! We were just posting a GoFundMe to buy you a watch." Said in the right way with people you are very familiar with keeps a lighter tone, and less like I'm actually upset (even if I may be.) Not that I'd ever say something like that in a professional setting or to people I'm not actually strong friends with; those people just get a "glad you made it, Leland!"
It's also sort of the same reason shows like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia are funny. When you're jokingly mean to a friend, you're being a bit of a caricature, an exaggeration. That's part of the fun of it, too. And why it can get a point across while keeping it light.
They're always more common in metro areas of the US. You must be from a relatively rural area and don't get out of it much.
That said, uh, the use of getting a taxi to drive you to or from the airport was just not having to park at the airport which generally costs a lot of money, and in certain areas is a little sketchy on whether or not your car will get cracked open while you're away.
I think the end-all-be-all of this obviously spiraling conversation is: the other user expected SLES to be a drop-in replacement for RHEL/CentOS, but it wasn't. So why did they not consider Suse for their enterprise uses? Because they had existing workflows that work on RHEL-like operating systems, and Suse would require more work and time to adopt than those alternatives. All of that is completely fair and valid. And to make your point: all you have to do is learn the operating system and suddenly that's not much of a concern any more. If the free alternatives aren't as feasible in the future, I'm sure there may be more appetite for that kind of effort.
I feel that I've very rarely actually heard people complain that what Red Hat is doing is illegal. The overwhelming majority of negative opinion takes that I've heard has been, "Red Hat is trying to squeeze out money from users which is against the spirit of Linux." Which is to paraphrase the generally ineloquent takes I've heard on the matter. Though there's a point to be made there, why did Linus Torvalds start the Linux project? To make a free alternative to the expensive Unix of the time. I think that point falls a bit short, there are plenty of completely free Linux-based distributions out there to choose from. People just wanted an "Enterprise Linux" for free, which for years had been CentOS, and now Rocky/Alma Linux. People feel like they're going to have to change to a new OS or pay Red Hat money, which given the spirit of RHEL, change probably isn't something these people are accustom to.
In short, I've heard of people being generally annoyed by the change, which may be fair. I haven't heard too many people seriously trying to make the claim that what Red Hat is doing is illegal.
It's not obvious to me that the user you're replying to believed that these were your opinions. It seemed more obvious to me that they were replying indirectly to the comments made by the Red Hat staff member.
But now that you've gotten to the point of having your own opinion and take: what is "the main issue" as you've mentioned here?
One half of my comment was actually about how you most likely have a better performing alternative option right where you already live. And even if you didn't, they're not asking you to move. You could argue they're not even asking you to use their software, you're electing to.