Tossica wrote:I would bet that Linux has a better chance of undercutting the desktop market before it makes a dent on the backend.
Corporate America loves Windows and Exchange. Thats the breadwinner for MS. They also don't care about most other application servers, which is where they save money and go the Linux route.
I've done work for a ton of Fortune 500 and mid size companies and all of them are rolling out large numbers of Dell Linux clusters and HP Linux servers.
For LARGE companies, Linux is a great idea. If you need a server to host a DB and have a staff on hand that can support Linux, why pay for a MS license? Most Mid-size businesses (I guess we need to define what that means) don't have the luxury of a full time competent IT staff and need their handful of servers to be doing everything they can to help productivity in their organization. Linux gets a big fail here and I don't see that changing any time soon. A Windows DC/Exchange/File (SBS for small companies) server paired with a 2003 Terminal server is a pretty tough combo to beat coming from a Linux standpoint.
Tossica wrote:For LARGE companies, Linux is a great idea. If you need a server to host a DB and have a staff on hand that can support Linux, why pay for a MS license?
big databases run on SUN or HPUX and that's pretty much it
the stuff that runs on Linux is the shit you can't justify spending real money on
HP and Dell are putting some serious support behind Linux these days so I can see their role in IT infrastructures growing but only in places where a Windows OS is overkill. By Linux in my earlier statement, I meant any flavor Unix. If you are talking Sun or HP-UX, etc, you are paying a hell of a lot more money than you would for a Microsoft product.
I think our annual support contract with HP is pushing close to the 8 figure mark
that being said, there is not a single linux variant out there that can offer the kind of support we need.
It costs more up front to buy hardware, os, software from a single vendor, but in the event of a major meltdown, you end up with a much better support experience
there's none of the bullshit where one vendor blames the other, and vice versa, and you waste hours/days/weeks just isolating garbage to force the fuckers to fix the issue
could we do it all with linux cheaper? sure
would it work as well? no
ps, referring to real UNIX as linux is just a slur~
IBM, Red Hat/Dell, and HP all provide excellent Linux support, so I'm missing what you are going after? All of them offer what you are asking for Tikker.
Do either of you do actual application development or anything but network support? There isn't a big gap between Linux and MS, except for the proprietary lock in. There are numerous commerciial applications for both, the difference being the cost for Linux is much much cheaper, and the stability is better.
Comparing development and roll out of any WEB application on Lamp versus 2003/Frontpage/SQL is an easy and overt win for Linux.
Most midsize offices can contract out LAMP and small database support cheaper for Linux, and with better results going through the above vendors, than doing the same thing on 2003 or NT. Small businesses cannot, but they usually don't have heavy IT departments.
What saves a man is to take a step. Then another step. – C. S. Lewis
lyion wrote:Do either of you do actual application development or anything but network support? There isn't a big gap between Linux and MS, except for the proprietary lock in. There are numerous commerciial applications for both, the difference being the cost for Linux is much much cheaper, and the stability is better.
prior to the position I'm in now, I did. my tech path was either to head towards the DBA side, or the network, and I chose network
I'm not comparing Linux to MS, but rather Linux to real Unix, and in that manner, it's lacking
HP does not support their linux variant nearly as well as their own HPUX
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
I really got into playing with FreeBSD for a while, it made an excellent firewall/dialup server when I was still using dial up. Last time I'd played with it they had made major improvements to cv-sup, but the installation was no where near as clean as some of the linux distros. I really liked it, but I have to admit it wasn't well geared for novice users.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
