Slashdot Mirror
Deciding Between SCO and Linux?
wolfbane01 asks: "I spend some time giving tech suggestions to a medium sized business firm (~100 employees) with a large amount of demand placed on their file server. Their current server is a dual Pentium 500 with RAID array and they are looking to upgrade it. The dilemma is the current server OS is running SCO OpenServer 5.0.5, and their new raid array requires 5.0.7. Their programmers have demonstrated that a Linux box can process records much faster, but are still worried about the investment and potential problems that switching OSes would entail. I have already mentioned the cheaper price and the community availability when problems come up, but what other reasons have Slashdot readers come up with for a switch? What arguments am I forgetting that make Linux more attractive then SCO? Should I advise against switching to Linux and advocate them sticking to SCO? Is SCO going to even be in business long enough to make the upgrades product cycle?"
Short answer: Buy Linux.
Long Answer: With the uncertain status of $CO , you really have to ask yourself: What happens if IBM wins? Or drags the case out for 10 years? IBM is the Master Litigator(tm). Throughout their existence they have used the courts to smash other companies into bits, or drag things out long enough to bankrupt the other guy. The only company that was worse than IBM for this was NCR (circa late 1800's to early 1900's --- several of their board got convicted for crap like that.)...
But I digress... IBM will keep the fires going for a really long time, and SCO can't last forever. By going the SCO route, you are essentially betting the farm that SCO wins, which seems a bit strange. If you go with Linux, you can be fairly confident that linux will be around for a hell of a lot longer, as SCO *may* have a case against contract breach by IBM, but they have't a leg to stand on against anyone else.
Given, that after the lawsuit is over, the entire community will shun them, they will have nowhere left to turn for customers, and let's face it: SCO never had many anyway. Aside from making a shitty product (And I've been exposed to SCO for over a decade now) they won't be spending any of their new found wealth on development, that money would be earmarked for the investors.
Linux is here to stay. No force in the planet will change that. Even if all the top Linux Kernel hackers died, Linux is going to persevere forever.
"...In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true..."
Tell them if they choose SCO, _I_ will come to kill them.
well, the new Linux kernel 2.6 has support for:
[fill in 95% of all hardware on the market]
BUT, the SCO OpenServer is much better:
1. it is based on the UNIX v7 source. hell, it _is_ the UNIX v7 code.
2. comes with a nice 1000 page EULA (that premits SCO to take your wife and kill your dog at time of their choice).
I say, go with a winner, go SCO!
(Unless that little update breaks your system. In that case you've got nothing to lose with switching :)
I suppose just to play Devil's Advocate:
I would presume from the post that they likely don't NEED any more software packages. They likely don't NEED more people with experience administering Linux.
What they need is to maintain the existence that their business has, but get their shiny new RAID to work.
What we know:
(1) They currently run SCO, and everything they have runs in SCO
(2) They need support for this shiny new RAID
What we don't know:
- How much the upgrade is going to cost them from SCO
- If there are any gotchas that they will run into trying to run their applications within Linux
- If the staff is capable of administrating Linux reasonably
So, is it worth the money to investigate Linux? I certainly wouldn't change something that Works for a new Unknown, even if it is demonstrably cheaper, without putting in some serious Time and Effort to test the new Unknown, and that's going to eat up a lot of that Demonstrably Cheaper difference.
As the article says, the programmers have demonstrated that Linux can process their information much faster, but do they need much faster? I mean really.. do I need a 2.5GHz P4 to word process, or can I continue using my P5/100 laptop? I highly doubt I would notice any difference except that the load time for OO.ORG would decrease from about Forever to about Half of Forever.
I would say to start testing Linux. Make sure that Linux can do what needs to be done. But if you need it up and running --now-- with the new hardware, you're gonna have to go with SCO for now.. but I would definitely say get into the Linux testing right now, because as everyone else here points out, SCO may not be around when the lawsuits involving Linux are done!
Trust me, I have no love for SCO, but look at things realistically with your mind, and not with just your heart.
"Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
you are the guy that purchased the single OpenServer license SCO sold between 1999 and 2003?
shame on you for supporting the terrorists!
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Leaving sco behind will let you focus on your core business.
I was involved in a business that migrated from SGI and SCO boxes to Linux, we saw a dramatic drop in IT costs and at the same time increased flexability. Not to mention we didn't have to pay $150 for a tcpip stack (this was back in '97-99 might have changed).
Not to mention, that you have a lot more commercial
applications available on Linux. Really, sco is a mess technically
they're behind the times, expensive and just plain crufty. Your programmers will learn to love linux in short order. Further, the C*O's will love linux too. With SCO they're probably used to hearing "Can't be done" or "we'll have to buy a license", it's a nice change to hear "sure, i'll do that this afternoon" or "we can already do that".
I have already mentioned the cheaper price and the community availability when problems come up, but what other reasons have Slashdot readers come up with for a switch?
I'd recommend sabotage. With little effort, you can ensure the SCO specific hardware never really works right. Putting the RAID card in the microwave for a few seconds seems to work.
Am I missing the question??
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
I'd suggest looking into UnitedLinux; heck, even SCO likes it! Evaluate it and see if that's more compatible out of the box with your stuff.
If you want a second opinion, here's some more advice; he also confirms that it's easier to move existing SCO stuff over to UnitedLinux than it would be to switch to RedHat Linux, for example.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Summary: you have a working SCO 5.0.5 system, required hardware upgrades are driving a minor software upgrade to 5.0.7 with presumably low associated risks.
Question: is it worth a major software change to Linux with high associated risks? This change is unplanned and the programmers have already said they're worried about potential technical problems.
Answer: no. You shouldn't be using a required hardware upgrade to drive a major software change. That's a bad practise to get into. You should be approving the minor software upgrade to SCO 5.0.7.
However: given the lower TCO of Linux and the proven higher performance with your application, you should also be proposing a long-term project to evaluate a migration to Linux. The evaluation should include a risk assessment, full technical approval from the programmers, consideration of knock-on costs like training and support, etc.
Never use minor changes with low risk to drive major changes with high risk. It makes you look like a cowboy. If the SCO system was failing and there was an impending deadline and the 5.0.7 software upgrade carried a high risk... THEN and ONLY then would a hasty Linux migration have any merit. I doubt that's the case. Don't put your balls on the block when this should be a simple low-risk software upgrade.
I read somewhere that they are the same thing. right?
There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.
SCO is a professional secure, and most importantly real unix, based on the original unix source code. Sometimes hobbyist projects such as fetchmail and linux can be used as cheaper alternatives to professional software, if you are a student or someone else with lots of time and no money. But for a succesfull american corporation, you will quickly find out that you need the real stuff if you are to succesfully compete in todays difficult marketplace.
Throughout the computer industry, SCO is commonly recognized as the best unix out there, and as the forthcoming lawsuit will show, probably the only legal. There are companies, such as IBM, Sun, SGI, and others, that have their own version of unix, but their unixes are nothing but cheap off-shoots from the original SCO source code, and their legality is certainly questionable. Some of these companies are even founded by famous hackers, such as Bill Joy.
Switching to linux may be the worst of all possible alternatives. While it is possible that other companies, such as IBM or Sun will be able to license the original unix source code, there seems to be no hope for the linux community to come up with the money needed for that. Among those with knowledge and an interest in the forthcoming SCO trial, there is no doubt that linux will probably become not just unavailable, but it will most likely be a federal offense. Betting on linux in these times, is as stupid as not accepting jesus and the lord as your savior.
I think that by betting on SCO, you are putting your money on a real winner! There is no doubt that SCO will continue to dominate the marketplace for as long as we can predict the future. Nevertheless, SCO is still pretty old technology. If you some day bring your kids to work, they will be frustrated by the lack of modern games on your server system. If this is a thought that bothers you, I would recommend upgrading to the industry-standard Windows 2000 system, surely a system for a new millenium!
Future AskSlashdot questions:
- I'm thinking about donating some money to charity. Should I give it to the FSF or Al Queda?
- I currently work for Satan but I'm thinking of quitting and working for God. What does Slashdot think?
Their programmers have demonstrated that a Linux box can process records much faster
If this is true, then it seems to me like a small step to just create a Linux shadow system operating in tandem with the existing SCO system.
If the shadow system demonstrates the needed performance, reliability and maintainability that your organization requires after some weeks or even months, then it will be a simple matter to switch the roles of the two systems and ultimately unplug the SCO box and redeploy it if the cost of that "security blanket" is too high.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Ahhh, Mr Gates, I was wondering when you would show up here on slashdot !