Apart from the hardware disparity, it is not clear if they are comparing the same version of Apache either. I would like to see some details on the benchmark.
The real monopoly is not Windows 3.1/95/NT. The real monopoly Microsoft has is on MS Office. Despite the talk of thousands of applications for Windows, 90% people are prefectly happy with MS productivity applications (Office, Outlook, Project). There are millions of files files lying around. I don't what is going to be Linux standard office suite, Koffice/Achutung/Staroffice/Applix. Whatever it is, it has be able to read and port to MS formats. The moment it is done, Linux has a chance to move to desktop. Writing a filter to MS files is a complex undertaking. But it is absolutely necessary for Linux to get a foothold on the desktop. Until then Linux on the desktop is a pipedream.
India does have a potential to contribute lot of Linux deveopers in future. However, unlike in the US where internet connection costs $20 month for unlimited time, internet connection in India is a big deal. The biggest hindrance to the adoption of Linux is actually the govt of India with its monopoly on telecom. I heard things have changed somewhat for the better. But I would be surprised if affordability of internet is anywhere near US.
He says that Linux hass 1.5 million lines whereas unix has 10 million lines. What a load of garbage. What a load of garbage! He is comparing kernel to kernel+applications. Solaris is supposed to have 8 million lines of code and that refers to kernel+standard utilities that come bundled with Solaris. What is this crap of Linux having less defects because it has less code ( and thereby subtly implying it does less).
I have a hard time believing that something like this can be done without modifying any of the linux source code and NT source code. Well, I can believe they tweaked Linux kernel here and there but what about NT?
It would be even more bizarre if they say that we can take an off the shelf Redhat CD and NT CD and install on top of VMware.
We are about install a central machine that runs NFS, sendmail, DNS, NIS, httpd for internal use, gnats for around 60 users. Here is the plan. Two identical machines with 512M ram and 9.0G disks with OS installed. One machine would be running as NFS server and the other machine would have all the servers sendmail, DNS, NIS etc. The NFS server is connected to a diskarray with 7 18.0G disks and a backup tape autochanger. I want to leave one of the disks as a hot spare. I would like to write scripts such that if one machine fails, the other can take over by just running a script.
It is the RAID part that is not clear to me. The last RAID I checked was Veritas on Solaris which was a major pain in the neck to manage. Don't know if managing RAID on Linux is any simpler. I am inclined to wait till RAID becomes a standard part of Redhat. Until then, I would rather depend on the tape backups than Linux RAID support.
I am curious to hear any experiences on people managing large file systems 100G+.
BTW, I haven't still figure how to use our Exabyte autochanger effectively with a GPLed backup sofware. Exabyte tech support wasn't very useful.
Slashdot Mirror
Apart from the hardware disparity, it is not clear if they are comparing the same version of Apache either. I would like to see some details on the benchmark.
The real monopoly is not Windows 3.1/95/NT. The real monopoly Microsoft has is on MS Office.
Despite the talk of thousands of applications for Windows, 90% people are prefectly happy with
MS productivity applications (Office, Outlook, Project). There are millions of files files lying around. I don't what is going to be Linux standard office suite, Koffice/Achutung/Staroffice/Applix. Whatever it is, it has be able to read and port to MS formats. The moment it is done, Linux has a chance to move to desktop. Writing a filter to MS files is a complex undertaking. But it is absolutely necessary for Linux to get a foothold on the desktop. Until then Linux on the desktop is a pipedream.
Ramana
India does have a potential to contribute lot of Linux deveopers in future. However, unlike in the US where internet connection costs $20 month for unlimited time, internet connection in India is a big deal. The biggest hindrance to the adoption of Linux is actually the govt of India with its monopoly on telecom. I heard things have changed somewhat for the better. But I would be surprised if affordability of internet is anywhere near US.
Ramana
He says that Linux hass 1.5 million lines whereas unix has 10 million lines. What a load of garbage.
What a load of garbage! He is comparing kernel
to kernel+applications. Solaris is supposed to have 8 million lines of code and that refers to kernel+standard utilities that come bundled with Solaris. What is this crap of Linux having less defects because it has less code ( and thereby subtly implying it does less).
I have a hard time believing that something like
this can be done without modifying any of the
linux source code and NT source code. Well, I can
believe they tweaked Linux kernel here and there
but what about NT?
It would be even more bizarre if they say that we can take an off the shelf Redhat CD and NT CD and install on top of VMware.
We are about install a central machine that
runs NFS, sendmail, DNS, NIS, httpd for internal
use, gnats for around 60 users. Here is the
plan. Two identical machines with 512M ram and
9.0G disks with OS installed. One machine
would be running as NFS server and the other
machine would have all the servers sendmail,
DNS, NIS etc. The NFS server is connected to a diskarray with 7 18.0G disks and a backup
tape autochanger. I want to leave one of the
disks as a hot spare. I would like to write scripts such that if one machine fails, the other can take over by just running a script.
It is the RAID part that is not clear to me. The
last RAID I checked was Veritas on Solaris which
was a major pain in the neck to manage. Don't
know if managing RAID on Linux is any simpler.
I am inclined to wait till RAID becomes a standard
part of Redhat. Until then, I would rather
depend on the tape backups than
Linux RAID support.
I am curious to hear any experiences on people managing large file systems 100G+.
BTW, I haven't still figure how to use our
Exabyte autochanger effectively with a GPLed
backup sofware. Exabyte tech support wasn't very
useful.
Ramana