5/7 So Redhat has this enterprise line that costs big bux. Anyone seen
this: http://whiteboxlinux.org
Seems to have all advantages with no cost, except the vague uneasiness
of not being "real" red hat. Are real enterprises using clones?
\_ Linux is linux. The kernel is exactly the same. You are paying
for support for RHE, not the software.
\_ redhat has been backporting 2.6 features into their 2.4 kernel,
so 'the kernel is exactly the same' isn't always true
\_ In theory but some ISVs only certify their shit for RHEL.
If stuff is set up to work on their particular setup then you'd
want to use that instead of "Fedora" or something.
\_ Real enterprises don't use linux. Real enterprises are happy to
spend tremendous amounts of money so when something goes wrong the
guy who purchased the stuff doesn't get fired. Instead, they grab
the vendor by the balls and the vendor's staff works day and night
to resolve the problem. When the NYSE is run on the same linux I
can download or buy off the shelf from Compusa, lemme know. Some
places will use linux in non-critical locations and cluster the
shit out of it so several simultaneous failures doesn't cost
someone their career.
\_ A lot of banks in NY still use VAXes. Don't look to them.
They have more money than sense. They will still spend
millions to upgrade their IBM mainframes. Plenty of "real
enterprises" use Linux.
\_ The poster is defining "real enterprise" as "any enterprise
that doesn't use Linux".
\_ Nonsense. I describe it above and again below and ask
for some campany names as well. You're so cheeky but not
quite as clever as you'd like to believe.
\_ E*TRADE uses Linux on IBM hardware with an IBM
contract. My dad's company (large manufacturer of
car accessories) runs MVS on an emulator on a Linux
box and it (not surprisingly) was faster than the
old mainframe. IBM wanted $1 million for an upgrade
and this solution cost $100K and works great!
\_ Further research shows that Schwab also runs
Linux supported by IBM. I think IBM's support of
Linux is key.
\_ That isn't the same Linux I can buy at compusa.
Also, that IBM hardware and contract is the key
concept I've stated 3 times now: no one is going
to pick anything that will get them fired. With
IBM on the hook to fix anything and work 24x7 on
it, the purchasing manager's career is safe(r).
If you were at a real company and chose Linux but
didn't have a company like IBM behind you'd be
a) stupid, and b) looking for a new job while the
company c) put out a job req for someone who
understand that $1m or $100k is *nothing* when
your entire company is on the line.
\_ You make no sense. Since IBM supports
Linux it is okay? Either the OS is capable
or it is not. Is your issue one of
support? If so, sign a contract with IBM.
\_ IBM won't just "sign a contract". It has to
be *their* version of unix, their install,
their guys involved in the architecture and
design phase, etc. I'm just guessing here
but you're not working yet, huh?
\_ So, assuming you're the guy who claimed
"Real enterprises don't use linux,"
you've basically realized you've made
yourself look like an idiot, and are now
spouting ad hominem arguments in a weak
attempt to save face. Real enterprises
use linux. Sure, their particular
distribution has to be certified, and
running on certified hardware, so that
someone will be willing to provide a
support contract. This does not mean that
the linux they run is so much different
than the linux you can run.
\_ Here, let's use a real-life example to
illustrate the point. Ugly fat biker
dude offers to give you an enema. You
reject the offer. Hot chick in nurse
uniform offers to give you an an enema.
You jump at the offer. Same enema,
different person making the offer,
different reaction.
\_ This post wins the best motd analogy
in recent memory award.
-- motd enema analogy dude #1 fan
\_ You don't seem to understand what "Enterprise level" means.
Do you even know what a mainframe is? Do you have any idea
what a cluster of VAXen can do? Name the Fortune 500 company
that is using stock Linux in a mission critical role. No one
is stupid enough to put billions of dollars or lives on the
line by using Linux to save a few bucks.
\_ Well, I am not sure if google is fortune 500, but they are
using linux in a 'mission critical role'.
\_ There are two mentioned just above your post. Let me
guess, they're "not using it in a mission critical role."
\_ I replied above.
\_ What's frightening is that "real enterprises" use MS
Windows at the enterprise level. How does that factor
into your argument?
\_ Name that Fortune 100 company and we'll discuss it.
\_ how about MSFT
\_ *laugh* And we've seen the effect of _that_ on
their security, uptime, etc. That is why RE's
don't care if a project costs $100k or $1m when
their multi-$B company is on the line. Those
kinds of numbers are so trivially small they don't
matter. Stop thinking small potatos. |
http://csua.com/feed/