Slashdot Mirror
Google Gives Reason Why it is Built on Linux
Rob writes "A common reason why more governments and enterprises around the world are moving to
open source software is unhappiness, it was revealed during a panel discussion at the
LinuxWorld Conference in San Francisco yesterday. Google Inc open source programs
manager Chris DiBona said the search giant has stuck with Linux throughout the company's
life, in part, because it
was unhappy with the terms of another software company. Which borgware company is he referring to?"
He was refering to Microsoft!
HIV perhaps LOLS
Freedom.
More than likely, this is a PR spin. In fact, I read somewhere that the reason Google uses Linux on their public service is because it's slower than other operating systems. This gives people an incentive to pay to use Google "premium" services, powered by Windows and .NET.
Which borgware company is he referring to?
It's Apple.
Surprise.
SCO OpenServer!
Seriously-- yeah it is MS, but the problem exists with any proprietary technology. The company doesn't need to be borg-like, just closed.
I've had plenty of jobs where we got locked in on the O.S. or on applications and it sucks. It is a rotten feeling when you want something changed but it is either impossible or it will cost you an arm and a leg. (Then you have to wait on their timing too)
I know throwing apple out there is a bit inflammatory around here but it proves the point. There are plenty of bad options out there without even pointing out Microsoft.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Google does a lot of things differently than most OSes are meant for. It's only logical that they'd choose one that they can customize to their needs...
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
It was just cheaper.
He was refering to Microsoft!
The article seems to imply that. But on closer reading, it indicates that Microsoft was just used as an example. The same would have been equally true of Sun, SGI, IBM, etc. And when you really look at what they were doing with Google, I think that Sun is actually more likely to have been the target than Microsoft.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
d00dz he wasdfasf obviouslafsa referring aot the astupiad slahsdto m osdersators. cos tehye sukc
what does roman polansky think about this?
Strange, I didn't see the word 'borgware' anywhere in the article. I guess that was just creative editing.
Does anyone wonder why Open Source and Linux in general have a bad rep?
Ok, simply put:
A. Open source can never be very easy to use and easy to run.
B. The common model of making money with open source is to sell you a support contract.
C. If you make an open source OS that is blindingly simple to install and use, you won't get any money from your support contracts.
Viva La Penguinista!!!!!!
Fear is the enemy; the one true enemy. {Sun Tzu-The Art of War}
Thanks for letting me know that those proprietary OS/SWs are owned by somebody else and not me!! OMG!!
Why can't I run the really cool stuff like Google Earth on my Debian machine
I had a circuits professor who had either done some contract work or worked at Google back in 2000. He told me and a couple other students that they used Salckware and ran the entire site from RAM, OS and all. Before that talk I never new you could run entire systems directly from RAM. Wild.
Unhappiness drives open source adoption
... I have to rip things out. But why would I want to spend money on something for which I only want to use a small part?"
... so we think it's going to happen," he said.
10th August 2005
By Rhonda Ascierto
A common reason why more governments and enterprises around the world are moving to open source software is unhappiness, it was revealed during a panel discussion at the LinuxWorld Conference in San Francisco yesterday.
Advertisement
Google Inc open source programs manager Chris DiBona said the search giant has stuck with Linux throughout the company's life, in part, because it was unhappy with the terms of another software company.
For instance, DiBona pointed out that if Google used Windows, or any other non-open source software program, to make changes to that system he would be required to essentially ask permission from that vendor. "Why should we hand over the control of our software support to another company?"
Other benefits of Linux for Google was being able to determine exactly what was running on any server at any given time and being able to plan what kind of power that machine would have, according to DiBona. This would not be possible, he said, using proprietary software. "Worse than that, if I want to expand
While showing a slide show of Google's hardware evolution, which began humbly with an odds-and-ends collection of "spare computers that were lying around Stanford" (hobbled together, literally, with pieces of Lego and duct tape) and ended with a present-day photo of Google's current server room (darkened to the point of being indistinguishable, for competitive reasons), DiBona said Google has used Linux all the way.
Research firm and LinuxWorld sponsor IDC projects Linux revenue would reach $35bn worldwide within the next three years. "It's growing twice as fast as Windows," said CEO of Open Source Development Labs Inc Stuart Cohen. "If you're skeptical, just visit the SAP booth -- here for the first time at LinuxWorld."
More governments in the US and elsewhere are adopting Linux and to help pave the way are striking down software patent legislation, said Red Hat VP of corporate affairs Tom Rabon. During the past few months, governments in India and the European Union have struck down software patents and the US Congress is currently considering patent reform, Rabon said.
In addition to reducing total IT purchase costs, governments in several countries have opted for Linux as an economic development decisions, he said. "They hope that open source would encourage [the] growth of an indigenous software industry," he said.
Also, "Unhappiness with the United State's lead in software" is driving some countries' governments to move toward open source, Rabon said. Some governments see open source as "a way to move away from US-based software company products," he said.
More than 125 national open-source policies have been proposed worldwide
during the past few years, Rabon said. Governments are using open source to run applications, entire agencies and, in some cases, entire governments. He highlighted the Venezuelan government's decree on July 13 that within 90 days all government institutions in the country must present a migration plan to move to open source software. "This is a presidential mandate
if they've relied on it so much, it would be nice if some of their apps would run on linux.
When you look at copyrights like a government regulation that controlls how people use information, rather than some kind of "property" right. Then it becomes clear that Linux is truely more accountable to free market paradigms, and in the information age - as information becomes commoditized, that will be even more so - as the companies that treat unrestricted copying over the internet like a threat will loose, and those that treat it like an advantage will win.
It's good to see some company finally step up to the plate and publicly admits that free/open source software provides independence and freedom. IBM, Novell, HP always put out the "cheaper" argument which is seen as "less value".
Freedom is strength, Ignorance is peace, War is slavery.
This is offtopic, but because it didn't survive the submission I did I thought it would be best to post it attached to another Google story.
A few days ago I noticed several websites which are linked by default in the Google Personalized Homepage show staggering increases in web traffic and page views. According to Alexa.com Wired more than doubled and also Slashdot , the NY Times and the Washington Post show remarkable growth at the end of july.
Is this a redefinition of 'slashdotting' or is there something else going on?
Repeat after me: We are all individuals
What an annoying poke at Microsoft, but I suppose I shouldn't expect anything less from the ass-puppets at Slashdot. It must be nice to have all your worlds problems boiled down to one fucking target... a FUCKING HUGE target.
Linux works fine, but it doesn't allow me to be productive. I leave Linux to do its job where it really shines: Office labor, Servers, etc. The selection of Software available for Graphic and Media are simply pathetic for Linux. I prefer to use a Mac or XP for that.
Instead of being an ass-puppet, why don't you admit that you'll use any OS available to get the job done? Upholding Linux as the end-all solution is just as fucking stupid as saying Windows is the end-all solution.
Google can't pay $90 a CPU for Windows XP Professional Global Oppression Server or whatever. (I'm a Mac guy so I don't know exactly what Windows is calling itself now.) I bet both Microsoft and Sun are kicking themselves for not cutting Google a deal. Imagine the PR Sun could have gotten by using Google as a reference customer.
Tristan Yates
Even if he is referring to MS, it's not as if google can be considered impartial. They must have known they'd be competing with redmond on one level or another. How would it sound if someone said to them, yeah but doesn't your search technology run on Windows? Not horrible but not great either. Especially if the competition becomes even more heated.
Unhappy?
Google is the biggest spyware company on the planet! They are just clever enough to use a search "honeypot", instead of invading your dinky system.
"I Looove Google!"
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Besides being customizable, Google uses oodles of servers. At $300 / seat for something proprietary, they are saving ungodly amounts of money.
In the end though, it is always about control.
It is your personal duty to fight for what is right on a daily basis. Ignoring injustice is identical to approving
With well known companies like Google and IBM endorsing Linux, I wonder why it isn't more widely used in the enterprise?
I wrote some thoughts about that in my website earlier today.
Expert Java EE Consulting
I wish I had mod points. This is far more news-worthy than some of the slashvertising that gets approved.
Why else do you think there is so many google stories? The owners of Slashdot are kissin some serious ass to be on that page.
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
implement a change because they don't see a need to. Of course they don't see any need to. They're not in your business, so they get in your face.
And your product goes begging.
Closed source has probably killed as many good ideas as PHBs.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
In their computer technology. Lego to server farms!
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
I blame it on stupid managers, e.g: "I don't want to use Java because it's rubbish at interoperating with Microsoft Word." ...from someone who makes IT decisions for a large government dept.
Hey guys,
Question: how would the web services proposal of GPL v3 affect google's web service's? Because the are linked to GPL licenses products, would it mean they need to distribute their web services code?
IDC predicts Linux revenues at $35bn worldwide within the next three years.
I wonder how much "Linux revenues" google has contributed to? How many Linux licenses have they purchased for their 100k machine farm?
Amiga?
No, no wait... DEC. Yeah! Google is so fast because it does NOT run on a PDP-10.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Welcome to the list
list of spammers
lol!
>Which borgware company is he referring to?" Could it be Satan??
It's been a long time coming, but we RT-11 users are finally getting revenge for that crappy GUI, 32k memory limit, and hype-driven "plug and pray" jumper architecture. It's time to say goodbye to proprietary "ODT-ready" keyboards and a system that locks up even doing simple tasks, like loading a CSR without disabling interrupts.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
Linux is successful many say because of Google- Google being the free 24/7 searchable customer support for your Linux problem. Somewhat ironic that Google's success is in part from using Linux.
When a popular web site links to another web site, the link target gets a lot of hits.
Slashdot is one example of this. Fark is another. SomethingAwful's Awful Links of the Day are another. Netscape's "What's Cool" is one of the first. I don't see what the big deal is. Google could start soliciting payments to link more sites -- oh wait, as a company that makes nearly all its money from advertising, that's what Google always does!
For more information, click here.
Given their elitist, academic background, they were probably raised on BSD. So why didn't they go with BSD?
I'm thinking it was a bit random at the beginning.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
When you have a few 100,000+ machine server farms, slashdot might care what sort of software you use. Until then, posting about what OS you deign to use is totally offtopic.
I always wondered what would happen to licencing if somebody invented a computer with no seat, no monitor, no keyboard and no definable cpu - just a big expanse of FPGA chips connected at the edges to network and power.
Personally I am much more impressed by the fact that Oracle runs almost their entire business, including business line apps off of Oracle RAC on Linux.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
In my 50-node-and-smaller networks, it's just so much nicer to be able to install the OS on the machines and not have to mess with licensing. I think that goodness would be that much sweeter on a 500-node network.
:-).
They could have used *BSD, but that would have been like Harvard boys using Yale locks. A bunch of Stanford grads use Berkeley-derived stuff? Get real
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
It's BeOS.
so does amazon and many other huge names. But lets not get carried away: Your busines can use Linux, and it probably won't become the next google or amazon. Linux is just a small part of the equation that made google a success. And hey! ebay uses windows, WTF? do your own research at http://www.netcraft.com/
While showing a slide show of Google's hardware evolution, which began humbly with an odds-and-ends collection of "spare computers that were lying around Stanford" (hobbled together, literally, with pieces of Lego and duct tape) and ended with a present-day photo of Google's current server room (darkened to the point of being indistinguishable, for competitive reasons), DiBona said Google has used Linux all the way.
Forget software licensing, I just want to see the slide with their server room!
Any links?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
It is not uncommon for things to operate to the benefit of each other. Another way of putting it is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This kind of thing is an unpredicted benefit. It gives open source a competitive advantage over proprietary software. Of course, Rome wasn't built in a day and it will be a long time before Microsoft's domination is broken but things like this assure that the day will come.
a lot of good men lost their sigs in that war.
I find it interesting that there didn't seem to be any mention of Linux' technical superiority over Windows. That doesn't seem to be one of Googles' reasons for going with Linux. This is interesting because many people claim Linux is far superior to Windows in terms of basic architecture and technical design, yet Google didn't see fit to mention that reason, if that is one of their reasons at all. And it MAY BE one of their reasons and they just forgot to mention it, but it's an intersting, ah, Freudian non-slip I suppose :)
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
The past is receding on me, too, it would seem. I meant 512KB, not 512MB. And it would take 64 DRAM chips!
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
And the price of OSS is not its main draw. I chose to develop a number of projects with Java rather than Visual Studio because VS was expensive to buy, while Java cost nothing. But then I was frustrated by my dependence on Sun to fix problems in the closed VM and class libraries. So I'm now developing on an OSS language and framework.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We'll pump it so full of Prozac, you'll feel happy just walking by the shrinkwrap.
0 liscenses, 0 revenue. you don't have to buy linux liscenses. They might have bought a liscense or two for dev boxes, but they don't need any for their production servers.
If more people speak up it will help blow out the SCO-FUD.
... but I'd hate to pay for the first one!
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
But what runs the mission critical db backends to those business line apps? Sun 12k servers. So yeah, commodity linux boxes fronting the Big Iron. Hey, kinda like how Hotmail (Microsoft) ran FreeBSD..fronting Sun boxes doing the real work and hosting the real data, for the longest time. (probably still doing it, at one point, Hotmail was the largest consumer of the Sun E4500 line of servers.)
This was at the bottom of the article when I read it:
/CBRincludes/related_news.asp, line 137
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80040e31'
Timeout expired
But! You would have the comfort of knowing that you are running a Certified Microsoft(R) Product!
I personally never visited Wired until I added it to my google homepage. Now I visit whenever a story catches my eyes (generally two to four times daily). I could definitely see google dramatically altering sites traffic.
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
"SCO provided the opperating system for the Abrams Tank."
'Long haired smellies' the world over quake in fear at the news....
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
If Google makes all these mods, then they should have used BSD.
Why? Both equally as free (paying per seat with their volume, and they'd be broke..)
But if they made something cool, then they could have packaged it and sold it without having to give out source under BSD vs GPL.
Yes, you communist nazi's, if you do work, you should get paid for it. If you look, most BSD's have a "lite" version, and a pro version, and you get the lite for free, and the pro version requires money. Everybody doing "free" work, that's great and all, if you are trying to push the vision of Marx and Stalin (err or was that Stallman? same thing)
Those who go GPL and they go "dude, I have no income!! But I have a penguin sticker!!" yeah, I hope that Penguin sticker gets you chicks because it ain't puttin' dinner on the table..
I'm more than happy to recommend Linux, but with the recent GPL trialfires a la SCO, most managers are jumpy.. and they should be. Where as BSD licenses have been tried by fire already, and provides more peace of mind. Also, when I recommend FreeBSD or NetBSD or OpenBSD, everybody knows what I'm talking about.
Linux? You mean red hat? yellow dog? debian? Suse? what is linux?? compability is a harsh mistress..
Of all the *nix boxes I've worked on, I like Solaris the most. Not the fastest, but it is rock solid. Next up is FreeBSD. I don't mind Linux on the desktop, but for a production box, I'd still recommend Solaris if they've got $$$ or else FreeBSD or NetBSD. (Openbsd for firewalls)
It's all well and good if the kernel is open source, but an operating system is much more than a kernel.
Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
"With well known companies like Google and IBM endorsing Linux, I wonder why it isn't more widely used in the enterprise?"
Why do you think it's not widely used in the enterprise? There may be as many as 30 million hosts running Linux. What was the estimate of the maximum number of OS/2 installations, by the way?
How many businesses use Unixware? (A large supermaket chain in my region does, their inventory, bookkeeping and personnel systems run on it).
It's all over the "enterprise"
where I work -- a very large, very well known publicly traded telecommunications company. Every place where we don't actually need huge Sun hardware or specific Solaris application support, we've got Linux.
Where do you believe Linux *isn't*?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
According to Alexa.com they gather their statistics from a toolbar the user has to download. Since my work as a systems administrator has allowed me to visit thousands of users and I have never seen this product it leaves me to believe that Alexa is just pure bullshit. On top of that your conclusion is obvious. No wonder your story never made it, it's a stupid story.
Not that I know much about mass production of computers, but how I do it is with a hotswap sata controller and 2 removable drive bays. One with a hotswap ide-sata adapter pluged into the back of it, and the other a regular sata removeable drive bay. The newest version of Ghost supports imaging a drive without rebooting, so it makes a great combination.
Article mirror:
http://firepacket.net/mirror/unhappy.html
That one tripped me up. A communist nazi would be a very conflicted person indeed.
Let me help you out with some terms:
Communism -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
Fascism -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Nazism -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
Stalinism -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism
All very similar but not all the same thing.
I don't think "$300 / seat for something proprietary" really matters that much. Even if they re-bought that license every single year, it is less than $1/day to match whatever they are paying the butt that sits in the seat. I have to imagine that even peons are getting more than $100/day.
More likely, they just found that Linux did what they needed, and the non-cost, per seat, was a bonus.
It's the "big idea" that google is, that makes it a multi-billion dollar enterprise... not the fact that they may or may not have pinched a few pennies here and there.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
it runs exceptionally well under qemu.
The parent poster didn't mention whether or not they've been around for a while. He said that they won't make money. Last I checked, Debian and FreeBSD don't make money. Hell, does either group actually employ a single person?
I don't respond to AC's.
I assume they need to bring a lot of threads on those machines, so performance difference may be a factor.
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Here.
Remember, they're running a cluster made of hordes of cheap, little machines -- vastly more machines than they have employees.
Also remember that they didn't always have that market cap, or any.
Though diskless workstations were very very common in *nix networks of the late 80s/early 90s (disks were *huge* physically and the only feasible approach was to have them somewhere far from the workstations and share them), the amount of the base system that ran in memory was typically just the kernel, which had the network support built in and booted nfsroot. As constrained hard drives were, memory was even tighter back then, consuming it as a ramdisk would've made the systems much less powerful.
Ahh, the days of running systems nfs off of 10base5 hub networks connecting to the huge servers with the 540 meg hard drives that took more than 4U (been so long, cant remember) each.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Haven't you heard?
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
It's a little more thana kernel really. Only the OSX GUI is really closed.
But Google would not need that part for a million headless boxes in a rack. Being able to modify Darwin would let them do as much customizing as they have done with Linix.
However of course when you have a million boxes any licencing fee is too much, so they are really better off with Linux anyway as it's been hammered on a lot more, even though they could have just grabbed Darwin and gone with it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They also didn't state the sky is blue and they need a mix of oxygen and nitrogen to breathe.
:-)
Some things just go without saying...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Perhaps the whole reason Google was created in the first place was someone sick of trying to find how to change resolutions in X-Windows for Linux using only AltaVista wanted a batter way.
I could see that being possible...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Given that the nature of F/OSS is to assimilate things, wouldn't that make it the real borgware?
"Since my work as a systems administrator has allowed me miss the existence of Alexa.com, I'll just shut up now."
Erm... ALL of it?
there something else going on?
Google has a very different model then the traditional news sites.
Remember how the News companies work: Traditional news websites & TV stations, like CNN, MSNBC have news editors who pick their news tidbits as they see fit, either subconsciously or purposely, regardless of what the viewers find interesting. They pick the stories based on how much ad revenue the story will bring. This can be a very flawed analysis-- Sometimes they are right on, other times they are way off the mark. Do you ever watch the news and wonder why they spent 30 seconds on an important news story while discussing Star Wars for 3 minutes?
There is a disconnect between what the viewers find interesting, and what the news editors believes that the viewers will find interesting. It's a somewhat flawed model.
News.google.com and the Google Personalized Homepage works differently--there is no news editors. The top news stories make it to the top of the list because people find the stories more interesting, and click on those links more often. Google analyzes the viewer's behavior to determine which headlines should be at the top of the page. Everything is done programmatically, and some people claim it's more democratic.
For instance, the morning of the Spanish Train Bombings the Spanish Government first blamed the bombings on the Basque separatists. As such, the news was not very interesting to the news editors at CNN, MSNBC, Good Morning America, etc. The big news stations and news websites were mostly discussing results of American Idol and the Laci Peterson Murder Trial. Later, when Al Qaida entered the picture, the news stations started covering the Train Bombings nonstop. All of a
On the other hand, News.google.com always had the headlines in the correct order-- as the visitors selected the news-- Spanish Train Bombings were top topics, Laci Peterson & American Idol were way at the bottom of the list. Google's model works pretty well.
I remember this pretty clearly-- I could not find any news on the Train Bombings for an hour, except for one line of scrolling text at the bottom of the screen.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
Clearly it was Commodore.
Having been a Cal grad from the time that BSD was getting started.
http://www.al-qaeda.cjb.net/
You could look at it that way. I prefer to think about how much code Google have contributed back to Linux to help make it faster, more flexible and more stable. This in turn helps make Linux more attractive to purchase *preloaded* on a server a company may want to purchase.
Also, the $35bn figure is probably referring to the projected total spent on server sales that ship with Linux, not on the distro's and support alone. Do MS server sales with MS OSes on them only count the OS price? I think not.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
So ebay runs windows, and from the netcraft page:
Last reboot 11 days ago
This is my Sig.
Where do you believe Linux *isn't*?
My grandmother plays solitaire on a 486 running Windows 95.
I'll sell my machine with lots of RAM integrated on board. It uses a state of the art 6510 and it can play the fastest Jumpman games! And best of all, you don't need a hard drive for it to boot up the operating system!
It's made by a little known company by the name of Commodore...
..bright screens for bright people, but now I've got to wear sunglassess.
Google is "successful" in that the service they provide you is "inexact". If I enter a search term into Google today, the results I get may be different from the results I get a week from now. This could be due to the dynamic nature of the Web, or a change in the algorithms; either way, Google has a lot of leeway when it comes to providing the "right answer" because there really isn't a "right answer". The results only need to be "good enough".
This is a different goal than a lot of other software products and services and means that the Google-customer's level of expectations is lower than that of your normal software-customer's level.
If you enter a combination of key strokes into a word processor, the behavior should be predictable and reproducible each and every time. If you enter a query into a company database, the behavior should also be predictable and reproducible each and every time.
Ultimately, this is why Google can "get away" with using Linux and OSS, while other corporations should use caution. The only real criteria for Google is that Linux (or the Linux cluster) be up 24 hours a day and be able to serve customers in a timely fashion. If a Google "customer" gets a "wrong answer", it's no big deal.
Two words:
Apple
Apple
According to Google engineers, Linux is a lot more scalable than any Windows server offering. This is why Orkut is such a dog--it was originally built on Windows.
I don't want to start a "Why you young 'uns today...and we LIKED IT!" thread, but how can you describe yourself as an oldtimer?
./ who predate me.
:-\
I started out on punch cards in the late '60s, early '70s. There are most probably guys here at
Kids today...!
Is this why Google Earth, Google Desktop Bar, Google Web Accelerator all support Windoze only ? Google might be harnessing the power of Linux behind the scenes, but all of its innovations for desktop users are on M$ only. Granted, that they are Beta/Preview versions .. but Linux could be a great candidate too !
I did a contract job for Google over the past four days. There is a silver BMW M5 in the lot over by building 42 that has a license plate that says:
I[Heart]LINUX
I should have snapped a picture of that car with it's two little penquins in the back window. Poor little things are being subjected to 368 lb/ft of torque on a daily basis.
Storm Shadow "The Hook Up" http://www.pe
AFAIK Oracle is moving more and more of their stuff to 10g clusters running on x86. Dell has also moved the majority of their european operations to Oracle 10g running on their own x86 servers. In fact if you look through the Oracle ROI press releases almost all of them involve running a business line app on oracle RAC and/or 10g with Linux and x86. Obviously it's not just Oracle that thinks this stuff is ready for prime time, a LOT of their customers do as well. Since you are already paying boatloads for Oracle licenses it's not like the selection of OS is a big consideration as far as cost is concerned. Running Oracle on x86 hardware and Linux is just a smart move for many of their customers.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
"\"SCO provided the opperating system for the Abrams Tank.\"
'Long haired smellies' the world over quake in fear at the news...."
So yeah, when some poor sucker commits suicide by 'diving' in front of an Abrams Tank, any connection to that persons relationship with the 'Santa Cruz Operation' is *purely* coincidental.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
You say you're running into a lot of contracts where they put a Windows box on your desk for Java programming... it's probably just that everyone else in the organization uses Windows on their desktops, the IT guys know how to admin them, and it's thus easier for them to give the developers Windows boxes too. If you work for a company like mine, that has a mix of UNIX and Windows and a lot of developers using both, you get whatever you need/want. If you work for a bank and there's 3000 managers using Windows and 150 developers, don't expect the IT dept to hire Linux admins just to give some of the developers Linux desktop machines. Get a better job.
The formatting is screwed up, but it would take too long to fix it. All the information is there. You can see that Microsoft's own site won't stay up as long as the sites listed running Linux (those with known uptimes). There could be a lot of reasons for that, however; I'm sure Microsoft has some extra troubles just because it's so huge. Also note that not all Linux-run sites stay up much longer than Microsoft-run sites, but on average they seem to win hands down.
Esoteric reference.
I thought it sounded like a scam just reading the documentation, and I've never seen a technical explanation of the "black magic" that enables it to magically outperform Oracle or even MySQL.
This is completely confirmed on reading Mike Spille's blog. Spille's a solid, no-bullshit kind of guy, and his technical calls are right on every time I've had independent knowledge, so I trust him on this. Check out the link:
http://www.pyrasun.com/mike/mt/archives/2004/12/25 /15.02.00/index.html
"The key thing to realize here is that the "transactional" capability that Prevayler is giving you here is serialized execution of Transactions, and that it won't write to the log if the transaction can't be pulled off. And of course, on success it will write to the transactional log. That's it. There's no rollback/undo, no locking, no thought whatsoever for concurrency in any form."
Yay. I feel so safe.
Will.I almost got my ass kicked for using the word "borgware" today.
Prior to my getting hired by the company I presently work for, there was a painful BSA audit. I can say with 100$ certainty that the BSA is the main reason for our migration to Linux.
They have licensed out their servers for other businesses now, doesn't that mean they're required to disclose their changes to the Linux kernel and other relevent software? Or do they get around this somehow by licensing their servers under a lease of some kind, where it's still google's property to avoid GPL requirements?
I also know that some kinds of proprietary drivers can be made to work with Linux due to more lax licensing requirements, so perhaps their changes are all in driver forms. It could also be purely userland stuff, but I doubt it.
Other companies had to disclose their modifications too (e.g. Linksys, TiVo), so if Google could get around it, why couldn't they using the same methods?
Ever heard of a tracking cookie?
I'd bet if you're running windows, you have an alexa cookie on your computer right now.
None, but that figure has nothing to do with licences, so whats your point?
Slashdot. The place on this planet where ignorance can get you insightful.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
The bad reputation is all FUD.
end of July?
just a thought, but maybe traffic is up on those sites because all the schools, colleges and universities have closed for the summer?
For bringing more people to Linux, I saw Hooray for unhappiness. here's how I think the whole process works:
Step 1 - Cluelessness - Buy Windows 95
Step 2 - Anger - Buy Windows NT
Step 3- Unhappiness - move to Linux
Step 4 - Confusion - move to Macintosh
Step 5 - Bankruptcy - move to Tibet and become a Buddhist monk.
You heard it hear first, folks. move to Tibet now before the rush comes in!
This might not be the best example, because the software world for OS X is full of pissy shareware applications of stuff that you get completely free (in both senses) for Linux. In fact, this was probably my greatest shock after switching from Gentoo (after the usual mouse thing) -- some guy wants $15 for something that Gentoo had out of the b- ah, off the wire. I still can't believe that the only decent DVD/CD burning software, Toast, is commercial.
Don't get me wrong, Apple has some beautiful platforms out there and the time I save because it "Just Works" is important enough to keep me with my iBook instead of going through the hassle of installing Gentoo on a ThinkPad. But the free selection for Mac OS X is a disaster.
I was a Linux/FreeBSD zealot for SO many years. I wrote all my code with 23423 platform portability in mind, things were good. Then I realized that I didn't have any real experience writing apps for Windows and I thought I should give it a try. I picked up some books on VS (Visual Studio) and started with C# (I had quite a bit of Java experience all ready so it was pretty easy to pick up the language). Then something very strange happened. I began to really like it. I found I was able to write applications which would have taken weeks in C using VIM or even a week in Java using Visual Age. I became a much more efficient programmer. Mostly due to .NET and the absolutely amazing IDE that is Visual Studio.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pure Windows guy now, but I do have an XP SP2 workstation and I spend quite a bit of time in VS.
Wired, NY Times and Washiungton Post are default RSS feeds found in Safari under Apple's 10.4 (Tiger) OS.
Is there a record of how much Google has actually contributed back to the Linux kernel? I've heard they don't send patches upstream. They wouldn't have to, after all, since they're not redistributing it (though I suppose those servers they sell to companies for internal searches must count as redistribution).
Also, the vanilla kernel probably has little use for Google's additions, since few Linux users have much use for the ability to run a cluster of hundreds of thousands of machines with the entire OS and data in RAM.
Anyhow, does anyone know if/what Google has contributed?
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
Booting and running OS plus apps across the net is all nice and dandy but you shure-as-hell doesn't want to page/swap across the net. It slows the machine down to a crawl. We had a few of those back at uni. We used to call them dickless workstations....
TCAP-Abort
They're required by GPL to distribute the kernel mods if they distribute the kernel.
Somehow I doubt they need to give away the software, and as GPL allows, use the modified version "only internally" at the company.
That everyone with a net access over the planet can benefit of those "mods" is irrelevant. They aren't redistributing nor selling their modified kernel.
Google homepage gave some massive exposure to a few websites when it was first released, which would naturally increase traffic to them. I don't think its the same as the /. effect though. Maybe it was at first, but as they add more optional content to the Google homepage, things will sort of get lost in the crowd, so they probably won 't see the same traffic increases as at first, when there were only a few options. However, getting /.ed is like having a targeting laser pointed at your site, its a strong focus that only points to one thing at a time.
I for one would love to see Google release an open-source Linux distro with all the clustering, IO & management extensions that I am sure they have made.... They might consider some of that their secret sauce though, so I assume we'll never see it.
Has anyone tried to see what entering "linux" on google gives you now a days? At-least on my Canadian "copy" of google (actually, even on google.com/linux), I get an interesting sponsored link at the top of my search results (not on the right side as usual):
Windows vs Linux
www.microsoft.ca/getthefacts Read In-Depth 3rd Party Performance Analysis on Linux & Windows!
Microsoft's marketing/advertising department working hard...
[alk]
Simple.
Google does not ship a version of Linux out to their customers. Linksys and TiVo do.
Google does ship a Linux kernel with there Google Search Appliance. But, I think that technically, you don't buy it and it is leased as a service, unlike Tivo and Linksys.
So I guess they are using that loophole.
Your grandmother fits in where in the "IT Enterprise"?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I don't get it, if Google was unhappy with Microsoft, why did they go with a GNU/Linux system instead of FreeBSD, OpenBSD or NetBSD? The BSDs are actual UNIX systems that have been around for decades.
I really can't wait for the day when you don't have to justify why you use anything other than Microsoft's products.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Interesting article, but I think it has very little to do with the life of the average programmer.
Let's face it, there are very few applications that would actually benefit significantly from changes to the O/S kernel. Certainly Google is one of them, but how many Google's are there?
If you're writing a web store, an internal corporate application or most other applications, choosing Linux just because you can hack on the kernel is not really relevant.
Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
> (though I suppose those servers they sell to companies for internal searches must count as redistribution).
Good point, I hope someone asks them to provide the source code. Then again, does "leasing" of appliances count as redistribution (in case that's what they call it)?
>Anyhow, does anyone know if/what Google has contributed?
If anything came out, it'd probably be contributions to the kernel, which can be searched, grepped and "wc -l"-ed.
I don't have the source at hand, though.
I take this statement to be representing the views of Google's open source programs manager, and not as from Google itself. If you think about it, most people in that position are going to do the best they can to pump up open source. If Larry Page, Sergey Brin or Eric Schmidt made this statement, it would represent Google. It is misleading to declare Chris DiBona's opinion as the truth behind the corporate decisions of Google.
This sig is o Unfunny o Funny
But the parent poster is the person about whom the article is written. I think we can consider him an authority on what he actually said.
(And he thinks Windows XP is good? Google loves Microsoft! We knew it...)
You are incorrect, it is -not- commonly accepted, its commonly mistaken. Just be a man and allow yourself to be corrected gracefully.
--SD
"Computers will never truly be free until the last windows user is strangled with the entrails of the last mac user."
I use gnu/linux exclusively at home and if I had my choice I would use it exclusively at work.
In addition to Google many organizations say the use linux because of licensing issues and/or cost.
There are always discussions about how/when linux will have matured as an operating system.
I say it will be the day when organizations that are not necessarily OSS enthusiasts say the use linux because it is the most reliable and easy to use operating system.
Apple has proved that nix can be absolutely easy to use.
The Free/SecureBSD people have proved that the nix back end can be made easier to deal with, more secure, and more solid.
Obviously you didn't have a hotmail account before Micro$oft bought them. No cookies were ever needed.
Fortunately, there are still some sites out there (notably message boards) that do not require cookies. I only enable them when I have to.
Beat to the punch.
When I'm feeling down, I like to whistle. It makes the neighbor's dog run to the end of his chain and gag himself.
Seriously, what updates have there been to Office since '97? I have a feeling someone else will probably ask the same question, but going back as far as Office 4.3 on Windows 3.1....
Hate to post anonymously, but the fact is, that is a move to drop solaris and integrate Linux, not a move to drop FreeBSD.
Congratulations.
Google is the biggest spyware company on the planet! They are just clever enough to use a search "honeypot", instead of invading your dinky system.
Proof? This is slashdot, we don't need to prove what we say here.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
OSS Software's advantages are often cited as being 1: free, and 2: Open. Both of these are strong advantages in some situations, but not necessarily in all. Most companies aren't firstly concerned with direct purchase price. In fact, many OSS projects have commercial components that provide custimization and support for a fee. Open software is a strong pull for those of use in the software field, but usually doesn't translate for the end user of software directly.
For me, the biggest advantage of OSS is that of availability and access. If I need a widget right now to solve a problem, I don't have to go through a formal purchase process with PO's and the like, I can just find what I need NOW. Then the other advantages kick in, because I can now modify it to exactly meet my needs. Yes, this translates to price via time saved, but not actual dollars. And yes, we do support OSS project with cash.
}#q NO CARRIER
Actually pretty much everything runs on OS X, just look at suppoted apps on fink or the OS X version of ports.
Google wouldn't really care about many sorts of apps though for the large farm they have, certainly not GUI ones at any rate - it would be mostly management tools that would probably work out of the box with a make configure.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
does any major web services run on MSFT (other than MSFT offerings)????
It would be retarded to even consider as an option, how is this comment not aimed at the other "realistic" choices - Solaris and various unix flavors...
Dibona - we love you but please, you're a recent add-on to Google's team and unless I'm mistaken the work Google did on the Linux filesystem occured many years ago
This guy needs to get a clue. He mocks Sun for being in bed with Microsoft and says that if Sun releases Solaris under the GPL they will give them laptops with Windows preloaded because Sun and Microsoft are friends now. The audience snickered, because they are stupid. HP has been Microsofts bitch for AGES, please Fink, at least make statements that make sense, you use a Windows laptop, admit it. HP only sells Windows desktops, at least own up to the stuff you sell.
Which is why MSN.com is on the bottom and Google's on the top.
In the non-sexual sense, of course.
I once spent a summer figuring out how to write device interfaces by trial and error. ODT was my closest friend.
Alas, I think slashdot is going the way of the PDP-11. I post a joke in response to a story about nothing, and I get marked "off-topic".
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
You wouldn't swap/page across the network, if that were occurring the w/s would be outfitted with a local drive for that function and that function only. Planning and testing were critical to environment functionality to ensure that swap/paging did not happen. If something went wrong with the internals of the w/s, you swapped the pizza box out for a new one, updated the MAC address in the servers bootptab and reboot the w/s. 5 minutes later you were online with the application running on a CDE desktop. And this was all done on a 10BT NIC in the w/s and 100BT LAN backbone.
Yes they are. Google licenses out their google search appliance to businesses, that's teh whole point. I even stated in my comment that was the case, but two people missed that. They physically hand over a little 1U server to a business to search their own stuff.
i'm still waiting for the dupe on this one--thought it would be in a few hours ago? /** slashdot source-code pwn3d! */
public main(String[] args) {
for (int i = 0; i SIZE_OF_INTERNET; i++) {
if (URLs[i].topic().equals("google")) {
URLs[i].post();
}
if (URLs[i].topic().equals("linux")) {
URLs[i].post();
}
}
}
No wait, that would be the ol' Berkeley Surprise!
^^
One of the main reasons a lot of companies were afraid of GNU software in the early days (as recently as the mid 90s, maybe even today) was fear of just this. While OSS has a lot more inertia and acceptance, and the GPL and its drivers have certainly helped in that arena, trying to force this on companies would be a death knell.
It would be seen as attempting to force communism down the companies' throats. That'll play in a few countries, but not in many.