Slashdot Mirror
Turbolinux Not Dead Yet
Abdul Nabi writes "I found this article on Linux Today which is a response from Turbolinux to the recent rumors of a shutdown. The responds contends that they are restructuring rather than shutting down." Ya know, I can't
think of a single person that I know that runs Turbolinux. Maybe that has
something to do with their problems.
giving them any market share outside of the pacific rim, turbolinux might have a small following of users in the u.s. and europe desiring proven IA-64 support (they were first to the linux market) or a really nice stable desktop for application development (ok, so no one i know personally ...). i get the impression they are part of united linux because of the strength of their usability - but SuSE is so gosh-darn usable i don't see that being their contribution to the group. their focus on the rim and a largely marginalized sector of this century's growth in professional and business computing is going to make it tough for them to make it on their own or as part of united linux.
when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
While competition is a good thing, too much competition in a small market will kill some of the competitors.
I wonder how many commercial distros will be left in some years. RedHat, Suse, Debian of course, but others ?
Well, you'll have a steady flow of small/niche distros appearing and going bankcrupt soon after. But I doubt we'll see any other big wonks.
Owner of a Mensa membership card.
I tried Turbo back in 2000, it was HORRIBLE. It seemed very much like a RedHat ripoff, with nothing extra. Plus, it didn't perform well for me..so I dropped it from my repertoire.
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
Oy! I use turbolinux. Because of constraints with budget, and because I inherited them, I run a turbolinux web cluster. It runs very well. It's really useful, as if a server goes down, I only have bad pages for 10 secods. It's a pain to set up, but it's all I have, dangit.
TL ain't too bad ...
My company has something like 20 TL servers, 5 of which are using TurboCluster for clustered management (used to be more, but, now we use Tomcat and it does its own load management)...
We have not had any problems with the TurboLinux *nixware...
Turbolinux is dead, eh? Then why is their distribution preinstalled on servers from these manufacturers:
IBM x135, xSeries
Gateway
Compaq Proliant
HP (duh) tc2110 rc7100
NEC
Hitachi
Fujitsu
SGI
They are also working with these manufacturers to customize code in the kernel and various apps to increase performance / reliability under heavy load under specific configurations for specific applications.
This whole discussion is absurd, don't think it's time to retire the Turbolinux icon yet, Captain Burrito.
Google search Turbolinux+preinstalled+server would give you a free clue, but then what would everyone do with all their spare time...
Why aren't you people coding?
BTW I was using Turbolinux as a desktop before I relegated the machine to more mundane tasks, and describing the distro as 'horrible' is just silly. I actually found it much more flexible at install time than Slackware (in 2.2.x days), although with the five-disk-Slack install now there are lots of module options etc...
Home users trolling about what is largely a server distribution is again, silly (slaps your wrist)...
fdisk3hs
Redhat:
1998 - Lost $3 million
1999 - Lost $6 million
2000 - Lost $42 Million
2001 - Lost $86 million
2002 - Lost $140 million (Redhat's fiscal 2002 has already ended)
Mandrake:
Lost 3.6 million euros in the 1st 6 months of this year, lost 7 million euros in the 6 months before that.
Yep, that "give the product away for free and make money on service and support" businesss model is really working well.
Open Source is great for amateur programming geeks who like to tinker with code, but it is failing miserably as a business model.