Yes, because outsourcing is only to Indo-Afrikastan. You could never possibly outsource to a data center in St. Louis where they have a staff of say 90 really good administrators to handle about 700 machines.
How does it compare to Hyperic HQ? I have not heard of Zabbix but its pretty and looks interesting. It supports HP-UX, which is a plus here. Most of the monitoring solutions I have found support Win/Lin only
Hyperic HQ seems to beat this. ZenOSS is good if you want agentless (except for Windows) monitoring or need a virtual appliance. You can build Hyperic up on a Virtual Machine.
Look at hyperic.com
I don't work for them, just spent months looking at a solution for this.
What does that have to do with my ability to read? I was highlighting that many things add to TCO. Your point seems to have little if nothing to do with mine. I can see how Windows would have a lower TCO depending on number of machines, their role, the way they are managed and maintained, the hardware they are using, the number of different versions of the SAME vendor's OS as well as number of different OSes based on Linux that they are using. If they were to say only have a Win2K and Win2K3 environment with admins that are familiar with both intimately, yet have few admins who know much about Linux, or are distro centric they would have higher TCO with their "Current" linux environment. I however said nothing about that.
Perhaps you need to learn to read better, or perhaps find out which person you would like to reply to, and make sure it gets to THEM. It is not as simple as "Unix/Linux is better, so it must cost less to own." There are lots of external factors that can come into play. With equipment being equal in quality and experience of staff being equal in quality, the sheer number of machines, their implementation (putting their DB server on the same machine as an apache and SVN server) could cause lots of problems.
Yes...and your comment just seems out of place. The cost of purchase is well below the cost of ownership of any major technological item like a computer/server. You have to ask about things like the cost of downtime, the cost of management, the cost of MANY more things. Many x86 servers, for example, cost more to power over their time than their purchase cost.
Cost of purchasing is not COST OF OWNERSHIP. SUSE has "OpenSUSE" which IS free and pretty good. SLES, their competitive product to RHEL is VERY good and cheaper than RH. You pay for support, which many large business like to have. My company had to use our support agreement (which when we migrated from RHEL to SLES saved us nearly 50%) because of a bug in winbind. In under a week, the issue was fixed.
Red Hat Enterprise also has a "Workstation" flavor. They are not all Server centric OSes. For one, I don't see many people using Red Hat as a workstation, but then again, my company left them for Novell SUSE a year ago. We are happy in the change.
Channels? You are not talking Fibre or SCSI, then, I assume. When you are discussing IDE in the context of RAID it becomes less "robust."
The issue is that there are 2 writes that must be done, even in parallel, is not as fast as reading from multiple platters. You don't get to cut the write in half and use the speed of the spinning platters to your advantage. In a RAID 1 Read, you can read partial data from either or both drives.
Mirrors have slower writes and faster reads. This is because the controller can pull different chunks of data from both/all hard drives. The writes are not faster as there has to be twice as many. Striping has faster writes but no tolerance for failure
RAID 5 is great, though expensive when done right. RAID 6 is better, though has less performance, as well as additional cost. Many controllers will not do RAID 6, and you lose 2 drives to parity. If your data is truly critical, you should have backups done VERY often, as well as a RAID 50. This way you are far less likely to lose data, though you have to have a stripe of at least 3 drives, in a mirror. This requires at minimum, 6 drives. There are also VRAIDs, which allow for you to lose drives until you hit the watermark of your data. This technology is usually reserved for SAN systems.
Citizen Gonzales did not say those things. Attny General did. There are differences. He was using his office at the time. As well, he is an appointed official. Who cares what he thinks about it.
They are still restricted in an "illegal" way. "Shall Not Be Infringed" somehow means "but only if we TOTALLY infringe" to some people who can't read that the 2nd Amendment is talking about militias in the context as the free people's will to protect themselves from aggressors foreign and domestic.
Backup tape density grows as well. LTO 2, which my company uses can store 200N/400C GB per cart. The truth is, our source code is so easily compressed that we get 500N/1000+C GB per cart when dealing with it. LTO4 should be out soon. I can only assume that in 5yrs tapes will be easily dealing in 20TB uncompressed.
No, we COULD get a machine with FreeDOS on it. The problem is that it was not the same type of machine. The specs were all different on it. They won't say "You can buy any of our machines with XP, with no OS, with DOS, etc" or even "This is certified to have components to run the following OSes. They tickled our asses with feathers about a deal and then said it would be cheaper to take it with windows licenses. I like cheaper, I just don't like feeding the bottom line of another company, or even contributing to their sales/install base when I have no need for their product nor any plan to use it. The other issue is my company already had corporate XP licenses. WHY should we have to buy them again? That amounts to extortion.
Its all about numbers. If they can continue using their existing hardware, cut support costs due to a different OS and maintain backend compatibility with their file shares, old reports, etc and still do business they are golden. The end user in a company doesn't really need to know how to use their OS. They need to know how to use the software that matters to doing their job. Every time a new piece of software becomes mandatory for their position, they have to learn it. How is this any different?
But even if they wipe the machine, it came preloaded with Vista. That counts as a sale to MS as well as their "user base" for Vista machines. What OS it runs after the cleanup by IT is another matter that they may not care about. I had to fight with Dell to even consider selling me machines I wanted for my company without an OS. They kept trying to tell me they were cheaper with Windows on them. They DO sell machines without a Microsoft OS, but they are slim pickins and did not match the specs I told them. They acted like I was asking them to build me a rocket and put peanutbutter inside. This is something they had never heard of they tried to exclaim. So much for their banter about how they make custom computers JUST FOR YOU.
How about your lack of logic and actual thought. I have guns. Many friends have guns and between all of us, we have killed exactly 0 people. People with guns don't kill people. People kill people for various reasons. Self defense, while traumatic, a justifiable reason to kill. It doesn't make it "right" because doing so will probably never make someone feel right again. It is right because the person who was killed in self defense, or even defense of a loved one put themselves into that situation. They chose to act in a way that made them the predator. The prey just happened to have a way to fight back. Humans have no tough hides, claws or shells. We are relatively weak on our own. Guns equalize the playing field.
If guns cause crimes or murder, then mine are defective
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, because outsourcing is only to Indo-Afrikastan. You could never possibly outsource to a data center in St. Louis where they have a staff of say 90 really good administrators to handle about 700 machines.
The link description is outdated. I installed the 1.1.1 appliance. It works, its pretty but it doesn't do everything we want.
How does it compare to Hyperic HQ? I have not heard of Zabbix but its pretty and looks interesting. It supports HP-UX, which is a plus here. Most of the monitoring solutions I have found support Win/Lin only
Look at hyperic.com
I don't work for them, just spent months looking at a solution for this.
Perhaps you need to learn to read better, or perhaps find out which person you would like to reply to, and make sure it gets to THEM. It is not as simple as "Unix/Linux is better, so it must cost less to own." There are lots of external factors that can come into play. With equipment being equal in quality and experience of staff being equal in quality, the sheer number of machines, their implementation (putting their DB server on the same machine as an apache and SVN server) could cause lots of problems.
Yes...and your comment just seems out of place. The cost of purchase is well below the cost of ownership of any major technological item like a computer/server. You have to ask about things like the cost of downtime, the cost of management, the cost of MANY more things. Many x86 servers, for example, cost more to power over their time than their purchase cost.
Cost of purchasing is not COST OF OWNERSHIP. SUSE has "OpenSUSE" which IS free and pretty good. SLES, their competitive product to RHEL is VERY good and cheaper than RH. You pay for support, which many large business like to have. My company had to use our support agreement (which when we migrated from RHEL to SLES saved us nearly 50%) because of a bug in winbind. In under a week, the issue was fixed.
Red Hat Enterprise also has a "Workstation" flavor. They are not all Server centric OSes. For one, I don't see many people using Red Hat as a workstation, but then again, my company left them for Novell SUSE a year ago. We are happy in the change.
The issue is that there are 2 writes that must be done, even in parallel, is not as fast as reading from multiple platters. You don't get to cut the write in half and use the speed of the spinning platters to your advantage. In a RAID 1 Read, you can read partial data from either or both drives.
Mirrors have slower writes and faster reads. This is because the controller can pull different chunks of data from both/all hard drives. The writes are not faster as there has to be twice as many. Striping has faster writes but no tolerance for failure
RAID 5 is great, though expensive when done right. RAID 6 is better, though has less performance, as well as additional cost. Many controllers will not do RAID 6, and you lose 2 drives to parity. If your data is truly critical, you should have backups done VERY often, as well as a RAID 50. This way you are far less likely to lose data, though you have to have a stripe of at least 3 drives, in a mirror. This requires at minimum, 6 drives. There are also VRAIDs, which allow for you to lose drives until you hit the watermark of your data. This technology is usually reserved for SAN systems.
Ubuntu?
Ctrl + Esc somehow stopped working?
Citizen Gonzales did not say those things. Attny General did. There are differences. He was using his office at the time. As well, he is an appointed official. Who cares what he thinks about it.
Don't you worry. When we invade you next, you'll take part in our freedom to not have any freedoms.
They are still restricted in an "illegal" way. "Shall Not Be Infringed" somehow means "but only if we TOTALLY infringe" to some people who can't read that the 2nd Amendment is talking about militias in the context as the free people's will to protect themselves from aggressors foreign and domestic.
at what privilege?
Backup tape density grows as well. LTO 2, which my company uses can store 200N/400C GB per cart. The truth is, our source code is so easily compressed that we get 500N/1000+C GB per cart when dealing with it. LTO4 should be out soon. I can only assume that in 5yrs tapes will be easily dealing in 20TB uncompressed.
Not at these prices. The licenses are bought in bulk and can be used on equipment for this business.
No, we COULD get a machine with FreeDOS on it. The problem is that it was not the same type of machine. The specs were all different on it. They won't say "You can buy any of our machines with XP, with no OS, with DOS, etc" or even "This is certified to have components to run the following OSes. They tickled our asses with feathers about a deal and then said it would be cheaper to take it with windows licenses. I like cheaper, I just don't like feeding the bottom line of another company, or even contributing to their sales/install base when I have no need for their product nor any plan to use it. The other issue is my company already had corporate XP licenses. WHY should we have to buy them again? That amounts to extortion.
Its all about numbers. If they can continue using their existing hardware, cut support costs due to a different OS and maintain backend compatibility with their file shares, old reports, etc and still do business they are golden. The end user in a company doesn't really need to know how to use their OS. They need to know how to use the software that matters to doing their job. Every time a new piece of software becomes mandatory for their position, they have to learn it. How is this any different?
But even if they wipe the machine, it came preloaded with Vista. That counts as a sale to MS as well as their "user base" for Vista machines. What OS it runs after the cleanup by IT is another matter that they may not care about. I had to fight with Dell to even consider selling me machines I wanted for my company without an OS. They kept trying to tell me they were cheaper with Windows on them. They DO sell machines without a Microsoft OS, but they are slim pickins and did not match the specs I told them. They acted like I was asking them to build me a rocket and put peanutbutter inside. This is something they had never heard of they tried to exclaim. So much for their banter about how they make custom computers JUST FOR YOU.
Have you got a flag?!
My SIG is the "poor man's Sig" it is a CZ 75B Stainless. A Beretta PX4 will be keeping it company soon.
How about your lack of logic and actual thought. I have guns. Many friends have guns and between all of us, we have killed exactly 0 people. People with guns don't kill people. People kill people for various reasons. Self defense, while traumatic, a justifiable reason to kill. It doesn't make it "right" because doing so will probably never make someone feel right again. It is right because the person who was killed in self defense, or even defense of a loved one put themselves into that situation. They chose to act in a way that made them the predator. The prey just happened to have a way to fight back. Humans have no tough hides, claws or shells. We are relatively weak on our own. Guns equalize the playing field.
If guns cause crimes or murder, then mine are defective