Slashdot Mirror
Linux Clustering Hardware?
Kanagawa asks: "The last few years have seen a slew of new Linux clustering and blade-server hardware solutions; they're being offered by the likes of HP, IBM, and smaller companies like Penguin Computing. We've been using the HP gear for awhile with mixed results and have decided to re-evaluate other solutions. We can't help but notice that the Google gear in our co-lo appears to be off-the-shelf motherboards screwed to aluminum shelves. So, it's making us curious. What have Slashdot's famed readers found to be reliable and cost effective for clustering? Do you prefer blade server forms, white-box rack mount units, or high-end multi-CPU servers? And, most importantly, what do you look for when making a choice?"
Well, he's complaining about something quite minor
It's not just a minor thing, it's symptomatic of what's wrong with Apple. You will use your computer the way Steve says you'll use your computer. You will use your iPod the way Steve says you will. Alt(Flower)-Tab will work the way Steve says it will (they intentionally broke the ability for third party software to change its functionality to match Windows/[many] Linux style window switching).
When I say I don't want a package installed on my system, that's final. Any company with that attitude is not ready for the enterprise IMO.
By comparison, in the Linux world Novell forces you to purchase Red Carpet update service for the same feature, and I believe Red Hat does the same with RHEL.
Access to the Red Hat Network is included with every RHEL subscription. I've not used any of the Novell branded Linuxes, but in SuSE (owned by Novell) all I do is fire up YAST and point it at a mirror and download away. No separate purchase or Red Carpet involved. All of which is irrelevent to my point.