Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Exec Says no Large Web Servers on Linux

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the that-sounds-fishy dept.

Accidental Angel writes "As reported in InfoWorld, Tony Occleshaw, IBM's software strategist for Europe, Middle East, and Africa said at CeBIT today that "No one runs large, million-hits-per-day Web sites on Linux." " Well, we served 640,000 pages on Wed on this Linux box. And the server load is only 2.00-3.00. I figure this box can handle around a million. The adfu server (also Linux) did around a million hits total that day, if you combine banner ads + layer HTML).

3 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. I wrote this in reply to that article: by xkahn · · Score: 3

    My company runs very large scale web sites on Linux right NOW. We
    get millions of hits a day, and Linux handles the load perfect, without
    complaint, and without problems or crashes. In fact, we use an Irix box
    for a file server on some of the sites and THAT machine crashes
    frequently.

    As far as we are concerned, Linux is the best investment our
    company has made. The machines it runs on are cheap and plentiful. The
    operating system is low cost and very fast and reliable.

    I think IBM is wrong when they say it shouldn't be used in these
    situations.

    In addition, we also use Linux on the desktop for almost all
    employees. (There are a number of people in the company who need Word and
    so they don't use Linux.)

    --
    This .sig is left blank.
  2. FreeBSD does it, but sucks as well by siberian · · Score: 3

    I dunno, I run 4 FreeBSD boxes and think its the greatest thing since sliced bread but Linux drives me insane and mystifies me at times.

    Its all in what your used to I think, not really an issue of true useability but rather human limitations in how we 'stick with what we know'

  3. IBM by geophile · · Score: 3

    IBM has many parts, many of which are doing the same thing, few of which even know about the existence of these other groups. Furthermore, many of the IBM folks I've dealt with over the years have a severe case of NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome. (If it's NIH it can't be good.)

    I can easily imagine an AS/400 manager thinking that Linux is his chance to make his machine even more relevant to the world. I can also imagine anyone who sells CICS or IMS or other highly proprietary software seeing Linux as just another enemy. (Someone in this position would be an ally of Java and EJB, however.)

    IBM will never be "on our side". Their interests may, in some situations, align with ours. Let's hope there are many such situations.

    I strongly recommend "Big Blues, The Unmaking of IBM" by Paul Carroll. It shows how a combination of arrogance, incompetence, and infighting led to the dominance of Microsoft at IBMs expense. You can't read this and not begin to see Microsoft emulating IBM. The book is also fascinating because it shows how a big, scary company can do such a consistent and thorough job of shooting itself in its foot over an extended period of time. Due, primarily, to "not getting it".