Posted by
CmdrTaco
on from the and-they-all-run-the-beast dept.
X86BSD writes "Interesting survey at Netcraft showing the most reliable hosting providers for June. Interesting that not just the top 5 are FreeBSD but that the top 10 come from all variants in the industry."
Wow, thank you so much. With more posts like this, the/. effect is sure to be a thing of the past!
-- "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
Re:I'd agree, but
by
ThePeeWeeMan
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Why was that modded offtopic?! You've got to credit this poster for understanding the *real* reason why 99.99999999% of submissions get rejected, which is to fulfil/.'s role as a geek center and increase the level of geek procreation.:-)
Wow,
is this the first 'SCO' post with negative mods? Currently the parent score is:
50% Offtopic
50% Funny
Is this a turning point for SCO posts?!?
Will SCO continue to guarentee funny mods, or will it begin to generate offtopic, troll, and overrated?!? Stay tuned boys and girls for the next episode of Slashdot!
*BSD, Reliable Provider? Maybe 20 years ago
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
Actually I'm interested in SCO too. Having had the misfortune being an admin for a SCO system for 2 months (before we switched to Linux) I wonder if anyone seriously would use SCO as a webserver. If s o I'd really like to hear about their experiences =P
Exactly. I personally haven't used SCO OS's too much, well not as a sysadmin at least, and I'd like to hear about people who have.
But I don't think we should talk about it, because apparently Slashdot administrators find it "Offtopic."
-- Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
At my work, we've got two kernel revs: the one that works well for our service, and theone Oracle deems necessary.
The one used for non-Oracle machines performs FAR better than the Oracle kernel, and is a patched -ac kernel. The Oracle kernel is RHAS2.1, soon to be RH Enterprise. It routinely runs out of swap (on a 4G machine!), and has relatively bad NFS performance.
So, now you do know of a real Linux production server set that uses patched kernels. However, it's not a big admin nightmare, as we pick a stable patch set and use it for quite a while, 6 months or so now.
Re:This is not surprising.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
While it is true that BSD is dying, there are some helpful steps you
can take:
deal with the inevitable.
grieve for your loss.
move on.
Never let your emotions get tangled up with something
as silly as a computer operating system. It isn't healthy. So BSD
fails. Big whoop. Deal with it and move on.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
Re:I'd agree, but
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
These are all good questions. The trick is finding the answers!
Slashdot Mirror
early post for the pirate zacs birthday and the queen of norway.
props to maus, linuxdave, larrical, gorge, and all others
yay
Cause that is just funny.
Everything Zen;
Everything Zen;
I don't think so!!!
Remember children, dont feed the trolls.
Wow, thank you so much. With more posts like this, the /. effect is sure to be a thing of the past!
"Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
Why was that modded offtopic?! You've got to credit this poster for understanding the *real* reason why 99.99999999% of submissions get rejected, which is to fulfil /.'s role as a geek center and increase the level of geek procreation. :-)
Wow, is this the first 'SCO' post with negative mods?
Currently the parent score is:
50% Offtopic
50% Funny
Is this a turning point for SCO posts?!?
Will SCO continue to guarentee funny mods, or will it begin to generate offtopic, troll, and overrated?!?
Stay tuned boys and girls for the next episode of Slashdot!
What We Can Learn From BSD
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
Exactly. I personally haven't used SCO OS's too much, well not as a sysadmin at least, and I'd like to hear about people who have. But I don't think we should talk about it, because apparently Slashdot administrators find it "Offtopic."
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
At my work, we've got two kernel revs: the one that works well for our service, and theone Oracle deems necessary.
The one used for non-Oracle machines performs FAR better than the Oracle kernel, and is a patched -ac kernel.
The Oracle kernel is RHAS2.1, soon to be RH Enterprise. It routinely runs out of swap (on a 4G machine!), and has relatively bad NFS performance.
So, now you do know of a real Linux production server set that uses patched kernels. However, it's not a big admin nightmare, as we pick a stable patch set and use it for quite a while, 6 months or so now.
- deal with the inevitable.
- grieve for your loss.
- move on.
Never let your emotions get tangled up with something as silly as a computeroperating system. It isn't healthy. So BSD fails. Big whoop. Deal with it and move on.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
These are all good questions. The trick is finding the answers!