February 11th, 2002, 03:38 PM
depth of linux commitment?
this link speaks about sun's new fondness for the penguin.
Do you believe that sun ibm and others are committed long term to linux?
Do you think that there will now be a shakeout in the distros for a few linux winners?
It seems that when big money gets involved there are winners and ....
I tried to send this earlier but we were under a ddos attack. (again)
February 11th, 2002, 04:23 PM
This whole "acceptance" of linux by sun is a brilliant idea.
The majority of "low-end" servers are mainly running Microsoft IIS webservers, because they were cheaper and easier than the solaris or IBM servers. If this goes through I think it will further impact the hold that linux has on the server market, and boost tux sales and the amount of people with linux experience. While this will be a steep learning curve, I think we will all be better off if IIS is on the backburner for the market. Let MS re design their webserver until it is ready to actually compete seriously with the rest of the world.
The only hangup to this is that the kiddies would focus their attention on Linux servers and since it takes a brain to use linux....it could be just as dangerous. There is a lot to look at where this whole idea is concerned.
just muh 2 pennies.
Antionline in a nutshell
\"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"
Trust your Technolust
February 11th, 2002, 04:59 PM
Let's look at it more realistic.
I think that these new distibutions and all the new noise around Linux will make it less development envoirement as it was known in the beginning. Most distibutions are now going away from the open source community. I am not saying this is the death of linux, on the opposite - maybe this is the new Unix - I do not know. But I am sure that in Several years we will have only two or three free distributions which is kinda sad.
February 11th, 2002, 05:17 PM
With MS supposedly concentrating for two months or so (yeah right) on their OS security, maybe this will finally get it through their dumbass heads that programming security from the start will benefit them greatly instead of constantly playing catch-up when it comes to IIS and other server-side applications. Apache's been around for years (I've been on board since pre 1.3) and they listen when someone says "Hey, this is kinda screwy". MS could take a lot of humble lessons from a lot of other developers of other programs, *nix and win32 alike.
As for linux in the open market, considering it does take a brain as hogfly mentioned, it will be targeted more and more however, the open source and commitment behind it will squash those (I can hope) and considering that shell accounts should really be limited, that'll be another area to look at. Support from Sun (they knew they'd be out of business if they didn't support it), IBM, and others is definitely a good thing for linux, especially since groups like the Gartner Group and governments are trying to get away from Windows because of inherent problems/security/etc.
We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much with so little for so long that we are now qualified to do just about anything with almost nothing.
February 11th, 2002, 05:24 PM
I donīt know what to say about Sun yet. I had just gotten a i386 running Solaris and the next day Sun announced that they
were dropping Solaris for Intel.
About IBM I can say that they have big plans, when SuSE got on itīs knees IBM came to the rescue. Offcourse this whas a big investment for IBM.
February 11th, 2002, 05:29 PM
good posts everyone. A mature discussion.
Hogfly - I agree and hope IIS will lose luster fast.
yasho - Let's hope it is the new unix.
Vorlin - we are watching the gartner stuff closely. I am recommending we part with the IIS sites we still have and going to chilisoft or apache.
Focmaester - Yeah. Maybe they will bring it back after 9.
February 11th, 2002, 05:41 PM
I'd like to make a point here. Linux has existed for more than 10 years. Before now, there has been no commitment by the 'big players' and Linux has survived for more than a decade. Personally, I believe that Linux will never go away. It simply is. It doesn't need the big money to stay in the game, as it just exists. It isn't a company or anything, it just IS.
When anyone can get a copy of the OS because it is freely distributed, then I see no reason to think that whether corporations adopt it or fight it it will actually make much of a difference. The only thing I see adoption of it changing is raw market share. If a company like IBM will support linux on their servers, that's a pretty big incentive for people to use it. If a company like IBM decides not to support linux on their servers, people will think twice before picking it up, because it will be coming unsupported.
Sun's adoption of Linux is perfect for them: They can further compete with MS on the low-end side of things. They need to sell their hardware, and if they can make it cheaper for people by bundling Linux instead of Solaris, then so be it, it's money in *THEIR* pockets, not someone else's pockets.
The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
\"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?
February 11th, 2002, 06:07 PM
chsh - yes of course that's true. I first played with linux years ago. I suppose now that it is reaching mainstream many see it as "new". Nonetheless there may yet be a shakeout because as more houses work on differing versions the business thing comes into play. Investors want to see a return hence my comment about a shakeout.