Slashdot Mirror
SuSE CEO's Two-Distro World
FrankoBoy writes "CRN has an interview with SuSE CEO Richard Seibt in which he claims such things as 'Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else.' Another example of this kind of corporatespeak can be found in another interview he did with ZDNet last week. DistroWatch has an article about all this in its current weekly newsletter."
SCO isn't a company. Debian and Gentoo aren't companies. Is Mandrake? Is there any other companies out there rolling their own distro?
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
RedHat and SuSE and SCO!!!
My rights don't need management.
Right now, when Linux needs to unite more than ever because of the FUD SCO is releasing, here comes this guy saying stuff like that. Maybe he should go read the cathedral and the bazaar.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
... not two-distro. IMO (not trolling either) Red Hat and SuSE both suck -- although SuSE sucks a little less. I use Slackware on my laptop and Debian for any server tasks, and neither of those distros are produced by a commercial entity.
Somehow I don't mind this kind of megalomaniacal self-important delusion when it's coming from a company like SUSE that actually has a meaningful, usable, well-crafted, well-supported product that time and effort was put into.
Oh well. To me, Linux still means "Debian and Gentoo, and maybe someday I'll consider trying SUSE, but probably not." Redhat and Mandrake are dead to me. ^_^
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
I've had problems trying to run Redhat on anything low end, mostly hardware incompatibilities, but also unexplainably long pauses without any disk activity.
So I use Slackware. No problems yet and great low end hardware support. Easy to administer too.
I haven't used linux long enough to say my opinion matters though.
<sarcasm> We all know Linux is all about SCO </sarcasm>
MoFscker
But I would leave out Red Hat and SuSE too. Linux doesn't "mean" any companies! Linux means a stable, reliable, nimble, free OS.
:)
Of course, my years of using and contributing to Debian (which is not a company) may have skewed my viewpoint somewhat.
And the Internet means two companies, AOL and MSN, nobody else.
funny... I thought that Debian and Mandrake were alive and kicking...
and Slackware has as strong of a following as ever.
hell, I find slackware to be the only choice for embedded system prototyping or dedicated things like a freevo box or other things you need to be able to strip out the crud to get a fast small system.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It's my view that the industry has decided there is one main operating system competitor to Microsoft, and that is Linux. Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else. There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors.
All he's saying is that in the corporate market most of the support is related to these two companies.
Personally I think he's wrong, but he's not trying to deny the existance of other distros or anything.
Does the general /. public know what is going with Novell and Ximian? (apart from the Netware admins). This is what one Netware admin had to say:
... This is a competitive advantage to Windows because this is not something you can get with [Windows].
Novell needs a new loading OS kernel to build Netware on. DOS certainly has reached it limitations with scalability and security so linux is an obvious solution. They'll still maintain their same environment and NDS tho. But scalability is their main push. E-Directory (NDS) loads on WinNT/2k/2K3 and linux.... but keeping it in its native environment is still the most stable of course.
And the CEO's answer to a question:
CRN: What do you think of Novell buying Ximian? Does this bode well for Linux adoption on the desktop? Seibt: I would take this as a fact that Novell is taking Linux very, very seriously, and it's another fact that they are not concerned about any lawsuit. They simply believe that Linux is something that is a huge value for the customer. Think about what CA [Computer Associates] just did. They did a survey with their customers about why customers are deploying Linux. [Customers] named five reasons: performance, reliability, scalability, security and total cost of ownership, which came in fifth. What does this mean? Everybody is talking about total cost of ownership, and no doubt this is very important, because all of us have to reduce IT budgets. But customers named four other reasons. These reasons are strategic reasons why to deploy Linux.
Well what?
Off-comment...
But I love the fact that if you type this sig straight into google, you end up with the first link to Apple's iPod.
-Barkeep, a draft of your most hazardous brew, for the world is slowly stepping into focus, and I don't like what I see.
Were gentoo zealots mentioned anywhere in the "most zealous zealot" poll?
I think they deserved their very own poll option.
Does anyone actually run SuSE Linux outside of Europe? If so, why? Red Hat is basically the Linux standard distro if you want to run commercial software, and Mandrake is simple to install and run for newbies. What does SuSE bring to the table?
I cant beleive that the guy said that linux is about suse and redhat . SuSe linux is surpased by a number of distributions out there. I am just shocked that SuSe would say that . I mean there are many many linux distributions out there and from a whole sort of community prespective SuSe is fairly low .
Companies. He's talking about companies. Name 3 companies that produce Linux. Red Hat, SuSE and Mandrake.
You also have apparently not used SuSE much, nor read all the articles about how popular it really is. It's the Red Hat of Europe, and Mandrake is taking all the scraps on the US and European markets.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
C'mon -- the guy is a non-native English speaker and the context makes it perfectly clear what he's saying. He said that from the perspective of commercial Unix vendors, there are two Linux distributions they actively consider.
I'm a Gentoo and Yellow Dog user, but the shrieking in just the first 10 comments is completely misplaced.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I'd still recommend SuSE to newbies regardless of this obvious corporate BS. In my opinion, SuSE is still a good distro. It has worked well for me. My only problem with SuSE is that they do not offer free ISO downloads (although they do have a Live evaluation CD and FTP installation). If they'd offer a free installable CD ISO I think more people would be willing to try their distro.
Smeghead every day of the week.
He's saying that as far as the corporate world goes, Linux == RedHat | SuSE. If you buy a pre-installed Linux box from some IT vendor somewhere, it will have RedHat or SuSE on it. This is basically true.
So don't jump the gun on tearing this guy a new asshole.
I'll stay with the turtle (Debian), 'cause we all know what happens at the end. The turtle poops all over the hare (SuSe). /me makey jokey joke/
/joeyo
2^5
Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else. There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors.
Thats bullshit.
HP/Compaq bundles Mandrake.
And certifies systems for Redhat, SuSE, Mandrake, and TurboLinux.
If HP isn't considerd a "large IT vendor," who is?
The unofficial
It would be nice if we could get Linus, RMS and ESR to together pen a statement (together, so that their individual quirks will roughly even each other out ;) ) stating that Linux isn't just about two companies, or even about companies at all. Linux existed before any companies were supporting it, and it will exist afterwards.
And if he doesn't take back this silly, new-wave corporo-capitalist nonsense ("Linux is about two companies"? What, is he learning economics from Bill Gates or Darl McBride?), we should simply boycott SuSE.
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
There are always groups of people who swear Maxtor blows and WD never fails, or Redhat installs on any hardware and Mandrake does not work on any.
The bottom line is, most distros work on most hardware without significant problems. There will always be fanboys who cry for years because they had one or two bad experiences with a Distro.
Especially about red hat. Red hat is the closest to a profitable, properly run, professional company in the linux world. Suse is quite respectable too, and they have a great product to back it up. While other linux distros do matter, they don't show up on the professional radar for most people.
Arguing about whether or not to use GNU in your name, or which GUI is more "free" than the other is irrelevant to most companies. They want good products, not irrelevant nerd-speak. Red Hat and Suse have forged past the anarchistic free-for-all attitude of hackers and made Linux much more approachable. Anyone who says otherwise is probably just jealous of their success...
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
Granted there are all kinds of linux flavors and distro under the sun, but walking down the street in anytown USA you ask any given person "hay you ever heard of linux?" or "could you tell us the name of a linux distribution/company you have heard of?" and most common answers will be Redhat, Suse, and Mandrake - in that order.
Red Hat has pushed Linux into the spot light more than any other company has - ok this is where I get flamed - but honestly what companies other than Red Hat have targeted more than the fat-guru-programmer stereotype nix user. Gentoo and Slackware definaetly don't expect anyone but a power user to even touch there distros. Mandrake trys to be a friendly nix distro, but they constantly beg their users to donate money and can barely keep from going bankrupt. Red Hat and Suse are the only 2 companies that have successfully made money selling linux to both corporations and home users, and of the 2 Red Hat is by far more "KNOWN"
Ave Molech Setting
Even more interesting is when you consider SCO just hired an ex-SuSE VP of International Business, to be the VP of SCOSource.
And that McBride comes from being a VP at Novell...
The SCO Group Announces Appointment of Gregory Blepp
"SuSe linux is surpased by a number of distributions out there."
Do you mean technically or in installation numbers? You could argue about the former, but every formal study I've seen has the installation base going "RedHat, SuSE, and then everyone else." I wish I had the links offhand, but alas, I don't have the time to go back and find them.
It's not really much of a stretch to say that SuSE and RedHat are the two big distributions, and that everyone else is a bit player. Even Mandrake doesn't have an install base that compares.
Not very tactful to go blurting it out, of course, but don't shoot the messenger.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
Debian/Gentoo vs. Redhat/Suse/Mandrake.
But then I realized he was referring to "companies". Linux is the way it is because it was made by people who care, and the same can be said (possibly to a lesser extent) about other unices(Linux walks, talks, and quacks like UNIX. So does BSD/QNX/etc.)
Don't get me wrong, I like nearly all Linux distros for the guts beneath them. I just prefer Debian over Redhat/Suse because of the complete lack of commercialization; I can get ALL of the available software in the same interface, with nothing held back "for paying customers".
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Simple - BSD is dying! Haven't you heard? I mean, why else would so many Slashdot posters be warning us it's coming appocalypse? ;)
It's my view that the industry has decided there is one main operating system competitor to Microsoft, and that is Linux. Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else. There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors.
This kind of polarization is usual behaviour when you have several smaller opponents, as a example: political parties in "non-bipartidist" systems use it frequently.
I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
Please read the above post and spot the obvious trolling inserted.
I've got a fever and the only prescription is more COBOL.
> You also have apparently not used SuSE much, nor
> read all the articles about how popular it really > is. It's the Red Hat of Europe,
Really? well... we don't live in the same Europe because SuSE is nothing in the UK, nothing in France, nothing in Spain. While Mandrake is.
Sorry but Europe is not only Germany.
strikes at /. once again...w00t
2, and I guess 3 commercial entities (IE COMPANIES) produce Linux distro's. Lots of other distro's available from many other sources but NOT COMMERCIALLY PRODUCED....
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
WTF? The guy simply mentioned what distro he was using, which was different from SuSE. He never brought FreeBSD into the comparison! You have no idea why he is using Gentoo rather than something else. Personally (as someone who has used both) I use Gentoo because its software library is updated quicker, and certain Linux subsystems (ALSA, preemptive scheduler, new I/O scheduler) are better for desktop use than the FreeBSD equivilients.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I think too much is being read into this comment. For one, it's obvious English is not this guy's first language from the text. Secondly, he seemed to be addressing Linux as it pertained to larger corporations. As far as large companies go, Suse and Red Hat likely ARE the only two distros they're really concerned with. They're the ones that have the parterships with the likes of IBM and Sun after all. He's not delusional - he's just not talking about what everyone seems to think he is.
"You can take our lives, but you can never take our Flerbage!!!!"
Big money in getting a 3% sliver of that 10% market share! Am I right?
Am I right, people?
He did not say there will only be two Linux distributions.
He said "There will be no third distribution that will be SUPPORTED by the large IT vendors."
That's his estimate on what the corporate world will support / believe in. Remember, he's looking on this from a corporate perspective where you get support etc., not a free O/S view.
> Even Mandrake doesn't have an install base that compares.
Everything but the truth!!! SuSE has a very small installed base indeed for a simple reason: their product is proprietary-locked. So it's installed only in corporate environments, while you see RH, Mandrake and Debian everywhere.
Just have a look at http://www.linuxcounter.org or http://www.distrowatch.com to learn about Suse real installed base.
And please stop to spread false informations.
I hate BSD zealots much more than Gentoo zealots. (okay, okay.. I use Gentoo myself and I realize thats a huge bias)
But still, at least the Gentoo people are advocating something that has a chance at becomming mainstream. Near as I can tell, BSD will allways have a tiny niche market, especially on the desktop.
The unofficial
I'm also not sure what he means by "company", because as far as I'm concerned Gentoo Technologies, Inc. has the legal status and enough products for sale to qualify as a company... and the only Linux company that has made any money off me is Mandrake.
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
Don't forget that Suse is pat of the United Linux distro (along with SCO unfortunately).
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
Does anyone actually run SuSE Linux outside of Europe?
To be honest and not make it a flame, I have no idea. I tried it. I dropped the 80 bucks for the Pro 8.0 release. It lasted about a week on my machine...
I use Gentoo now. I used (and still promote to the n00bs) MDK because the ease of use thing (and I used it for a few years so I can help them out if they get stuck). I had a bad expirence with SuSE, and I know I'm not the only one. I have a few e-friends spread around the globe and they've had the same "glowing" reports I have...
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
quote was taken out of context - SuSE's just saying that corporate IT is focusing on just two distributions.
Don't know about you - but I see very few other distributions out there on corporate boxes...
Okay, everybody calm down.
First of all, I really don't think that this interview was very interesting.
What seems to have gotten it onto Slashdot was his "only two distros" comment. However, what the person submitting the story left out was one minor detail: context.
He said HP, Sun, etc., are mostly backing off from pushing their own proprietary operating systems and opting to push Linux-based products. In that context, there are two highly relevant Linux distributions: Redhat and SuSE.
Can you name another distro with the resources to provide support to a major hardware vendor deploying Linux?
Isn't it amazing how much less interesting and inflammatory his comment seems with a little context surrounding it?
Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
> Does anyone actually run SuSE Linux outside of Europe?
You can say outside of "Germany". Suse is really a German thing that tries to expand to territories MandrakeSoft catched the latest 5 years.
I'd be one of those new Gentoo users. I've been slowly transitioning over to it for about a week after having spent 3 years or so piddling with Mandrake and RedHat. (As a side note, I still feel that MDK is the best distro around for Linux newbs). I'm thoroughly impressed with it, and I can see why people have been making such a big deal out of Portage. I've come to feel that Gentoo is the perfect distro for the Newb++, as I've learned many things about Linux I had never known before venturing into this, despite considering myself an "intermediate" user.
:) I think it's this type of flexibility that attracts me to it - You can turn Gentoo into pretty much anything you want it to be.
Being able to start from Stage 1 really teaches you a lot about the system, while a Stage 3 (pre-compiled) install allows you to quickly deploy a system and take advantage of the Portage without waiting a full day for KDE to compile.
I think Gentoo is definitely going to be my distro of choice from now on.
The most common answer will be "what the hell are you talking about?"
Of course, Debian is a GNU/Linux distribution, and not a Linux distribution.
All he's saying is that in the corporate market most of the support is related to these two companies. Personally I think he's wrong, but he's not trying to deny the existance of other distros or anything.
If you look at this, it's wrong no matter how you interpret it. Literally, he left out a damned big company - IBM. Yes, they use Red Hat's stuff, but to say "Linux means two companies - Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else" is just flat wrong on that basis.
If you want to be assume he meant distros, then obviously he left out like 50.
You would have to interpret that as "companies who release their own distros under their own name" for that to make any sense, but by that time, it's irrelevant. The major players aren't the companies making the distros, it's those like IBM getting it on machines. Among companies with distros, only Red Hat (not SuSE!) has had any real impact doing that. SuSE's penetration is far less, especially outside Deutschland.
So, to me, the only sense in which his statement is true is that in which it's barely relevant. Sorry to SuSE, but they have nowhere near the impact of Red Hat or IBM.
Ultimately, he's trying to sound as if SuSE is half of the non-MS world, and that's nowhere near the case
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
He's right, there are 2 linux business operating system companies now, Suse and Redhat. If I was to ask Dell, HP, or IBM if Mandrake ran on their servers, they'd say "Maybe but don't ask for it in writing", for Suse or RedHat you get an answer of "This range of servers are all certified to work with RedHat Advance Server and Suse Linux Enterprise Server"
If I want to buy some hardware + software, the only way to get a certified setup with Linux is to buy either Redhat or Suses server products at about $1000. For people running large Oracle or DB2 databases on IBM xSeries or Dell Poweredge servers, this is what they need.
His quote carries on with "There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors". I saw HP were supporting Debian while Bruce Perens was there, but now looking on the HP site everywhere it is RedHat or Suse.
There's definitely going to be more desktop linux vendors, but a lot of them still ride on top of Redhat or Debian, and again a lot of them cater for specific markets.
The funny thing is that I actually did try Suse the other day. I downloaded and burned their "Live CD" as part of a lecture. I was very impressed at how well it worked. It really was a no fuss deal. Like you I'll put up with a little meglomania for that. What harm can he really do to free softare? Who really needs large IT vendors? The future is free.
He also says lots of good stuff too. He slams SCO and easily dances around all their FUD. He's creating value and sees himself as a big institutional player. Good for him. No free softare based system can be as ugly or as abusive as Microsoft was.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
> But I love the fact that if you type this sig straight into google, you end up with the first link to Apple's iPod.
You of course realize that is because google displays the most visited sites first...
The unofficial
Thanks in Advance
Sig:Why copyright isn't a fundamental human right
Because I like rsync and python scripts more than CVS and makefile hacks? And I like running stuff on my embedded MIPS and PowerPC. Which leaves me with NetBSD. Of course netbsd doesn't use ports by default, so now the user has to figure out how to "upgrade" NetBSD with ports. When FreeBSD installs cleanly on my ibook maybe I'll try it. For now I'll stick with Gentoo and NetBSD.
:)
Also, please don't lump FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD together, as if they were just different distros of the same thing. (well maybe NetBSD and OpenBSD).
These three BSDs are infact all very mature forks of very old version of software. They have evolved, for the most part, indepedently. There is a lot of trading between the groups, but Linux takes stuff out of NetBSD too.
Of course ports is available in Linux too. If you feel up to installing them. Gentoo portage does a few things that bsd ports does not, although one could argue that the features of portage are not features at all but bad design.
The *BSD crowd, especially FreeBSD crowd are pretty sore about Linux being more popular. What also really hurts is the 1-way street for sourcecode. Linux can grab things out of a BSD, but a BSD can't grab things out of Linux, all due to the nasty icky GPL.
Of course my own OS is public domain, so I hate BOTH the Linux and BSD people because you'll be able to steal from my OS and I won't be able to use stuff from your OS. You all are terrible bastards.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I'm actually looking to toy around with Linux some. I'd prefer it be easy to install, support a decent array of hardware, and be as painless as possible to gussy up KDE, or Gnome 2.
From what I've seen in discussions like this, is a slight plurality to redhat. (Last time I tried it, that crappy lilo bootloader munged my, not exactly spanking, new harddrive's mbr, preventing a dual boot setup.)
--Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
So, lookes like SeSE has found SCO's secret stash, and/or borrowed Steve Jobs's reality distortion field.
Mandrake makes a decent all-around box (server or desktop), Slackware makes a great server, Debian has its' following, etc.
Wow. Obviously you have never gone near Suse Enterprise or RedHat Advanced Server.
Suse's portal server is a killer platform and the first product in a long time to really challenge Exchange in the enterprise.
As for a desktop distro, from my experience in corporate buildouts, Suse and Lindows seem to really shine right now. RedHat is good, too.
We still run NetBSD or a trusted UNIX on our big iron servers, though.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
It doesn't matter whether Red Hat and SUSE are most popular right now, maybe they deserve to be.
What's most important is that with Linux there is no way that they can prevent any other company that decides to step up and bring a distro to market.
This fact will keep them on their toes via the omnipresent shadow of the unknown competitor just around the corner and it means that even if they decide to abandon Linux ten years from now, any of the other distros can come in a take up the slack.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Is this true of Lincoln, Gandhi, Bonaparte, Hitler, da Vinci, Jesus?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
All the NetBSD people I've met are really cool. All the FreeBSD people on IRC are bastards.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
though you might have to settle for the full 8.2 professional 5-cd set)
LILO is a tool, and tools don't screw up, the people who use them do.
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
I have to agree with you on just about everything. Gentoo, I have found, has one of the nicest installs I have seen (while my linux experiences are not as high as I would like (I'm more of a BSD fan, myself)). It was fairly easy, and you don't install anything (almost, there are a couple things like nano already installed, IIRC)that you don't tell it to. It's plenty stable, and fast. It's pretty much the only linux distro that I have found to be worthy of having installed on a computer. But, all in all, I've found OpenBSD to be one of the nicest installs. It doesn't install anything at all that you don't specify, it's *very* secure and very stable. But, those are really all my opinions.
Are you telling me that you don't see the connection between government and laughing at people? - Interviewer
Admittedly, this guy is leaning out of the window here. However, the industry -- in this case meaning not computer vendors but IT companies wanting to use computers for administrating/performing their work, is so far used to Windows, and may not always be forgiving when it comes to quirks that geek distros like Debian, Gentoo and Slackware tend to have. While in the hands of a dedicated power user, these may be far superior to SuSE and RedHat, in the hands of even a computer-experienced, intelligent linux-newbie, they bomb.
Having appeased the geeks (I like Debian a great deal, trust me), what does SuSE(my current OS) have to offer? Easy, smooth installation, flawless autodetection -- as far as I know -- and an acceptable configuration tool in the form of YaST. On first boot, you get a good KDE install, with the important stuff, like OpenOffice and such integrated, good menu structure and MIME type settings. SuSE's weakest points are lack of SuSE rpms for a lot of programs, and the fact that changes to configuration files may be overwritten by SuSEconfig, which runs after every major system change. However, for someone who either wants a smoothly running system, or is proficient enough to disable SuSEconfig and compile some programs themselves, SuSE is quite a nice distro. For those reasons, it may be much more attractive for companies than tweak distros.
Divide et impera!
While many vendors do support other distributions than the big two (RH & SuSE) this is mostly on the desktop. Support on the server side for large servers is pretty much restricted to these two. This is true for hardware also If you want support for larger SMP's, SAN, etc there are not many drivers for other distros. Usually you can just go ahead and try, but if something does not work the support line will tell you to replace your distro xxx with RH/SuSE where thei support it.
I've been involved in quite a few new Linux customer projects. All the time third party software (Oracle, SAP, DB2, etc) was involved as well. The only distros which are *certified* to run this stuff are Rh and SuSE. And customers do want certified installations !
Personally I'm happily running debian and gentoo, but I haven't come across commercial installation of these distributions yet.
Markus
according to netcraft, if linux means 2 things, it is RedHat and Debian :)
> Gentoo is garbage.
Its not garbage, its different. Alternative, if you will. Kind of like in the music industry...
Not everyone has the same needs/tastes in a distribution as you.
The unofficial
I'm 19, live upstairs in our house, and I happen to be a real life user of linux.
Well basically if you see there are two types of distributions. Well one type mainly to make money out of with easy but sometimes crappy arch(example:- dependency resolution with rpm) second type is out of love for the "process" of linux. well yeah to put it short one treats linux as a product and other as a "process"( http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5057755.html ). But its total crap to say that only those two would be supported by the IT industry.
...especially where the PHB factor is low. I also use a lot of Mandrake myself, especially as a recommendation to others, 'coz the ease-of-use (installing, using and maintaining) is unsurpassed (well... Debian can be easier to maintain :-).
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Can anyone speculate why scox stock is up 21% today (to 12.66)?
While I agree that users are more often at fault than tools, to say that they don't screw up is simply false. Software tools, at least, have bugs. They do things they aren't supposed to do, even when being used exactly as advertised.
I have no idea what happened to parent commenter's system, so you may very well be correct in this case that he improperly configured LILO. That's the case more often than not. But not always.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
I'm not sure if you are mentioning Linux style /proc because you think it's bad or because you think it's good?
/proc. And you can do things like /proc/pid/fd. Most modern Unix-like operating systems have /proc for viewing processes. Solaris and QNX do, I know that for certain. proc stands for PROCess
/proc by making it some kind of kernel configuration interface like Linux does. BSD uses sysctl interface to control kernel options (like the number of file descriptors for example).
/proc/ is a real shame, also if you've ever written a kernel module in linux that provided /proc you'd notice that there is some very peculiar behavior. For example you can't just dynamically allocated each line, you have to just allocate a buffer of data ahead of time, fill it in and ship it off to /proc. Otherwise you'll end up with some really terrible race conditions where data might change in mid-read. Also Linux /proc system information files are not seekable, with is another inconvience.
Anyways. First part, is BSD does have
BSD doesn't overload
The way Linux has overloaded
The proper way to do a lot of these things would to use an ioctl on the device that the information would be associated with. And that's generally how most operating systems deal with it.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I ran it for a while...switched to it when a Slackware install ate itself. YaST is fairly decent at configuring stuff it knows about, but building/adding "outside" apps gets to be a little tricky. After a couple of years or so, I built an LFS box...once I was somewhat familiar with that, I started building systems around LFS instead, as it delivered a lightweight system with just the stuff you want, and it was usually a bit faster.
Nowadays, I use Gentoo...it offers most of LFS's performance advantages in an easier-to-use form. I have Slackware on an old 486 for which building LFS or Gentoo would be impractical. I suspect I'd be lost if I tried picking up SuSE again...I'd have to figure out its quirks. Ditto for Redh*t, which I've never used, aside from some poorly-configured boxes set up by a clueless "admin" who didn't know WTF he was doing. (Tried Mandrake once...pitched it after a day or two. I think the pattern that's emerging here is that the more shiny the Linux distro, the less likely I'll be able to get it to do what I want.)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
...except the fur SuSE part.
[Half-smiley.]
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
This is excactly the meaning of the statement.
It has nothing to do with desktop distros.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
1) Using the nVidia drm kernel module and XFree driver instantly crashes my computer.
2) My BT848 TV card doesn't actually work right.
Something that Gentoo has over FreeBSD (and not just with regard to my system) are use flags. With FreeBSD ports, adding support for certain libraries often requires passing flags to make, which you typically don't know until you trying to build a package and it spits some message out about them. In Gentoo, you can select the flags you want and everything automatically uses them. I have to admit that getting all my programs support for all the libraries I want is something I really enjoy about Gentoo.
But overall, I do like FreeBSD and would probably run it more if I could use XFree with OpenGL acceleration and watch TV. I do run it on my laptop, because all of the hardware there does work with it. Notable is also that the documentation is outstanding compared to most anything on Linux.
The bottom line (for me at least) is that Linux tends to be more bleeding edge and has broader hardware support, probably due to a larger user and developer community.
I'm not so sure about that. I think it was taken out of (or beyond its) context, although I do find the sentiment somewhat brusque. The companies that *are* starting to distribute linux on servers and now desktops are working mainly with Red Hat and Suse, who make most of their money from support services the corporations rely upon. That's just a fact right now - corps want another corp they can bitch at. If they were smart, they'd bring in a few savvy admins, use a free distro and pay *them* for support. But there's that whole "If they were smart" condition, applied to corporate IT no less...
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
Yes, the comment is in reference to desktops but it's in reference to desktops in a corporate environment. If you're a company deploying Linux in the US, you buy Red Hat. I'd bet that they have 90% or more of the corporate Linux market.
I don't know if SuSE is in the same position in Europe or not, so I don't know if the quote is accurate over there. It's accurate over here.
(And for what it's worth, I don't run either. I run Mandrake desktops and Debian servers on my LAN. But I'm not a corporate customer either.)
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
Well, based on the replies in this thread I'd say that the people who try it will, in general, switch over to Gentoo.
It is therefore highly recommended that you do not try SuSE - unless you like to have casual sex and get your kicks out of risking getting syphilis.
BOO! TERRO
Good Day
XML causes global warming.
Here's another comment refuting your claim, with links.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Mandrake is a product of MandrakeSoft.
UnitedLinux is the parent company of SUSE, the European arm which produces SUSE Linux. There is also the Asian arm, TurboLinux, and the South American/Latin arm, Conectiva. Yep, all these major distributions fall under the same parent company. So you're pretty accurate in asserting that there's only a few big players as far as corporations go.
---
WARNING:Slashdot karma not redeemable in the afterlife.
Okay someone help me compare distros to music:
RedHat: Mainstream
SuSE: Classical
Debian: Folk
Slackware: Rock
Mandrake: Country
Gentoo: Techno/Pop
FreeBSD: Heavy Metal
NetBSD: generic drum rythms
OpenBSD: tranquil, stress-relief
SCO: Satanic
The unofficial
I'm actually looking to toy around with Linux some. I'd prefer it be easy to install, support a decent array of hardware, and be as painless as possible to gussy up KDE, or Gnome 2.
Then use Mandrake. It's easy to install, it recognizes pretty much everything, and there are lots of mirrors where you can download the ISOs (except right after a new release :). When you decide you like it, join the Mandrake Club to show your support.
Jesus Christ, stop it already. I mean I've seen rabid open source people before - a whole lot of them actually - but you gentoo types are just unbelievable.
BOO! TERRO
After seeing all the outraged comments on here ("Waddyamean he thinks my copy of Gentoo isn't a distro?!"), I'm surprised, because I think he's right (at least, in terms of corporate distros). Before any holy warriors mod me down for saying this, I should provide a disclaimer...OK...here goes...I am a distro bigot, and I would never use anything but Slackware (if it's my decision to make), because all the major distros are disgustingly bloated. Slackware -- it rocks. RH/SuSE/etc -- they suck. Just the facts, ma'am. *ducks*
Now that we've got that important fact out of the way, let's look at Oracle. Last I checked, Slackware, Gentoo, and other distros that lean further toward the hobbyist/programmer/hacker end of things were not supported by Oracle -- it was only SuSE and RedHat. It's not just Oracle -- as a general rule, if you find some proprietary software that they're trying to make a Linux port of, and they name a distro, it's about 90% likely to "support" RedHat and maybe 40% likely to "support" SuSE.
Reason for the quotes around "support" would be that most of the time, a specific distro is not needed. It's the same kernel and most of the same FS setup (well, Slackware's init scripts are a little bit bett^H^H^H^Hdifferent, since they follow BSD instead of SysV). However, naming the distro supplies a corporation with the perfect ass-covering if it's something their tech-support hasn't been trained on. "What, you don't use RedHat? Well, I'm sorry, but we can't support your software. Even though you paid us $5,000 this quarter for gold-level support. It's broken -- you fix it."
It comes of picking something very specific to train $6.50/hr helpdesk personnel who aren't likely to investigate and learn a new distro. Plus a reason I can sympathize a bit more with: If the customer is breathing down the company's neck to fix this problem that they had with a homebrew distro some BOFH in the customer's IT dept. crafted, it will cost a lot of time, money, and perhaps contracts (as the customer gets more impatient) to get it fixed. Better to go with an extremely common standard, even though they are the lowest common denominator in terms of distros.
So I agree -- to the corporate world, there are only SuSE and RedHat distros. The rest just aren't supported.
There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
You mean "alternative" as in "same old shit with a different name"? Was that horribly poor comparison on purpose?
XML causes global warming.
Not on purpose, no. I was mostly brainstorming.
:)
I elaborated on this theme in this other post
Criticism welcome
The unofficial
After all, if it's your responsibility to maintain the system, you're going to stick with what you're familiar with, and in North America, that's NOT SuSE. Nor in a large part of the rest of the world. China, India, other parts of Europe and Asia ...
If you had to set up a corporate lan w. linux desktops, you'd probably opt for the same setup you're using now (Debian servers, Mandrake desktops). Why? Because you're familiar with it, you know it works, and there's tons of others using it :-) In such a scenario, SuSE doesn't enter into the equation.
What a dumbass thing to say, it's almost worthy of a SCO executive it's so stupid.
Say goodbye to Debian, Slackware, Mandrake, etc.
The SuSe Uberschmuck has spoken!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
> I'm 19, live upstairs in our house, and I happen to be a real life user of linux.
Yes but you'll get no respect from the 30+ year-olds who think you need back problems and a potbelly in order to be considered a real life user of linux!
The unofficial
You also realize that IBM is a partner with UnitedLinux?
Labeling SuSE as evil because of it's association with UnitedLinux is as wrong as labeling TrollTech as evil because it's association with Canopy Group.
Basically, this is another non-story.
- Lycoris Desktop
- Lindows
- SuSE
In the past, they also carried Mandrake.My beef with the whole 2-companies thing is that you'd think he'd be a little more sensitive, given how:
- everybody's up in arms over the stupidity SCO is pulling
- SCO and SuSE being partners in UnitedLinux
- SCO just this week appointing a new vp snatched from SCO
So, SCO says they own Linux, SuSE says it's just them and RedHat --- man, you'd think they were a couple of kids doing a circle jerk around an old copy of National Geographic or something, they come off just SO full of thmselves.When the new genereation of UDMA 66 drives came out (iirc), appearently lilo wasn't ready, if I had a 33, it would have been happy. It was one of those things after the fact, so, I go with lilo, it all looks ok, then the next step of the install mysteriously craps out, so I go to boot into windows to do some email, check out some documentation etc. And that crapped out too. Fortunately, the disk utilites that came with the harddrive did a nice job of planning for just such an emergency. But it was annoying. Turns out that this was a known problem with lilo at the time, but mandrake thought it'd be best to try to bury it, as opposed to prominently mention it.
Tools are far from perfect. And they occasionally fail, even when used as intented.
--Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
given the recent SCO events, UnitedLinux is dead.
But Suse's future depended entirely on a success of UnitedLinux. Suse is in many respects like SCO: they don't really believe in open source, but only in closed source pay-ware. Thus, the suse administration program YaST is closed source. In the end, they will sink with their partner SCO.
Eventually, the distro world is gonna be:
- RedHat (corporate users who think they need phone support)
- Mandrake All people who want to use linux but don't want to edit config files by hand
- Gentoo All those who love editing config files in emacs and vi, and to spend their time compiling kernels and wanking on how fast their PC compiles it
- Debianfor all those who think it should be named gnu instead of linux and that Stallman is good and Linus is bad, and who choose their distro on ideology rather than on rational aspects
You gave me a good laugh, thanks :-) Mind you, SCO just picked up one if its' veeps from SuSE.
Gregory Blepp, vp in charge of SCOsource
Hey, since SCO doesn't get the Open Source paradigm, maybe he'll end up w. open sores :-)
I quote from : http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/debia n_linux_distribution_10_years_old_today.html
Despite the abscence of funding, Debian is the second most popular Linux distribution we find on internet web sites, surpassed only by Red Hat, and leaving the likes of SuSE and Mandrake in its wake. Arguably, Debian is the most cosmopolitan of any of the Linux distributions, having a significant following in the former Iron Curtain countries, and well represented in almost every country.
Geographical Distribution of sites running on Debian Linux
[END QUOTE]
What studies do you use?
Suse is a corporate enitity, which makes other corps that much more likely to deal with them. The 2-distro comment is bunk in the common market, but in the corporate market it's spot-on.
Sounds like a jerk to me too, but like the man sez, it's corporatespeak. No matter what happens in the corporate world, we'll always have Slackware and Gentoo and which is fine by me, although if Red Hat and/or Suse can keep working well with the corps, then that's a good thing too. When was the last time you had a beer and listened to heavy metal with a corp exec? Hmm??
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
Your quote is also out of relevant context since you fail to continue with the rest. Here is the relevant snippet:
/. story submission which quotes Seibt as: "Linux means two companies: RedHat and SuSE, and nobody else." Obviously, Linux does not mean two companies, it doesn't mean any company, Linux is just a kernel.
It's my view that the industry has decided there is one main operating system competitor to Microsoft, and that is Linux. Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else. There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors. And from that perspective, even Novell decided not to compete anymore on operating systems. They now migrate all of their applications to Linux. This is a two-horse race between Linux and Windows. [emphasis mine]
So, there! He's giving his opinion about distributions that will be supported by "large IT vendors". He is also talking about Novell bailing out of OS competition. This is a corporate environment.
What is even more out of context is
If you want more, read the question thas was asked as well, and read it carefully, not just copy and paste. The question was:
But is it Unix or Windows that's being used less because of Linux? And will there be a shift in the future toward Linux replacing one or the other? For instance, as Linux on the desktop becomes more prevalent, will it be Windows that's more at risk?
The first question is: What OS is Linux displacing more right now: Unix or Windows? The second question is: As Linux gets more popular on the desktop, what OS will it displace more in the future?
In response to these questions he mentions HP, IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, and SCO, out of which his vendor analysis comes out. It is obvious he is talking about corporate server environments supported by "larte IT vendors"!
If I was to ask Dell, HP, or IBM if Mandrake ran on their servers, they'd say "Maybe but don't ask for it in writing"
Since you specified "servers", I can't say that's untrue, but HP certainly says that Mandrake runs on desktops from HP, and the interview did talk a lot about Linux desktops.
Being able to start from Stage 1 really teaches you a lot about the system,...
To me, this is the only real reason to use Gentoo. The binary optimisations are nice, but don't really make the 1337 system most Gentoo users claim. (Proper sysadmin of the system will gain you much more than compiler optimisations, in most cases.)
Portage is nice, but no great shakes; Debian's dpkg system is much better for maintaining a system. And I've discovered that maintaining my system takes quite a while (2.8 GHz P4, 512Gb RAM, etc).
I think you are right: Gentoo is the perfect "journeyman" system. After an apprenticeship with one of the easy systems (Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, etc), someone who wants to learn would do well with Gentoo. The documentation and community are first-rate.
That said, I think I am about to ditch Gentoo and return to Debian. I like the cutting edge nature of Gentoo, but I think I miss Debian's package management too much.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
I'm in UK.
I run SuSE 8.2 because it's the only distro I've found that will actually work on my PC - others (Mandrake, RedHat) fail to work with my RAID controller (KR7A-RAID).
SuSE's install and config tools (YAST1/2) are great for newbies like me.
True, but I've used SuSE Linux long before their United Linux efforts. I used to like what they were doing with Linux, but after buying 3 or 4 distros at $70 a piece I finally got fed up and now I don't trust them to contribute more than they absolutely have to back to the community. They seem to have forgotten where they came from, IMO.
touche' ;-)
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
Does anyone actually run SuSE Linux outside of Europe?
I do and I'm in the U.S.
What does SuSE bring to the table?
YaST2
Which means that I, or anyone else can come out with my own distro anytime I want!
THAT's what Linux means. Nothing else.
I use SuSE because I think it's one of the best distros, but SuSE's attitude is a little off-putting especially with the whole SCO thing going on.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
"Linux means two companies: Red Hat and SuSE, and nobody else. There will be no third distribution that will be supported by the large IT vendors."
Tough to argue with that.
"Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
I install SuSE 8.2 on Laptops and PC's at work. Not really an enterprise Linux user, but just for corporate workstations. I use SuSE purely because it installs damn fast and set's everything up (in most cases) properly. No hassels. It doesn't have a RedHat-ized version of Gnome/KDE. It has a beautiful splash screen. But most importantly, it has SUPPORT options.
Debian would be my pick for stability and security for a server though. However, no support options except mailing lists, BBS and IRC.
Seibt wants us to fall into the same trap everyone else seems to be falling into lately, that Linux (or Gnu/Linux) means RedHat, or SuSE. It is neither. There is no such thing as a RedHat OS, or a SuSE OS.
Large IT vendors will support whatever you want them to support, as long as you're willing to pony up the bucks. Place an order w. IBM for 1000 thinkpads w. Mandrake, they'll be quite happy to take your money. And your hardware is still warrantied. Last I looked, IBM was a large IT vendor.
Because of the terminology he was talking about. He was talking about significant companies. Not significant software. Not significant distros. Not what was significant about package-foo 2929.222 coming out.
Indeed, RedHat and SuSE are the most import Linux companies.
I agree. Its good for newbies. But if you ever want to edit your system files by hand you better find some other distro or you might end up spending hours trying to figure out why your changes keep getting reverted.
It also includes service vendors such as CGI, who, as long as you're willing to spend the coin, will work with whatever you're willing to throw at them.
You think a large computer-services company is going to refuse a contract because you specified a distro other than RedHat or SuSE? They understand that RedHat and SuSE are just distributions, not operating systems, and that (to quote RMS) the OS is GNU/Linux. Not RedHat. Not SuSE. Not Mandrake. Tell them you want 10000 desktops w. [insert your fav. distro here], and they'll work out a quote. It's just business. Not some stupid "holy distro war".
Large IT vendors will always follow the $$$, which is how they stay large. And when you're chasing sums of money that large, you have to follow the golden rule - "He who has the gold makes the rules". Hell, for enough money they'll support DOS, Cobol, Business Basic, Windows for Workgroups, OS2, etc..
A house divided cannot stand. Publicity like this is just the medication Microsoft needs to overcome the shit they have created with security lately. I hope that Linux distros can find a way to overcome this rediculous counter-productive in fighting that the media and SCO is trying to stir. I note that MSNBC/ TECH TV are trying their best to look unattached. Even though you can bet that Leo L will not be too silent on these issues. Bet he comes back with the usual "Linux is not quite ready for the desktop" garbage and tows the MS line! GNU and Linux has suffered from this rush to divide. Lets not help MS with this hatchet job by providing more fuel for the fire!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Please read it again, he is talking about corporate server environment, and the question was about servers also.
that with all this arrogance they are not the next company to go sco.
-><- no
I work for one of the Large publishers.
I try to not only support the "commercial" distributions, but maintain a list of known working versions of glibc, and the like. This is for a few reasons.
1) Just because RedHat AS 2.1 shipped with glibc version x and Kernel Revision y doesn't mean that those versions will be in place when our software is installed. To an extent, even "commercial distros" are no more useful a rule of thumb for compatibility than any other Linux distribution. Yes we Certify against release versions, but this is the real world. Security and bug fixes being what they are, a Real World BUSINESS installation is not terribly likely to be "as in the box" 3 months later. Every Unix/Linux platform I test is like that.
2) given a list of compatible package revisions, one can reasonably speculate whether it is worth testing/installing the product on something along the lines of Gentoo/Slack/Debian.
We don't necessarily certify those distributions, but you all know as well as I do that you can't tell a System Administrator "sorry, your OS isn't on the approved list" and expect to sell an expensive application. I'd rather our field guys say "it should work. Eval it, and if it does, we'll sell you licenses/whatever."
If they're big enough, I guarantee that they will get support no matter how home brew/non-Commercial their installations are.
3) If a particular package version (stable, mind you) breaks us, there might be a good reason why. At the very least, it should be noted in the bug database for investigation/tracking, supported or not.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
...All press about the management of Lindows, points towards them being interested in bettering linux. Mandrake caters to it's consumers and redhat is a company that gives back to it's community. Suse seems to be out only for their benefit and while they might make a good product, I don't want to support their business style....
Sorry to rain on your parade, but you're into serious bullshitting territory here.
SuSE (~300 employees) has a subtancial amount of fulltime developers programming OSS day-in and day-out. They pretty much did Alsa by themselves, they did something like 90% of United Linux and they are the ones in the market offering the biggest value for the least money. They've translated big parts of the linux documentation into german and offer a solid service that goes beyond just having a cardboard box. A box with the largest paperdocumentation on a linux distro, I might add. Shure SuSE wants to make a buck, but stating that they're only focusing on their benefit and not giving back anything of substance is just plain silly.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
My main distro is a battered (and I do mean battered) SuSE 8.2 LiveEval. (BTW, I'm in the US, and doesn't Linus Torvalds live in the US? He runs SuSE at work and RedHat at home (or is that the other way around...) according to "Just for Fun". Read it.)
Sounds like a bad comedy routine, doesn't it?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Something that Gentoo has over FreeBSD (and not just with regard to my system) are use flags.
/etc situation. My god. I'm fully convinced you can find Hoffa in there.
And something that hurts it are USE flags.
Unless you feel like sitting there, before installing anything, and going through all the USE flags, you will have to do a clean install at some time.
But let's say you move from KDE to GNOME. Clean install, because emerge -C will leave too much junk around, and you can't safely remove things because Emerge doesn't keep account of dependancies on emerge -Cs.
Of course since FreeBSD's ports usually use the same varibles for each optional library, you can put them in make.conf (gee, sounds oddly familiar) and boom, your good to go.
And don't get me started on the Gentoo
For the record, the Nvidia driver doesn't crash either of my computers, and the BT848 driver works fine here.
I used Gentoo for about a year and a half, and now even my desktops are FreeBSD.
Maybe this guy should try installing Mandrake.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
you gentoo types are just unbelievable.
OK, so we REALLY like it. Sue me. I use the source, Luke.
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
Whoever summarized the article really took offense to the "two distros" comment. That's a pity: SuSE is a good community citizen, and has gone a long way toward making Linux acceptable to the corporate and government crowd. They're also convinced Linux belongs on the desktop--as opposed to (for instance) Red Hat, which seems to have decided Linux desktops are for hobbyists.
He's right, by the way: the IT world is concentrating on SuSE and RH right now. That doesn't mean Gentoo/Debian/Mandrake/Slackware and the rest don't have a place, but none of these distros have done much to get themselves certified for government adoption. SuSE has. Power to 'em.
I like SuSE, and have put 8.2 Professional on five machines in the past few months. My friends love it. It's an easy install, and yast is a convenient manager. SuSE goes naturally with KDE.
The only computer in my life that isn't running SuSE is my iBook, which uses Yellow Dog 3.0. It's tough to beat Terrasoft's Mac hardware support.
I'm happy to buy from a company that's passionate about the platform and knows how to play hardball with Microsoft.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
I definitely agree with you that the optimizations aren't the real reason to use Gentoo. Right now, the learning process is key to me, later on, the package management is what's going to keep me hooked. Remember, I'm coming from the Redhat-based world of RPM hell, so Portage is a huge step forward for me. It may not be the absolute best, but I like it. :)
:) Either way, right now, Gentoo is turning out to be the perfect distro for my current needs, and that's what matters. It may not be perfect for others, but hey, that's why we have so many different distributions. It's all about choice.
Really, what I'm enjoying right now is the fact that I know exactly what's on the machine, and that I can add or remove packages at will with a single, simple command line call. Or that I can check for updates and patch them just as easily.
Most people do focus on the "from source" nature of Gentoo, but that's really only a small part of it. Gentoo's still a relatively young distribution, and I think that it's yet to fully define itself. I think that as it matures, there will still be a bleeding edge aspect to it, but that it may very well more drift towards an Unstable/Testing/Stable type system much like Debian. Really, it's already starting to happen - the ~x86 keyword for example, and the "heresy" of distributing binaries.
...while Red Hat's dominance cannot be doubted, and Suse's extreme popularity is not in question either, it would be a mistake to ignore the "31 flavors" aspect of linux. For instance, I keep at least two Knoppix Live CD's on my person at all times, and I hand them out like candy. People are amazed that there are OS's that are stable, beautiful and not Microsoft/Apple.
Then there's Lindows, and FreeBSD (though less of a nix, more of a nux). At least 5% of Macs now run Yellow Dog Linux IIRC, and I know for a fact that some schools have revived their old PowerPC 61xx's using MKLinux.
Regardless, he is generally right, but the OS community needs to downplay these statements, or it *will* become just Suse and RedHat.
Here are the distros currently supported by Oracle.
;-)
Yes, it's mostly just RedHat and SuSE that are supported by Oracle. Actually, SuSE just falls under UnitedLinux alongside SCO and some others. Not just any SuSE, either. The personal edition of SuSE you can download for free is not supported. You need Advanced or Enterprise Server versions of RedHat, SuSE, and other distros in order to be actually "supported" by Oracle.
That said, I'm sucessfully running Oracle 8i on Slackware and Oracle 9i on free SuSE, but those are non-production servers for evaluation.
The production servers run PostgreSQL on Slackware, naturally!
Actually I just ran into that problem not so long ago. I work for a small business, and while our servers are important - they aren't Red Hat Enterprise cost important just to get support longer than a measly year. I mean that negates most of the cost savings with Linux over Win2k (flexibility, control and other issues aside). I'm certainly not going to upgrade all of our Red Hat servers every new version, especially after the disaster I had with version 8.
Support is important as my boss likes to feel someone is behind it. The next in line is SuSE - but I really don't want to fork over money just to mess with a distro. And seeing how a distro is layed out is especially important with Linux, in order to see if what they're doing is going to jive with what you want to do with it. So basically I'm probably just going to say "screw the support" anyway, and use FreeBSD or possibly Debian.
Most linked to by other sites, actually.
[SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
Oh, well I had read otherwise somewhere but it appears you are correct.
The unofficial
I've used pretty much every major distro under the sun. SuSE 7.3 was my first foray into Linux (I had owned older versions of Red Hat and Corel Linux, but never got around to installing them), and it's simple and intelligently configured, if more than a little intimidating to people who don't know what they're doing. They've got an awfully good installer, and their system is reasonably well-packaged and configured. Their configuration tools are top-notch as well.
The boxed installation comes with 7 CDs and a DVD, which is nice, especially if you don't have a broadband connection. Also, their software packages are almost always up to date and well-tested, compared to Mandrake's which are new and sometimes break things (I never got Gnome to not irrepairably screw itself up after a few days), and Debian's which are stable and well-tested but always out of date if you stick to the "stable" or even "testing" trees. Also, everything Just Works. Every system I've tried it on, SuSE has consistently detected all of my hardware, and none of it has required extra drivers. Something always goes wrong with every other distro.
Another thing many people like about SuSE is the paper manuals. If you only have one computer, you can't always get online when something goes wrong and you can't fix it; and let's face it, even the 1337est guru can only take so much of reading 80x25 monospaced man pages. SuSE is very well-documented and covers the installation process through configuration, maintenance, etc. and does a damned good job of it.
However, the "commercial-only" attitude makes them unattractive to home users, and like you said, the de-facto commercial distribution is Red Hat. They've got the tools, but they're aiming for a saturated market segment they're unable to penetrate. On the home front, they've got Mandrake and Lindows to worry about, and both of those are also much better at what they respectively do.
Personally, I used SuSE for a long time before trying Red Hat, Slackware, Mandrake and Debian. I very, very much like Debian now.
At this point it's the people who use linux at home are the ones who are going to step up and suggest which linux to use. And SuSE may well be right there is only two real choices here, but that's one more than just SuSE. With the arrogance SuSE has shown towards their favourite distrobution and the fact there really isn't that much difference between SuSE and RedHat, SuSE may well find themselves the first loser which really isn't that much different from not being one of the choosen two in the first place.
Redhat seems to understand this better than most commercial distros. They don't go out of their way to cut down other to make themselves look better. Sometimes the best course of action is to sit nod and let the other person do all the work for you.
BTW I don't use either. Debian all the way here.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
I'll grant that what goes in /proc is pretty random and unorganized, but it's still immensely useful. Much better than throwing more cruft into ioctl (which is a heap of cruft to begin with. I can see real arguments for moving that stuff to another directory (/sys or something), and I can't comment on the API for modules, but I definately wouldn't want to give up Linux's /proc. It's what I miss most on Solaris and Tru64.
Sig:Why copyright isn't a fundamental human right
So Nottingham Counci, The Met and many other sites going for SuSE is nothing? Oh well I'd better get out of this consulting business I've been selling the wrong thing (No I didn't sell to these people but I am selling SuSE to an awful lot of businesses in the UK!).
Not to be pedantic (I know what the situation is), but since when is the state of Linux dependent on any companies, let alone 2 companies?
Would "enterprise scalability" have been harder without corporate support? Yes, no doubt. What about "secure networks" of all kinds? Yes, that would have been harder. What about good old academic rigor? Well, we needed that perhaps.
So, IMHO the corps are right and justified to be proud; they should advertise it on TV in fact. I personally have no prob with buying their products. But dammit, they shouldn't act like they're the only thing, because those who know this biz know better than that... and they write the salesman's check.
Yes, both Suse and RH have massive resources within the Linux community. Yes, SGI and IBM do too. In this game, minds and hearts count as much as dollars. But let's not be stupid here; it's just a fraction of a very fractured market, overall.
So would the biz types please lose the used-car salesman mentality for the sake of my patience?
C|N>K
I just took a long, hard look at this from every angle. Red Hat changed everything recently with their reorganization of their product line. The end result? You can have the "rolling beta" for free, or you can pony up hundreds of dollars per box for an updated, stable OS. SuSE's latest version is everything I've thought Red Hat was for the past 5 years, and it's still available for a boxed-set price. It's stable, and I haven't found any bugs in it, unlike Red Hat 9, where I personally logged a couple bugs, and got tired of waiting for someone to fix them. SuSE's distros are also free to keep updated, unlike Red Hat's, and the updates are available for two years, not just one. I'm doing this a big disservice by not going into all the gory deatils, but that's the short story. If you like Red Hat, then SuSE 8.2 is the "Red Hat" that 9 should have been. And, yeah, I think this sort of attitude crosses over into the SLES and RHES products. Red Hat wants to lock people into their Red Hat Network service, and you'll violate your contract for those updates if you install on more than one machine. SuSE is still open, albeit for the price of one boxed set. I'm sticking with SuSE until they pull a "Red Hat." After that, I guess there's Gentoo for the desktops and Debian for the servers...
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
Mandrake installed easily, but I felt their QA was weak, we reported some glitches in their installs and watched successive releases not make simple fixes. Mandrake appears more interested in features and less interested in stability/quality, and I felt at the time that Mandrake was not easier than Redhat or SuSE.
I've used Redhat the most extensively. Redhat has integration testing problems. However, redhat has more packages on rpmfind.net, which can be useful.
SuSE's been my desktop system at home and it has been quite good. SuSE professional edition is likely to be available in boxed sets in stores (redhat sounds like they my discontinue that mode of distribution) and my dept. is internally showing signs of preferring SuSE over Redhat, meaning, I'll probably switch to go with the flow.
A few observations worth keeping in mind are:
SuSE's YAST seems to be a more functional gui driven admin tool than Redhat's control panel, and has a much more consistent interface across versions.
Just wait until I'm in charge. When you see the sort of stuff I'm gonna pull, it'll make Microsoft seem like a benevolent-software-monopoly-dictatorship.
Get back in your hole Daryl McBitch, you only think you can screw everyone. -SMACK- -SMACK- You are going to jail.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Why I'm replying to an obvious flame, I don't know. But the compiling is perfect for all us "fake" users who like to test and/or develop new software which makes Gentoo the right choice for some of us "old" folks who still think computers are fun.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
...make a mod for RTCW that lets you play as Red Hat staff (Allies) or as SuSE staff (Axis).
I think you're confusing "web sites" with "total install base". By your reasoning, there are more Linux installs than Windows installs _total in the world_. Obviously, that would be a mistake.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
Novell needs a new loading OS kernel to build Netware on. DOS certainly has reached it limitations with scalability and security so linux is an obvious solution.
What difference does it make what OS the loader runs under? Linux can be booted from MS-DOS, it's called loadlin.
Yep, thats it. My attempts at the spelling weren't even close.
Read, L
I'm writing this on my Slackware box. I also have a Redhat server, and my daughter's workstation is a Redhat machine. I use Red Hat for two reasons: 1. A project I am on at work uses Red Hat, and 2. I didn't have time to fiddle around with the things in Slackware, that work out of the box in the Red Hat distro (particularly when you are doing desktop services for your family).
I did find Red Hat limiting for my own applications - and I prefered the way Slackware handles configurations, more 'unix - like'. Since 1994 I have used many different distros, including Turbo Linux, Gentoo, Mandrake, Linux Pro, Suse, Debian, and Knoppix. Over the years I always keep coming back to Slackware (although I use Knoppix as a recovery/utility disk at times - due to its ease of use).
If I had unlimited money and time, I would run Slackware on a standard fast motherboard/peripheral setup, that I would tune and lock down configs on, and all of the 'chrome' stuff my daughter likes (what's a "shell" Dad!?) would be tweaked out for her and my wife.
Unfortunately, I work on computers all day (configs, programming, troubleshooting, consulting on system admin issues - you name it), and have neither the time nor the energy to do it 'right' at home. So my menagerie of computers of various makes, models, ages and operating systems will have to suffice until that day I win the lottery, find out I have a rich uncle who left me his estate, or sell the great American novel...
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
I got SuSE 8.2 because I had run the live eval CD, and the Knoppix live eval CD, and they both configured themselves very well. I was building a new computer for myself (Antec Sonata case, ASUS PAPE/Lan motherboard, P4 2.4GHz) and they had SuSE 8.2 Pro at CompUSA when I when in to pick up a Linux package. Loaded up right away, found my printer (DeskJet 880C) right away, found my hard drive, video, CD, mouse all right away. It installed itself from 5 CD's, and I was the absolute newest newbie around.
I did have to dig a bit to get the Geforce4 card to use hardware acceleation on OpenGL. I had to get the new NVIDIA driver, and do some command line things to get it to load itself in. While not completely point and click, I was able to do it knowing essentially nothing but how to work Google and newsgroups.
I have never used Red Hat except as a coaster. I got a copy of like 6.X someting SuSE retail.. I wasn't impressed. I am still using Mandrake and I plan on staying with it.
SuSE is sleeping with the enemy (SCO) Therefore it can bite me.
As you can see I don't care about my karma.
I'm using the data avalaible to me . If you can show me a study (with actuall bases in reality) that shows installs of linux then I will conceed the point . However it should be pointed out that linux is commonly installed in the server enviroment and as sutch this survay may be an accurate representation of linux server install . It will not show end user boxes , however the point behind this being that the dude in the article was referring to companies migrating from unix to linux . Generaly speaking unix systems are not end user boxes and are more likely servers , so that makes the use of the netcraft survay even more valid . Now if you can point me in a direction of a survay of total linux system installations that would be very nice , otherwise...
I have used Linux since slackware 3.6a. I have tried slackware upto 7.0 then to redhat 5.2 at some point, then suse 7.0 and 8.1 and one of the more recent debian builds in between the suse versions.
...everything is right there for you. .rpm's with more ese then my redhat 5.2 could
Why SuSE? A few reasons:
1. it works out of the box on every box from my an old p75 to my newest 2.4GHz with and without scsi, and raid.
2. it has the shortest install time, esp. since everything is now on one DVD or 7 CD's
3. yast2. the way suse can handle both tarballs and
4 it has a killer firewall script that is just extremely fast to edit, so i don't ahve to waste hours rewritng my firewall whenever i move a box from its role to a new one, or 10-15 minutes just to play a new online game or something.
Slackware is and was great, but i got tired of wasting all the time building from tarballs.
Redhat was just riddled with bugs and problems, even installing its own rpm's
However, I think SuSE has seen its day, too. They have gone too proprietary, and non-standard compliant, making it a pain in the rear to update these days. Needless to say 3 years of SuSE is now soon to be over on my boxes...back to slackware or maybe something new, for I shall not use RedHat due to past experience, and I will not use it simply because "its what everyone else uses"...which is why most people in the US use it, I think. Because I never found it that impressive compared to other distros.
oh, and i live in the US, also.
I've played around with a most of the big linux distros, and nothing compares with the ease of KNOPPIX for getting a great system loaded and running. All the benefits of the Debian distro without the headaches. At Distrowatch, it's currently generating more interest than Suse. The live CD format, easy HD installation, and excellent hardware detection allows easy access to apt-get. That could be the ticket to increasing the linux share on the desktop. http://www.knoppix.com/
I use Debian. I like Debian because I don't have money, and I find the mailing list support good and useful.
That said, all the time people ask questions from a RH point of view, or mention "well, I also have SUSE". Nobody gets in a dither--at least, not any more than usual (the Debian mailing lists are not "professional" by a long shot, and the burners are kept on with a constant low-level flame.)
But to be honest, I've seen, indeed installed SUSE before, and SUSE's YAST is every bit as good as Debian's installer. For newbies, it's probably better. Indeed, their partitioning program is better as well, in my opinion.
And when I installed it, it was a sample install, but I got everything. After that, I'm pretty sure I could figure out how to install any source code I needed.
My point is that if a company was interested in installing Linux, or if a person who had the $80, and understood German better than English wanted it, I would not hesitate to recommend SUSE.
I really don't see any vs.
That said, the Debian distribution is every bit as valuable as the SUSE distribution. As I mentioned above, I use Debian. I really do hope that the CEO was saying essentially "if you want to go with a Linux company, that means us or RH", and not turning SCOish (starting to think with an "us vs. free as in beer" mentality).
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Actually, all I did is say I'm installing it -really, today, honest engine. What's with all that "Oh My GOD! These GENTOO Kooks Are Out In Force!!" type replies.
Seems like you're being kinda sensitive about the fact that I formatted a windows box, grabbed an ISO and did an install.
Perhaps you should try QNX? Here, it's not Gentoo, but I work for them and would be more than happy if the everyone decide to use QNX for everything. I feel that it's the best RTOS on planet. If you're a professional software developer I really hope you have an opportunity to use it for a commercial project. In fact, here's a URL where you can download it for free: http://get.qnx.com/. Our commercial product, QNX Momentics features the Eclipse IDE with a large number of advance features for embedded developers, including specialize board support platforms.
There. Now you can clearly see the difference between a comment of mine that's not motivated by anything and a comment that's motivated by my interest in spreading a particular type of technology.
--Hey, I'm in IL,USA and dropped the $$ for 7.3DVD. I ran it for a couple years, and truth be told I thought it was better than Mandrake at the time. Then got fed up with the 2-gig filesize limitations and how hard it was to update the security/bugfixed packages. At one point I had downloaded over 1GIG of package updates!
--So when I discovered Knoppix, I installed it on a testbox first, then converted my SuSE server. Happily running Debian now.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
--Actually I *started* with SuSE 6.4 or thereabouts, and stayed with them up to/including 7.3 because of Yast. When they came out with 8.0 and said they were dropping the original, text-based Yast in favor of resource-intensive GUI-based Yast2, I said "Sorry, you've lost my business." Even sent a few emails to the company.
--Yes, I know Yast2 has a text-based mode, but part of the reason for me not liking 8.0 was that you couldn't even *install* w/o using GUI mode. This was significant departure from previous suse installs.
--However, I have used their live-cd (8.2?) to configure my XF86Config-4 file, and set up my LVM partitions. Their front-end utilities are some of the best around.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
Does anyone actually run SuSE Linux outside of Europe?
I know many people in spain using SuSe. Most of them
switched from RedHat.
If so, why ?
It's got RPMs, it's easy to install. It just works.
From the Gentoo install doc:
Sorry about that, but see? I'm not crazy.
Well I code a *LOT* more C code than scripts. So I have a bias towards nice binary interfaces. I'm too lazy to parse stuff, even if it's as simple as a loop with some scanfs.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
To be arrogant you have to be in a dominant position in the first place.
Suse is at present wanabe big player, not a big player in the linux world
Despite the abscence of funding, Debian is the second most popular Linux distribution we find on internet web sites, surpassed only by Red Hat, and leaving the likes of SuSE and Mandrake in its wake.
So if Netcraft are to be believed, Richard Seibt seems to be right in that it is a two distro world; its just that SuSE isn't one of them.
Installed the Bubblemon yet?
Come on, guys! He's talking about the corporate world!
I know there have been like 200 comments stating the exact same thing, but they have all been modded +5 Insightful. I just love those points...
When a friend of mine who's been buying SuSE since v6.3 put SuSE8.2 update on his laptop whick killed it.
He contacted SuSE support who told him RTFM. Trouble his that the update version of SuSE has nothing in the manual that covers the problem he had and he had stated it was the updtae version so presumably they hadn't bothered checking. On every other problem he's mailed their support on the service he's received has been equally unhelpful and now he's just stopped bothering to contact them.
So I'd guess that the piss poor support that he, as an individual, has received shows where all SuSE's efforts are going and people who at get crap support as a home user aren't going to be wildly excited about having it in their office.
Personally, I have no qualms about Mandrake and run it, server and desktop, in several offices with no probs. Paid for support is low cost, fast and generally friendly and the community gets you out of a sticky position within 24 hours 5/10 times for free
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
Well, up til recently, a SPARC distribution. Redhat stopped letting people download their sparc distro back around version 6, SuSE kept theirs around much longer
rms said, "Well, God told me that GNU/Linux was the One True Linux. Nobody else."
Seibt said, "Well, God told me that Redhat and SuSE were the One True Distros. Nobody else."
Linus said, "Wait, wait -- I never said that."
philcrissman.com.
linux == slackware
!(^((ri)|(mp))aa$)
Speaking of flat wrong...
Ummm, are you forgetting about the fact that SuSE and IBM signed the Munich deal? I doubt that SuSE is unaware of IBM. But IBM doesn't have a Linux distro, which is why they teamed up with SuSE.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
This is an old article - about 4 days old. I should know, that was when I submitted the story.
On 2003-08-18 14:52:23 to be precise.
But my submission has neither been rejected or accepted.
Throw another karma log on the fire.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Remember that really where SuSE is coming from is in the business space. And from our experience, in that area, he's right. We rarely run into business servers running anything other than Red Hat or SuSE, or maybe Turbo.
On the personal, home user side the installs are far more varied.
K.
Has anyone noticed how as RedHat and SuSE get bigger, their distros get weaker?
I have never regretted my speech,
but I have frequently regretted my failure to speak.
Red Hat support the kernel development and SuSE support XFree dev.
Or what sort of contribution did you have in mind?
Nah, you can definately install 8.0 using text based mode. They just don't 'officially' support it anymore.
I agree though, YaST2 is a bit resource intensive for my taste, but its not like processing power and RAM are at much of a premium anymore. YaST2 runs perfectly fine on a $199 Walmart PC.
quote:
Or this:
Another quote:
So together with all the other distro's mentioned I think SuSe is just dreaming about their being only two distro's. Perhaps they want to be the european Microsoft?
I am one of the few linux users who is not looking forward to mainstream adoptation of linux. Sure call me elitist but I don't need my favorite OS polluted by WinModem drivers, binary only drivers and grahical boot screens.
The reason I have stopped using first redhat, mandrake and Suse is that they all seem to insist on going the MS way installing web based configuration tools for apps I can control infinitly better from a config file.
Sorry, I started ranting. Never mind.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Yeah Suse and RedHat are COE and CCC. CCC is required for DoE servers that touch anything secure or nuclear.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
[..]Debian was developed specifically to counter "Linux Companies"[..] That, my dear Twitter, is complete nonsence. Please read the retrospective by the founder of Debian himself. When the Debian project was started, there were no other distro types!
The quotes you provide are all in response to different questions. They are out of context of the relevant question. The relevant question and answer interchange only touched upon server OSes in corporate environments.
In fact, and again, the OSes and related companies that Seibt mentioned when beginning that specific answer were Unix vendors HP, IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, SCO, who face competition from MS Windows. OK, So far he's talking about servers.
From that point, he goes to say that - the above companies, facing competition from MS, have to think about their strategies for the future because, in his view, industry has already decided that the only competitor to MS is Linux. OK, he's still talking about Unix vendors competing with MS in the server market and their strategy as far as Linux.
Now, when it comes to main competition against MS in this arena, there are only 2 companies/distros that are supported by large IT vendors [for the server market], and those are RedHat and SuSE. And, from that perspective, even Novell decided to bail out of OS competition. OK, he's still talking about servers.
Don't you see? He is discussing corporate server market, not desktop, not average Joe. This does not mean that the whole interview was about servers, but that the specific answer, and the quote that was taken our of context, definitely was.
Here's a quote from Oracle's site source here:
And in an article on clustering here they again take an OS-agnositic viewpoint. Or is Oracle not big enough? Their ads don't say "Red Hat Linux". They say "Linux".Or take cpu mnufacturers. They offer cpus specifically targeted to the server market, and they don't care which distro you run. They support them all. Or do we now not count cpu manufacturers as part of the IT industry?
Different versions of GNU/Linux are pretty much interchangeable, and most people understand that. Seibt doesn't, or he's trying to pull a SCO.
The actual facts say that SuSE is bullshitting when they claim to be "up there" in terms of numbers, as was pointed out by distroWatch, both in an earlier link, and here, where interest in SuSE lags below Mandrake, Red Hat, Gentoo, Yoper, Debian, and Knoppix, and especially here, where they point out that SuSE is talking out of their ass, in specific reference to Seibt's comments.
Or you might want to look at this slashdot poll, where even insensitive clod distros outpolled SuSE.
SuSE seems to think that its' all about the install. I think they've come down with a YaST infection.
I don't disagree with most of what you say there.
/. story submission. And then they go bragging about Mandrake, Gentoo, and other distributions including desktop installations, and browser statistics, supported by "no reliable" polls by their own admission. In fact the quote from the other ZDNet article that distrowatch references is as follows:
/. or any other polls to prove such a point is... well... I don't have a comment on that one.
My point was that Seibt was talking about large IT vendors supporting server OS in the arena of OS competition in the corporate server market... and the quote taken out of context from that interview. It seems we now both agree to this.
Now, I don't agree completely with Seibt's opinion, and, it's clear, neither do you. I believe other GNU/Linux distributions have a fair chance of grabbing a share of corporate server market, and getting reasonable support from large IT vendors. You bring a good example of Oracle. In the beginning Oracle only "supported" their software on SuSE, then RedHat (if I am not mistaken). But now, they are more distro-agnostic, and rightly so. If Yahoo can use FreeBSD, then it's only reasonable to think that some large corporation may predominantly use Debian on their servers, for example. Obviously, Seibt thinks otherwise (what does "pull a SCO" have to do with this, anyway?).
As far as distrowatch links, they seem to take the quote out of the context as well, just like the
Q: But if they're getting rid of Unix, that would suggest there's room for more Linux distributions. It's all open source. It's all transparent.
A: If you ask them, they will tell you they want to support two distributions.
The question, again, is about replacing Unix in corporate environment, not a Pentium II box in someone's parents' basement. In that sense, and in many others, none of these polls are accurate, make sense, or even relevant to Seibt's specific answer, and taking
Thanks for the bit of history, I was able to find some references to SLS and a download of the MCC interim release.
I hadn't heard of either of them before your post, although I would have known about SLS if I had been reading the manifesto more carefully.
Read, L
I don't about you, but I'm sitting here typing this message on my machine which is running slackware 9 and is as solid as a rock. I don't think slackware is getting the respect is deserves. I run Oracle 9iAS on top of it and it never falters.
Dave Hill, Pimp
Having RPMs would be a *bad* thing...
Luke-Jr
I originally wasn't going to respond to this. But it's interesting, your comment. Not to rub salt, but just well, the compliment that it was to every engineer.
:). Even if every once in a blue moon that means a little extra disappointment.
They're pretty much the pre-eminent tool makers. But really engineering is all about failing, and hopefully doing so in a controlled manner. And every thing they do is, in a way doomed, and they know it. Nothing last for ever, the tools included. But when someone busts out, with "it can't be the tool it must be the user" (rightly or otherwise) it's an enourmous compliment. It's quite an achivement for a group of people to have their work thought so well of. (Lawyers? Dentists anyone?)
I have to say, it is pretty nice, almost never having to think twice about the tools
Or maybe I'm just reading into things.
--Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
Your methodology is still flawed. Web servers only represent a part of the server market, a part which is getting smaller as desktop and workstation Linux begins to get into the vogue.
_ releases /archive02/market_share.html
Now, for my proof:
http://www.suse.de/us/company/press/press
In 2002, according to PCData, SuSE had a 38% market share in the US. Unless you think their share went _down_, which is highly unlikely, the math is simple: if RedHat is larger (let's say, 45%), that it doesn't leave room for anyone to be larger than SuSE besides RedHat in the total market.
I'd even argue that Debian has a special advantage in the internet-facing (web, ftp) server market that is responsible for its disproportionate share - the "stable" branch is famous for its security.
Personal anecdote: most people in my LUG run RedHat - the overwhelming majority, in fact. Then comes SuSE and Mandrake, and then everything else. Not scientific, I'm afraid... but I've given that above.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
A couple of things wrong with that: . . .
Your link doesnt actually say that (it comes up 404 unless you remove the space , even then it does not say 38% market share)
Second : How did they calculate there market share?
Box's/licenses sold versus other boxes/license sold?
Most other distributions dont require people to by a box set to use there OS , (debian doesnt even sell one) . Then on top of that , that only takes into account installs , I installed SuSe once , but it sucked royally so I replaced with another distro (debian)
Anecdotaly : Most of my friends (who use linux) were at one point or another using RH , or mandrake , but have since switched to other distributions (like debian , gentoo , and a whole bunch of lesser known ones)
While I do agree debian is probably good for interfacing on the web and not for home use , the CEO in the article was talking about migrating from unix servers to linux servers . While they might not be web servers unix boxes arent that likely to be desktop machines.
hi i'm totally new to linux scene, i was wodnering if anyone could point me in the right direction for getting started, i'm hoping to set up a small ftp server using linux, but have no clue where to start or what distro to use, any help would be appreciated, thanks
You missed that part where I conceded that SuSE is known in Deutschland (which, incidentally, is where Munich is located).
Bottom line is, who is responsible for getting linux on corporate servers? The answer is a big I-B-M. SuSE can puff up all they want, but IBM could go with any linux distro, practically. They could roll their own, if they wanted or needed to. Ask any CEO who makes linux and they'll say IBM. As such, I maintain that what the SuSE suit was saying was a tad deceptive, or at least way overly self-important.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Definition: "pull a SCO" == "give the impression that you're vastly more important/relevant (especially in the IT industry) than you are".
Update of an old saying about statistics: "There's lies, damn lies, statistics, and Bible quotes" :-)
So, how was your weekend?
This is true, but obvious and irrelevant. Simply being a company who makes linux does not get it on desktops or servers. Regarding his quote where he suggested that half of corporate linux is because of SuSE...that's laughable. It's because of IBM.
If you ask people who makes "Linux", you'll get various answers - and I'll bet none of them are IBM.
How much money, and do I get to pick the people? If you mean slashdot users, you're right. If you're talking corporate America, people outside the IT department never heard of SuSE, and probably not Redhat either. They've heard of IBM. So when the IT guy goes to the CEO and says "We want to go with linux instead of Microsoft," the CEO says "What the hell is linux?" At this point, the IT guy has two options. He can say, "An OS made by this obscure company in Germany," or he can say "A great OS made by IBM." Guess one gets linux on machines at that company.
Until IBM rolls their own distro, they aren't a big name in Linux.
Absolute horseshit. IBM is directly responsible for most of the linux installs running in the corporate world. Period. That may not make them a big name in the slashdot crowd, but around normal humans, and in business, it does.
. But SuSE is one of the largest distros, and even IBM recognizes that - otherwise they wouldn't have chosen to partner with them.
True, but their impact is still miniscule. Let's look at it this way - I bet SuSE puts linux on more machines in the US *with* IBM than *without.* You want the counter position?
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
That doesn't make IBM a Linux company. IBM is a solution company. Just because the corporate world is very familiar with IBM doesn't make them a Linux company. It doesn't make the original statemet about SuSE and RedHat being the big two providers of Linux less true. The perception of the business world doesn't change the fact.
Absolute horseshit. IBM is directly responsible for most of the linux installs running in the corporate world. Period. That may not make them a big name in the slashdot crowd, but around normal humans, and in business, it does.
Of course IBM is huge in the business world. Them being responsible for getting Linux installed in businesses doesn't make them responsible for Linux itself. It is a small distinction, and probably not worth arguing about.
Let's look at it this way - I bet SuSE puts linux on more machines in the US *with* IBM than *without.* You want the counter position?
Sure, I'll take the counter position - without a Linux distribution such as RedHat or SuSE, IBM puts Linux on zero machines in the US.
The original point was that SuSE and RedHat were said to be the two biggest names in Linux, and someone argued that they forgot about IBM. It doesn't matter what people in the business world think, IBM is not a big player in the Linux world. They are huge in the IT and business world, nobody doubts that. They are smart because they know better than to reinvent the wheel, so they partner with companies who are the big players in whatever part of IT they need to use. That is SuSE and RedHat.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
You can play semantics all you want, perception (right or wrong) is what matters.
Them being responsible for getting Linux installed in businesses doesn't make them responsible for Linux itself. It is a small distinction, and probably not worth arguing about.
I never claimed they were responsible for linux itself, it's indeed irrelevant, and if you aren't arguing it no one is.
Sure, I'll take the counter position - without a Linux distribution such as RedHat or SuSE, IBM puts Linux on zero machines in the US.
Again, you think they couldn't? It's cheaper to do it that way. Look at it this way. SuSE existed, in a near vacuum, before IBM. Only with IBM is linux on computers. No, IBM didn't make linux. They got it on machines. And, I might add, an OS *not* on machines is prettty pointless.
The original point was that SuSE and RedHat were said to be the two biggest names in Linux, and someone argued that they forgot about IBM.
Yeah, me.
It doesn't matter what people in the business world think,
Tell that to whoever's paying your salary, assuming you're employed and out of college.
IBM is not a big player in the Linux world.
Perhaps Stallman's linux world, if only because they haven't renamed the company GNU/IBM. They're damned big when it comes to translating linux into cash, which, I might add, none of the "big players" you're fond of have been able to do.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
They could have, but they didn't. Why? Because SuSE had already done all the work of putting together a good distro. Obviously, IBM considers SuSE one of the big players in the Linux distro game. They are the distro provider, IBM is the "enabler" if you will. Linux distros have existed up to this point on their own merits, and by your account being on next-to-zero computers. SuSE may need IBM to further their business, but their business existed on its own before they partnered with IBM. Neither is essential to the others survival, but I think they can work very well together.
Perhaps Stallman's linux world, if only because they haven't renamed the company GNU/IBM. They're damned big when it comes to translating linux into cash, which, I might add, none of the "big players" you're fond of have been able to do.
Exactly. IBM knows IT business. SuSE knows Linux. IBM knows that they aren't a Linux company, SuSE et al know that they don't have huge hooks into IT business. That is why they are working together. They do different things, and each does their own very well.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.