Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat CEO: Linux Is Now The 'Default Choice' For The Cloud (bizjournals.com)
Speaking at the "All Things Open" conference, Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst remembered when Linux "was just a 'bunch of geeks' getting together figuring it all out on an 8286 chip" 25 years ago. An anonymous reader quotes BizJournals:
"It went from being kind of a hacker movement to truly what I'll say [is] a viable alternative to traditional software," Whitehurst says, adding that Red Hat was a part of that push. Over the years, it came out from under the radar, being what Whitehurst calls "the default choice for a next-generation of infrastructure," particularly when it comes to cloud architectures... He points to Google, Microsoft and Facebook, all having open sourced their machine learning systems. "They recognize the company that builds the community around that piece of technology, that technology is going to win."
First off, that's 80286. Missed a zero there.
Second off, that's wrong. Linux needed an 80386sx as its minimum supported CPU.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Company head says my company is the leader in current buzzword-hype-technology.
Is there really nothing going on right now that we use that as "news"?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Slashdot headline: "Linux is the default choice".
There's... sort of a significant gap between the two.
Hey! Ubuntu has made its way into Windows. Get on board! ðY
Astro
Please just feel free to stick with Windows, then.
Seriously--choice being a thing and all...
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I mean they offer cloud installs of RHEL, but few will be clicking that button.
systemd is no longer a problem for us. We've all moved to FreeBSD and no longer use Linux.
Ubuntu on Windows is not Windows running Linux by any stretch of the imagination. It's Windows running a Linux app.
It's not Linux people. It's just not.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Secure boot and shoddy BIOS make Linux on a lot of PC's hard to utilize. If you can access the cloud someway however then it's ok.
All 5 of you?
I think we pretty much got that with Android Tablets(*). Android (while creating some new issues) did solve a lot that plagued Linux Desktop. Take a flavor of Android, from different manufacturers, across a wide range of versions, download an APK and it works. Play Store providing a better environment to do that.
No end user is expected to have to type in "Sudo apt-get make and make-install" and manually solve dependency issues.
No end user is expected to solve driver issues.
For the majority of tasks people do at home, Android tablets can replace their desktop. Of course they have yet to replace Desktop / Laptops for serious high power work.
I liken to to back in the 80's when there were home computers: Apple II, C64, etc that were simple easy to use machines that would do what most users at home needed, then there were higher power Personal Computers, Mini-computers, workstations, etc for serious work.
*Of course the neckbeards will say when they mean "Linux Desktop" they don't just mean an Open Source OS running Linux kernel like Android, but GNU/Linux with X-Window and crappy window managers.
Linux us more secure due to app armor and SELinux. I wish this existed for FreeBSD
http://saveie6.com/
I got my cert! Basically needed it to prove that I can work with systemd
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
What were they expecting Windows? I don't know enough to comment on BSD but other than that, what are the other options? I would generally consider anything but linux in a cloud environment to be some terrible terrible marketing experiment in progress where some OS company bribed a bunch of users to use the stupid solution they were offering. Then expect to see those companies either fail because of their stupid choice, or switch and talk about how stupid their choice had been.
You've never known the touch of a woman other than your mother...
...that one time when she forgot the rubber gloves.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
You don't have to deal with poor application support
I thought we were talking about Windows...
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Bring it on, tough guy.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
If you are going to expand and contract instances based on demand you aren't going to spring for a bunch of proprietary server licensing.
Rather than have to predict your maximum load ahead of time or have licenses sitting on the shelf you just run Linux and don't worry about it at all.
What do you mean? Unless you thought that it was so much easier to administer AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, Sco, and Solaris (depending on your viewpoint). Or maybe you thought that AS/400 was easier to use?
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
(Prince's 1999) - I was dreaming of an updated system when I realized I was running BSD.... We were stupid and we knew it and dreamed of system-d..... All night we were thinking we should make the move....Let's party with System-D like it's 1999....
Two thousand zero zero and we're all happy now....
You don't use it at all, do you? If you did you wouldn't be making such stupid statements.
I maintain around 2000 Linux machines with thousands of users. None of them are having any of the problems your talking about. Some of them are even normally *Gasp* Windows users. Even they can use something like even - SAS without a problem.
As for RHCE, whenever I hire one, they're always top notch. I never have to show them system stuff. Just how to use our ticketing system and they're off. Even if I ask them to fix a Solaris box.
The AS/400 has a complete menu based system administration mode. Its actually quite easy to figure many things out without really having to know any programming/scripting languages. Similarly with AIX (smitty) and HP-UX (sam/smh). Both of which are conceptually comparable to what a window's control panel/administrator menu is capable of. Particularly now that MS has stopped putting any effort into assuring that the GUI can actually configure everything in the machine.
I'm not sure about IRIX, but sco, solaris and linux lag behind in this category. In the case of linux its heavily dependent on which distro you use, with suse's yast probably being the most complete, and approaching the level of what was available in hpux/aix, but still only covering a limited subset of the total configuration options (although it manages to nail all the most important options, allowing you to configure a basic SMB/apache/whatever server without having to drop to the command line).
Regardless of what I hope are typos in the summary, I recently attended a 'cloud debate'. Of course, one of the groups there was for Azure of Microsoft fame and they had I believe the Open Source director as one of the two representing Azure.
One of the things that stuck out during the debate was that he openly admit that initially, Windows instances easily made up over 70% of all instances launched in Azure BUT in the last 2 odd years, this number has flipped and Linux now represents 70% of the new instances being brought up in Azure.
> Ubuntu on Windows is not Windows running Linux by any stretch of the imagination. It's Windows running a Linux app.
Read his post again. I think that's what he's really looking for. "I can do Linux and do it still running Windows!" ;)
Astro
I wish this existed for FreeBSD
HardenedBSD isn't that analogous?
"I can do Linux apps and do it still running Windows!"
FTFY but yea, pretty sure the problem with this conversation is me. :)
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.