Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EDS: Linux is Insecure, Unscalable

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the still-better-than-the-rest dept.

daria42 writes "Large enterprises should not use Linux because it is not secure enough, has scalability problems and could fork into many different flavours, according to the Agility Alliance, which includes IT heavyweights EDS, Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft, Sun, Dell and EMC."

60 of 1,112 comments (clear)

  1. What a bunch... by vinsci · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... of losers to Linux. :-)

    --

    Trusted Computing FAQ | Free Dawit Isaak!
    1. Re:What a bunch... by Janitha · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh look, Microsoft is in that bunch too, the internets surprise me daily.

    2. Re:What a bunch... by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is... they act like forks are bad things. Yes, projects can die from fork-deaths; on the other hand, forks can breathe new life into projects. Of course, they neglect how much work is involved in successfully forking a process. I don't expect to see the Linux kernel forked any time soon ;)

      --
      "Here's a fun fact: the moon has turned to blood!" -- Newscaster, "Jesus Christ Supercop"
    3. Re:What a bunch... by blane.bramble · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually the kernel is forked all the time - most of the non x86 architectures start life as forks and eventually make their way back into the kernel.org kernel. Each new version is also a fork, which is why you can still get 2.0, 2.2, 2.4 as well as 2.6 - forks are part of the development model for the kernel, and are also part of many closed-source development models. Unless, of course, you completely stop all work on an existing product to produce a new version.

    4. Re:What a bunch... by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      prehaps somebody should show them the xfree/xorg situation and how much that *helped*

    5. Re:What a bunch... by bonch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Forks ARE bad things. The mantra of "choice" isn't applicable to every situation. Standardizing on a platform is difficult enough in the Linux world. Forking things whenever one of the devs feels wronged (usually how these things get started) just increases the confusion and non-interoperability between multiple platforms. It's one more to support and worry about.

      Desktop Linux has, for the most part, stagnated because KDE and GNOME won't merge into one mega-standard. Instead, we must continue to install both entire desktop environments just to comfortably run each other's apps. It's absolutely ridiculous the way the wheel gets reinvented several times over. If you're running GNOME, a KDE app, Mozilla Firefox, and OpenOffice, you've got at least four major libraries now sitting in your memory, all doing the same things but with different code, implementing their own GUI widgets. You're never going to have desktop standards that way.

    6. Re:What a bunch... by imroy · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Linux kernel does have quite a few forks. They're just not big, seperate forks. Their work gets routinely folded back into Linus' fork. There's the personal forks like Alan Cox's -ac patch, Andrew Mortons' -mm patch, etc. Many architectures and sub-projects also maintain their own forks. So forks aren't bad on their own. Open Source licenses allow the different forks to share their work. It's just that the big commercial entities like to keep reminding people of the devastating Unix fork. To their commercial mindset it's the only type of fork they can imagine. And they're obviously trying to slow the commoditization of software through adoption of Open Source.

    7. Re:What a bunch... by vadim_t · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nice way of completely missing the point.

      KDE and Gnome have nothing to do with forks. They're completely different things, independently developed, and which for the most part share no code. You can't just merge them because the architecture is different.

      Having several different libraries that implement widgets have nothing to do with forking. And at least Linux has only two big ones. I rarely use Windows anymore, but each time I do I'm amazed at the non-standard look of every damned application. I mean, for some bizarre reason every firewall, antivirus, IM program, office suite, etc. has to have its own widgets, and MS applications aren't an exception.

      A fork is a division in the development of a program. For instance, what happened with XFree. It was stagnating, so a group of developers decided to take the current tree, and work on it separately. Result is that we now have an actually active development in Xorg. I fail to see anything bad about it.

    8. Re:What a bunch... by chris_mahan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have to agree. Everybody's little change is considered a fork. A real fork is when there's bad blood or differences in strategy between two groups, and one decides to 'rename' their project to be 'uberKool'.

      I personally think that forks are what makes FOSS nimble and trim.

      I can understand how those companies would not want that (my company is doing a project with EDS-- I won't comment!!!) since they live on bloat.

      I think the corporate motto of software development is "Write once, sell everywhere." And forks get in the way of that Almighty Directive.

      I say let them rot.

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    9. Re:What a bunch... by bonch · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I never said KDE was a fork of GNOME or vice versa. I was just illustrating that having parallel platforms stagnates progress. The point is the same.

      Having several different libraries that implement widgets have nothing to do with forking. And at least Linux has only two big ones. I rarely use Windows anymore, but each time I do I'm amazed at the non-standard look of every damned application. I mean, for some bizarre reason every firewall, antivirus, IM program, office suite, etc. has to have its own widgets, and MS applications aren't an exception.


      That's true, but it's nowhere near how bad it is in Linux. If your only standard for comparison is the way Windows looks, desktop Linux is never going to improve. And regardless, the vast majority of Windows apps DO look the same and use native widgets, have buttons in the same place, have the same menu items, use the same keyboard shortcuts, and can copy-paste damn near anything between each other. The Linux offerings don't come close, because they won't standardize.
    10. Re:What a bunch... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I was just illustrating that having parallel platforms stagnates progress."

      Uuhh, like Windows 9x and Windows NT?

      Bullshit when it applies to Linux. Having two highly competitive desktop platforms like GNOME and KDE results in both getting better faster.

      And it's nonsense to say that Linux programs don't usually use the same layout and menus. There's no significant difference between Windows and Linux in that regard. Some authors don't follow the standards, but most do. Certainly all the major applications do. And nit-picking one or two menu entries on some specific Linux program (which is no doubt your next tack) doesn't change that fact.

      Anybody switching from the Windows 2000 GUI to the XP GUI is going to have MAJOR problems with figuring out where everything is on the Start menu. Instead of having things in a clearly defined place, you have to read an entire panel of SENTENCES to figure out where what you want to do is located. Which is why MS allowed you to switch back to "classic view".

      Anybody who says Windows is easier to use than Linux is simply wrong.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    11. Re:What a bunch... by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "That's true, but it's nowhere near how bad it is in Linux. If your only standard for comparison is the way Windows looks, desktop Linux is never going to improve. And regardless, the vast majority of Windows apps DO look the same and use native widgets, have buttons in the same place, have the same menu items, use the same keyboard shortcuts, and can copy-paste damn near anything between each other. The Linux offerings don't come close, because they won't standardize."


      Just to add to this point: Windows users such as myself are spoiled because of this. I've tried to adopt Linux a couple of times, but these very problems that were mentioned made me throw my arms up in defeat. It really is hard to switch to Linux when a.) It's an uphill battle all the way and b.) Windows has actually achieved a decent computing experience. (If you're shaking your head, make a BSOD comment and watch how quickly you're corrected.)

      Feel free to dismiss me as a newb or a dumb-shit or whatever. I have no problem with that. I didn't put hours and hours into Linux. Niether will a lot of 'desktop' people that Linux is going after. This is why I'm so critical of having to edit .CONF files etc.

      I do want to mention something, though: Knoppix is headed in the right direction. I used it about a year ago and was stunned that a.) it auto-detected everything just fine, b.) I had no problem finding what I needed, c.) It more or less behaved like Windows. I wish I could be more specific, but it was the first time that I ever used Linux and didn't feel like I was lugging around a ball and chain. So I don't want to sound like Linux will never improve, obviously it is. I just hope one day a little more thought in the direction of "Microsoft's already trained 10s of millions of peoples how to use a computer..." happens.
      --
      "Derp de derp."
    12. Re:What a bunch... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      " Oh look, Microsoft is in that bunch too, the internets surprise me daily."

      Hmm...actually, out of all of the groups.companies listed up there...I'd almost have to say EDS This stupid &$*#(# NMCI system they have burdened the Navy with cannot be described any nicer than as a royal 'clusterfuck'...horrible network connectivity...using windows, no good apps for admins to connect and admin to their machines...so slow, and restrictive. I mean, sure, it might be ok for a secretary to use just to do some word docs and powerpoint presentations, but, for people that need to code or so serious admin work...TOTALLY useless.

      And that is ONLY the functionality issues...they way they fuck the govt. out of money by what they charge is outrageous...not to mention the red tape involved just to get a simple request fulfilled.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    13. Re:What a bunch... by stevesliva · · Score: 4, Insightful
      which is why you can still get 2.0, 2.2, 2.4 as well as 2.6
      Which is nice, because you're not forced to die or upgrade when some beancounter decides it's time to stop supporting security patches for NT or IOS or Solaris 2 or whatever.

      Here where I work, we're moving from one set of tools and database to something newer. The question arose, "But how will we look at old data 15 years from now?" (A valid concern in patent defense.) The answer, "The tools have been ported to Linux, right?" Done and done.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    14. Re:What a bunch... by AstroDrabb · · Score: 5, Informative
      I was wondering the same thing about Oracle. This might be a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. I have read tons of news items about how Oracle is pushing Linux and according to this one, it seems Oracle leads on Linux with 360% growth
      Oracle's Linux commitment began in 1998 with the first commercial database on Linux. Today, Oracle is the only major software vendor to provide first-line support for Red Hat and Novell/SUSE. All Oracle products are available on Linux and Oracle Database on Linux has met the Common Criteria Standard at EAL4, the highest industry security level for commercial software. Gartner Dataquest says Oracle is #1 on Linux with 360% growth.
      Oracle also seems to be doing well performance-wise on Linux: Fastest benchmark result on four processors running Linux
      Fastest benchmark result on four processors running Linux

      On an HP Integrity rx4640 with four Intel Itanium 2 1.6GHz processors running Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 3, Oracle Database 10g Standard Edition achieved: World record four processor performance on Linux of 161,217 tpmC (transactions per minute) A price-performance ratio of $3.94/tpmC. Oracle, the first and only database provider to demonstrate TPC-C performance leadership on Linux, now holds more TPC-C world records on Linux than any other vendor. This latest benchmark result further demonstrates Oracle's commitment to delivering exceptional performance and reducing the total cost of ownership for all business needs.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  2. Interesting crowd by oneandoneis2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No chance of any anti-linux bias from any of that lot, eh? :)

    --
    So.. it has come to this
  3. We are the risk takers of our time by suso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In relation to the spirit of this article.

    In an industry where companies distort facts, thwart community efforts, it can be hard to know who to trust and what to believe. I think it is times like these when we the Open Source/Linux community can compare itself most closely with other changes and booms in society's history.

    Think of all the doomsayers who like to say "The sky is falling" around times of economic uncertainty and social change. In the end, the ones who take the risks during those times, usually come out ahead.

    I consider the Open Source community to be the "risk takers" per say of our time. I don't think that we'll end up on the wrong side of the fence when all is said and done. But if we do, so be it! At least we tried to make something better of the world. Something that gives rather than takes.

    I don't think we should spend so much time reading articles like this that give us the attitude that the sky is falling. We should spend more time celebrating Linux and Open Source and leading the way to what will come next. We need to be leaders not Doomsayers.

    If you want to read a good article on why open source is the right way to do things, read this Peruvian Congressman's letter to the manager of Microsoft in Peru. Really great read.

    1. Re:We are the risk takers of our time by xdroop · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Think of all the doomsayers who like to say "The sky is falling" around times of economic uncertainty and social change. In the end, the ones who take the risks during those times, usually come out ahead.
      Sorry sir, your logic does not follow. Just because the winners were risk-takers, it does not necessarilly follow that risk-takers are winners. The risk-takers are winners because they took the right risk at the (right) time. That said, I do not think Linux is a "risk" these days.
      --
      you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
  4. "Heavyweights." by rah1420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Interesting how all of them just might have a teensy > agenda of their own which is threatened by Linux in its ascendancy, huh?

    Yawn.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Duh by rhombic · · Score: 5, Funny

    And in other news, McDonalds sez "Burger King is bad for you! Try our new salads!"

    --
    1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
  7. shocking by zerkon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who could imagine Sun and Microsoft speaking out against Linux... Just Shocking!

    --
    The Answer
  8. thanks by justforaday · · Score: 4, Funny

    Phew! Thanks for telling me. I'll get right on the phone with our MS rep to let them know we'll be renewing that contract...

    --
    I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
  9. Slashdot says... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."

    I think this is a fair summary. But really, Microsoft, I see you listed. Is Windows more secure? Is Windows more scalable? I mean, they know as well as we do about the possibilities of it splitting into multiple varieties, but aside from that...

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  10. In other news: by thomas.galvin · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news:

    Democrats advise constituents against voting Republican.

    Apple recommends iTunes users to purchase iPod.

    McDonald's suggests that Burger King's fries are bad for your heart.

    Snowball introduced to hell. Snowball melts.

    Sun rises in east for 1,324,408,203rd consecutive day.

    --
    Thomas Galvin
  11. Interesting list of companies by overshoot · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sun and Microsoft go without question, but some of the others are interesting. Oracle, for instance, has declared Linux to be the star of their roadmap going forward.

    Perhaps the key is the company most conspicuous by its absense: IBM, who competes with all of them.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  12. At least they don't hide their bias. by Staplerh · · Score: 5, Informative

    Obviously, I thought the study was biased, looking at the list of supporting companies. But then I RTFA:

    The alliance comprises a group of IT hardware and software firms that have combined their expertise and products to help EDS create 'best of breed' solutions and compete with the likes of IBM Global Services and Hewlett-Packard for the most lucrative government and enterprise contracts.

    Well, if Microsoft wants a lucrative government contract, clearly the organization that is supporting this move is going to decry the competition to push its own agenda.

    Why do people even listen to these organizations? I suppose you know their bias from the outset, rather than having to 'read between the lines' of other organizations.

    --
    "There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
    - Bob Dylan
  13. Oracle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFH:

    ...according to the Agility Alliance, which includes IT heavyweights EDS, Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft, Sun, Dell and EMC.

    From TFA:

    ...according to the Agility Alliance, which includes IT heavyweights EDS, Fuji Xerox, Cisco, Microsoft, Sun, Dell and EMC.

    Fuji Xerox = Oracle?

    1. Re:Oracle? by clem.dickey · · Score: 4, Informative

      EDS lists both Xerox and Oracle as members of the EDS Agility Alliance.

  14. Have you ever read something... by Zugot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and just shook your head and didn't have anything to say?

    That article was the worst.

    This is just more proof that EDS ain't worth a poop.

    "From a corporate perspective, we are not confident where Linux is right now today. A large enterprise needs to be sure because it relates to securifying [sic] the environment. We see some of the same things occurring that did to Unix -- it could splinter into many different types of languages. We are quite cautious about Linux and its deployment," said Rasmussen.

    What?

    --
    -- Bryan
    1. Re:Have you ever read something... by superid · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's wrong with "securifying"? It's a perfectly cromulent word.

    2. Re:Have you ever read something... by justforaday · · Score: 4, Funny

      we are not confident where Linux is right now today.

      How about right now tomorrow?

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
  15. OS vs. language by twd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would not consider someone who would refer to Linux as a language, as Mr. Rasmussen did, to be terribly knowledgeable about this things.

    --
    ~*~ Tara
    1. Re:OS vs. language by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It gets better: here are some other things he said:

      A large enterprise needs to be sure because it relates to securifying the environment.

      Also, we are somewhat cautious about what happened with Unix - it splintered into eight applications -- until McNealy finally announced he won the battle and had the one surviving Unix out there.

      Clearly this guy was promoted to his level of incompetence long ago, and never bothered to keep up with the industry in which his company supposedly is a leader.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
  16. Hmmmm.. by Sonicated · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The top arcticle on Slashdot states:

    EDS: Linux is Insecure, Unscalable

    ..and the one below it states:

    Google and Their Server Farm

    Google is small, they always get hacked and their search engine doesn't scale. QED.

    ;)

    1. Re:Hmmmm.. by rtaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google is small, they always get hacked and their search engine doesn't scale.

      Google doesn't really use any of the scalability features in Linux. In fact, they seem to go out of their way to avoid them and instead rely almost entirely on in-house technology for scaling.

      It's a bit like saying that florescent lights are scalable because you can put thousands of individual lights within a building, or that IBM laptops are scalable because you can purchase them in units of 1000 running MS Windows.

      --
      Rod Taylor
  17. hard to believe by yagu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article, or at least the people putting forth their thesis (I call bullhockey, it's really more of an agenda) do much to discredit themselves with claims such as:

    ..., Also, we are somewhat cautious about what happened with Unix - it splintered into eight applications ,...

    I don't know exactly what they mean by "splintered", but working in the Unix field now for twenty-plus years, I never experienced:

    • ANYTHING I could describe as a splinter.... at worst I would describe my experiences as nuanced differences among the various flavors of unix.
    • EIGHT(?!?) applications! First and foremost, unix is NOT, repeat-after-me, NOT an application.... and anyone who describes anything about unix in those terms reveals more about their depth (lack of) in understanding of OS technology than insight therein.

    I don't find or see anything enlightening or new in the article, and walk away shaking my head when these kinds of observations get any press at all.

  18. Hahaha! by RenHoek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unlike Windows wich is secure (XP SP1 box is compromised in 18 min when online), scalable (try running ANY version of windows on more then 2 processors), and has never been forked into multiple flavors (NT, 95/98, ME, XP Home/Pro/Corp).

    Yawn..

  19. Who Comes Up with These Names? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... Agility Alliance, which includes IT heavyweights EDS, Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft, Sun, Dell and EMC.

    Agile for dinosaurs, I guess.

    EDS, Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft, and EMC are not names I associate with agility. It would be like IBM, Exxon-Mobile, GE, and Wal-Mart getting together and calling themselves the "Lightweight League of Business".

    --
    That is all.
  20. A former EDSer (thankfully) by robkill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Back in 1996 EDS declared IE to be the "standard" browser for use on all internal machines. When those of us who were using Sun boxes asked "What about us?", the reply was "We have Sun users?"

    --
    DMCA - Chilling free speech since 1998.
  21. doubts by austad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I doubt all of the members actually agree on this. Oracle has been pimping their stuff on Linux pretty hard lately, and Linux is what they actually do their development on now.

    Cisco has been using linux in several of their products, including the cache engine card that fits in 2600/3600 routers, the WLSE, the Airespace stuff they just bought, and a bunch of other stuff.

    --
    Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Slashdot? by bonch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No chance of the reverse from this crowd?

    Each claim should be evaluated regardless of messenger. If the claims don't make sense, there's no reason to immediately dismiss them because you know you're right. Instead, address them. Yes, there are cases where Linux is insecure and unscalable. There are cases where it is more secure and more scalable.

    We should adopt more balanced opinions around here. Unfortunately, what will happen is that people will counter the article's reactionary opinion with an opposite reactionary opinion.

    1. Re:Slashdot? by rpdillon · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Each claim should be evaluated regardless of messenger.

      I completely agree. But that doesn't mean I'm going to ignore who wrote the message. Do you ignore who the author of the book was? Or who wrote the article? I don't lend everyone the same credence. It is very different for the criminal to claim he is innocent than for his supposed victim to claim he is innocent. The author makes all the difference.

      In this case, it is merely amusing to note who the author is, because clearly, the claims are absurd. Linux has been shown to be capable of high security (an agency called the NSA helped us in this area, IIRC). It has also been shown multiple times that it is very scalable (Google, anyone?). This has nothing to do with my opinion of Linux, it merely has to do with basic standards of credibility. It is akin to standing in front of a Rolls Royce and claiming that it is a low quality, inferior car. This is amusing, but it is even more amusing when you find out it's a Chevy salesman making the speech.

      Unfortunately, what will happen is that people will counter the article's reactionary opinion with an opposite reactionary opinion.

      First, I'm not sure how the article is expressing a reactionary opinion; I don't know of anything it was "reacting" to. It seems more like a baseless attack to me. Secondly, just because someone disagrees with an article does not automatically render their arguments invalid or "reactionary", as you suggest.

      Lastly, as a bit of concession, I do think balanced opinions are good. But that doesn't mean we should dignify this kind of propoganda. If someone (anyone, even the EDS) comes along with something that is measured, qualified and well-researched, then we can address it in turn. But this does not deserve serious attention. This is a classic marketing move - "The OTHER product is insecure, it doesn't work on a large scale, it is more expensive, and, oh look! We have an alternative right here!" Take another look at what this guy is saying and tell me honestly that there is anything remotely concrete in what he is saying.

      "From a corporate perspective, we are not confident where Linux is right now today. A large enterprise needs to be sure because it relates to securifying [sic] the environment. We see some of the same things occurring that did to Unix -- it could splinter into many different types of languages. We are quite cautious about Linux and its deployment," said Rasmussen.

      "We are concerned about security on an open standard environment like that. We are also concerned about some of the scalability issues that we are seeing on our clients on a global basis. Also, we are somewhat cautious about what happened with Unix - it splintered into eight applications -- until McNealy (Scott McNealy, chief executive of Sun) finally announced he won the battle and had the one surviving Unix out there. We think Linux has the possibility of going the same route," said Rasmussen.

      "Quite honestly, in the notion of costs, as we look at what we are structuring with our alliance partners, we are not seeing a compelling cost advantage that would lend us towards Linux -- given the other things I have mentioned," said Rasmussen.

      Jim Hassell, managing director of Sun Microsystems Australia, argued that Linux was no loss to the Agility Alliance because it could use Solaris 10 instead of Linux rival Red Hat.

      "If you test Red Hat against Solaris 10 against whatever else... we would say that Solaris 10 beats it hands down on functionality and everything else," said Hassell.

  24. Best. Quote. Evar. by Ransak · · Score: 4, Funny
    securifying

    Did George W. Bush take a job with their speech writing lackeys?

    --
    "Powers. I have them."
  25. A Real Contender by blueZhift · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is just more proof that Linux has arrived on the scene as a real contender in the IT world. I remember when I first heard of Linux, there were literally daily changes being released for the kernel and things were seemingly in a constant state of flux. At the time I was using OS/2, but I was curious enough to keep an eye on Linux and where it was going. Years later, when it really mattered, the choice was simple, Linux. Why? I work in an environment where I'm an army of one and costs and security are very important. Windows just wasn't the best choice for what I needed to build and the budget I had. I guess I wasn't the only one who thought that way! So called studies that refute what frontline IT people see everyday in the field just prove the desperation of those threatened by Linux and the overall free open source movement. If they're smart, eventually they'll learn to live with and perhaps profit from it, but right now they seem more interested in stopping it through FUD and legislation.

    --
    To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
  26. Tell that to Google... by MikeCapone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..that Linux is unscalable.

    --
    Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
  27. Re:Definitely the wrong image to portray by suso · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its amazing how many misinterpretations of posts there are from people here.

    I bet that if Obi Wan Kenobi posted a comment on slashdot like:

    "Darth Vader betrayed and murdered Luke Skywalker's father"

    10 people would reply to his post saying that he is using the wrong wording because he didn't actually murder him. Then Obi Wan would have to qualify his wording by saying "Its true, from a certain point of view."

    Sheesh. Give me a break people.

  28. EDS was responsible for crashing 80,000 Computers by thenextpresident · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1732672,00.as p

    Most of the desktop computers in the UK's Department for Work and Pensions were paralyzed for four days on Monday, when a failed upgrade took them offline. The outage, covering 75 percent to 80 percent of the DWP's 80,000 PCs, is one of the largest in the UK government's not entirely impressive IT history.
    And possibly one of the most costly. According to staff reports, the outage occurred on Monday afternoon, disconnecting staff e-mail, benefits processing, and Internet and intranet connectivity. According to one, a limited network upgrade from Windows 2000 to Windows XP was taking place, but instead of this taking place on only a small number of the target machines, all the clients connected to the network received a partial, but fatal, "upgrade."

    Another source says that the DWP was trialing Windows XP on a small number ("about seven") of machines. "EDS was going to apply a patch to these. Unfortunately the request was made to apply it live and it was rolled out across the estate, which hit around 80 percent of the Win2K desktops. This patch caused the desktops to BSOD and made recovery rather tricky as they couldn't boot to pick any further patches or recalls. I gather that [Microsoft Corp.] consultants have been flown in from the U.S. to clear up the mess." EDS is also thought to be flying in fire brigades.

    --
    Jason Lotito
  29. Oblig George Carlin... by Dread_ed · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now a message from the national apple society:

    FUCK PEARS!

    --
    When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
  30. Oracle by soloport · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oracle is NOT mentioned in the actual article. Oracle is part of all this in some fantasy world, called Slashdot.

  31. Oracle by soloport · · Score: 4, Informative

    NOT mentioned in the actual article. Remember? You're reading Slashdot...

  32. Is that the same EDS... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 5, Informative
    ...that killed several thousand PCs by rolling out Windows XP SP 2 onto Windows 2000 machines?

    ...whose financial affairs are being investigated by the UK government?

    Just wondering...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  33. funny to see this article right above the news ... by fadir · · Score: 4, Funny

    about google's server farm - one of the biggest linux server parks and argueable the most famous search engine with incredibly great overall-performance.

    *rofl*

  34. Google and Amazon call... by John+Whitley · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... bullshit! As well all the other major enterprises that have many thousants of deployed Linux boxen running business-critical software. These folks use Linux because 1) it's much more secure and securable than the competition, 2) it scales massively, 3) they can have their own fork (e.g. apply security patches, performance changes, etc. to the current production kernel version on their schedule, not some vendor's). Isn't it ironic how some of the uses of having your own "fork" improve scalability and security. 8-)

    Let's not forget that it's far cheaper than the proprietary competition even for all of those benefits.

  35. I'll bite. by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful
    • Insecure: Linux has three role-based security mechanisms and mandatory access controls (SE-Linux is just the one included), three ACL mechanisms (Trustees, POSIX ACLs and SGI's XFS security mechanisms), an EAL4 rating with an EAL5 possibly underway, USB or dongle system locking, support for cryptographic and "trusted" hardware, support for IPSec, a very impressive packet filtering system (layers 2, 3 and 7), capabilities and that's just the kernel. If you want to include the rest of the system, you've stack guards, SSL/TLS, Kerberos 5, rootkit detectors, binary modification detectors, TCP wrappers, bayesian intrusion detection systems, root jails, virtualization (which allows you to compartmentalize, and therefore can be used for security), MD5 passwords for the shadow suite, one-time password systems, public key encryption and a host of validation & security auditing tools (TARA, SARA, NMap, Nessus, BASS, etc)
    • Unscalable: The Linux kernel supports "pure" SMP systems that are respectably large. For larger system, bproc and OpenMOSIX permit scaling up to about 65534 nodes with each node taking perhaps 64 processors. To my way of thinking, that's pretty damn scalable. Actually, as bproc and OpenMOSIX use different migration systems, it may be possible to build a grid of grids, where you've a Beowulf cluster of MOSIX clusters of 64-way SMP nodes. This gives you a theoretical capacity of 274,861,129,984 processors. Microsoft is planning to add clustering, in the future. Let me know when it compares. Linux also supports NUMA, Distributed Shared Memory, Active Ports/Active Messages, gigabit MPI, high-speed network filesystems (Lustre!) abd other key components for scaling. See "first few entries in top 500 supercomputers" for further information.
    • Prone to forking: There are many Linux distributions, tailored to people's needs, but only one real "kernel". There are many Windows kernels (the 3.x tree, the 9x tree, the NT tree, the 200x tree, Windows CE, Longhorn) but the distributions are basically the same components. Who is creating more of a fork - the tailor who makes clothes that fit from standard material, or the tailor who uses the closest material to hand, regardless of what it is?


    The claims can be easily disproven. Unfortunately, while companies enjoy First Amendment protections, they are virtually immune to slander/libel. A pity, as there'd otherwise likely be enough money to be made from such a suit to keep every Linux user and developer fed and housed for the rest of their lives.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  36. Fear Uncertainty and Doubt cast back on MS et al by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These entrenched companies, led by Microsoft, have a particular blind spot when it comes to recognizing the damage they are doing to their own reputations and public image by continually and obviously lying to the public.

    Microsoft has already damaged their reputation to the point that MOST IT professionals understand that anything MS says to them is most likely a lie. They may buy MS products for other compelling reasons, but always with the understanding that MS is a sneaky company.

    Aren't they apprehensive, even a little, of having NO goodwill among their customers? If the technology competitive landscape changes (eg: the power of the monopoly weakens) their customers will be eager to jump ship.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  37. Linux and scalability by a3217055 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I use Linux on a regular basis across many many machines of different sizes. Their maybe some truth in the article saying that Linux does not scale well. Firstly the whole thing of security is over rated. It is a corporate fudge factor, things are as secure as the apps that you use and you make your system. Linux does have a strange threading model but it works and does 99% of jobs with out issues.
    I run linux on SMP boxes ( more than 8 processors a machine) and their are some problems. Usually with network device drivers or some watchdog card. But otherwise it works. The most important thing is to learn how to get the job done.
    I have not used Solaris 10 thus I don't know what the new features are. The closed UNIX systems "seem" more robust because they sell the hardware with the software and ( example AIX with IBM POWER boxes ) and they have some major, major, major testing.

    Now the article says using Linux on mainframes is concering, well it sure is. Because why pay for a iSeries OS/400 license when Linux runs on the box rock solid. Linux on iSeries is amazing, it is a piece of art in itself.

    This was nothing but some technical jargon by soem companies that have outdated security procedures and they don't even have any facts. This is not news this is gossip.

    Also another thing Linux is a far more versatile system than people acknowledge it to be.

  38. Target... IBM... Innocent bystander, Linux by Psarchasm · · Score: 4, Informative

    Good article from all the way back in 2004 regarding where this is actually pointed. http://www.crn.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=510 00391&flatPage=true

    Would Sun rather see Linux go away? Sure, but they also believe in it enough to sell it. http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/v20z/index.jsp

    These are quotes directly from they guy heading up EDS's strategic alliances. Not from members of the strategic alliance - has anyone asked Ellison if he thinks Linux is insecure, prone to unfriendly forking? Guess not. http://www.oracle.com/events/unbreakablelinux/inde x.html. Guess not.

    Cisco? Well lets see they have linux running on some of their hardware, and apparently its good enough for their engineers to run http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2005/0216cislinux.htm l

    So lets round out the list...

    EMC - http://www.emc.com/products/systems/linux/index.js p
    Dell - http://linux.dell.com/
    Microsoft - http://www.mslinux.org/ Err, umm - ok maybe not.

    --
    http://windows.scares.us
  39. They say linux doesn't scale well. by consumer_whore · · Score: 5, Informative

    They say linux doesn't scale well. SGI has Linux systems with 256 cpus in a node. http://www.sgi.com/products/servers/altix/ Microsoft is only now getting a cluster version of their OS http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/0 3/04/2134229&tid=201&tid=231&tid=156