They won't steal that much market share by doing just that. Long term, once they've got Chrome OS established on Netbooks I expect them to turn their attention to desktops. Many enterprise business apps are now web apps, with (for example) Oracle and Java EE backends. Organisations that run these apps today will plop Windows desktops in front of people, just for the purpose of running a browser and email. If google can create an alternative to these desktops using Chrome, and replace Exchange, IM, and Project organisation with Google Wave, then there is a chance that they will grab significant market share off Microsoft. There is also a sizable market in home users too. I know lots of people who only use their PCs to browse the web, do email, and do write the occasional letter. They would be a shoe in for a home Chrome desktop. So while Google might now bury Microsoft with this strategy, they will weaken them. The combined challenge from Apple, Linux desktops and Chrome is going to be a real challenge for MS to meet in the coming years. Their competition has never been so strong, and its getting stronger (albeit slowly).
Thats because Apple aren't out to change the Windows mindset. They are out to make money, and have chosen to do that by targeting the premium slice of whatever markets they choose to go into and out performing any competitors they find there. Judging by their financial results and cash reserves they've built up over the past few years they're doing very well at it.
I suspect that Red Hat's focus is on backporting security fixes and server-class hardware drivers, not desktop stuff
Which was my point in the first place, that other distros do focus more on desktop features. So unless you have a burning need to run CentOS on your laptop, you'll get a more functional experience choosing something else.
I'm subscribed to the Planet CentOS feed in Google Reader. Shortly after the Open Letter was published this blog post appeared. It's authored by Ralph Angenendt who is one of the 8 signatories on the Open Letter. In this blog he says: "Lance vanished from the project some time in 2008".
All good, valid points in a work context. I expanded on my comments though in my previous reply to the AC if you wish to have a read (no point in repeating myself).
Ok if you're using it as a portable mirror of your customers configurations, then I can understand that.
Just what USP is there in Ubuntu that I need for browsing & email that running the same apps (Firefox & Thunderbird) can't give me?
I was specifically thinking about the benefits that newer versions of software and drivers would give you, for example with hardware support. I would be willing to put money on the table that Ubuntu or Fedora do a dam sight better detecting and configuring Wireless cards in newer laptops (and desktops) than CentOS. And that they deal with sleep/suspend better due to improvements in more recent versions of the kernel. And I know from my own experience on the Desktop that CentOS, being tied to the (old) RHEL versions of the X server does not do so well with newer monitors. I have a 19" GNR monitor at home that Ubuntu, OpenSuSE and Fedora will happily detect and use at the correct resolution. It's impossible to get the correct resolution with CentOS however because it's not supported with that version of X yet. It doesn't bother me that much because I'm using my CentOS boxen as servers and if I need a graphical login on those systems I just use NX Nomachine from elsewhere. But my point is valid.
Lots of people complain about Redhat charging every day
Rubbish. Redhat target small business through to enterprise customers, not the home hacker, and (strangely enough) business people place greater value on something if they have to pay for it than if they don't. They might want to be charged less, but that's a different kettle of fish.
While you can run CentOS on a laptop why would you want to? There are other Linux distributions out there (Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, etc) that are designed to provide a better desktop/laptop experience using more up to date software. CentOS = Redhat commercial, and is really built to get the most out of server systems.
1. If the health of the company and their product is absolutely dependent on the well being of Lance, then they should have done everything they could to keep this story quiet, as it is embarrassing.
They did. Washing your dirty laundry in public is never pleasant, but in this case they needed to find a way to get Lance to engage and had run out of options. Shining a public spotlight on him seems to have done the trick, so it was the correct move.
2. A cranky engineer screwing off for a few days is common enough that it was a non-story to begin with
They've been trying to resolve this quietly for about a year and they were getting no where.
And CentOS relying on one person for as much as seemingly their very existence (by their own tone over this issue) has absolutely guaranteed that I will never use CentOS for anything important.
Hm, I smell the fresh scent of manure in the air. From your tone I'd bet that you never have used CentOS for anything important, or you wouldn't be so quick to give it up. Not that this is going to be an issue for much longer, which makes your objection pointless.
The layering in Btrfs is done internally. As the Wiki says:
Does the Btrfs multi-device support make it a "rampant layering violation"? Yes and no. Device management is a complex subject, and there are many different opinions about the best way to do it. Internally, the Btrfs code separates out components that deal with device management and maintains its own layers for them. The vast majority of filesystem metadata has no idea there are multiple devices involved. Many advanced features such as checking alternate mirrors for good copies of a corrupted block are meant to be used with RAID implementations below the FS.
And Linus has obviously already accepted this, as Btrfs is part of the Linux kernel now.
Keep one to experiment on, but teach the other all about how to build systems and how to design itself, then tell it to go and design a better version. Call it Multivac, ask it if entropy can ever be reversed and wait for the salvation of the human race:)
If you have physical unrestricted access to a system to the point where you can power it off/on at will then all bets are off anyway. What's the point in trying to crack the password when you can just CD/USB boot, mount the drive and then browse away to your hearts content.
And anyway, you won't get very much in the way of Rainbow tables on a CD or USB drive. The full complement of Rainbow tables weighs in at just over half a TB now.
Where exactly does it say in TFA that this has been used to do a remote attack? It doesn't, and the YouTube demo shows quite clearly that Brad Spengler is already logged into the box he's cracking using his own account. Trailrunner7 is trying to sex this up. Of cause if there were a sizable population of consumer Linux desktops out there, and an active virus hacker community targeting the said consumers with all the social tricks they use in the Windows world to get them to execute attachments, then we would be in a world of trouble at this point. But of cause we're not are we.
You think so huh. You've obviously never tried or you'll have discovered a nice little feature called login retry delay. Usually set to about 2 seconds. Doesn't matter how fast your laptop is.
[ this a general comment for anyone interested in Zabbix ]
I'm currently working on a project in a Hospital. We chose Zabbix (1.6.4) and myself and a colleague have set it up. It's currently monitoring 169 hosts (mixture of Windows, Tru64 Unix, Linux and UPSes) with 7108 items monitored and graphed and 1,704 trigger alarms. And this is really small potatoes compared to what Zabbix can handle. We've not had any issues with the Zabbix server processes. It runs just fine.
What I really like the most is its graphing capabilities: the ability to zoom in on a section of a graph by just dragging and selecting the time interval you want. This also works with "Favourite Screens" containing multiple graphs, where selecting a time window on one graph automatically zooms the rest of the graphs on that screen at the same time.
There's an excellent FireFox plugin too that gives you a summary icon at the bottom of the browser, a single bar to display the most recent event, and clicking on the icon slides a tabbed pop-up frame into view that contains all the information you'd expect to see on the Dashboard.
Like any monitoring tool of this size though, getting all the data in for the systems you want monitor is time consuming. My advise would be to concentrate first on getting a few systems just how you want them, then work out whether it's faster for you to clone them and mod system specific information or export the XML for those systems, use those as templates for other systems/hosts of the same time and work with XML import.
Ok sequential IO is going to improve some as more data will pass under the head compared to todays disks. But Random IO isn't going to feel the same benefit because that's influenced more by Rotational Delay (fixed by spin speed) and the time it takes for the head to shift between tracks: Disk Seek. So your figures are going to be wildly off in real life.
Well this is all fine and dandy for storage space, but what about performance? Drives are getting bigger all the time, but you're still stuck with spindles that rotate at the same speeds as the ones from last year, or the year before. I can't see anyone wanting to replace their speedy many-spindle database disk farm with a single 320TB disk that still spins at 10Krpm and only delivers ~125 IOPS. Performance is going to suck big time. All the top TPS benchmark results for example are achieved using 1000's of disks to max out the IO speed and make the database fly.
You're not seriously attempting to take a back handed swipe at Linux by bigging up Solaris's command line admin tools are you? I mean, have you actually looked a recent release of Redhat or SuSE? You must be barking mad. Linux has a very rich and comprehensive set of command like tools at its disposal. Your few examples are easily matched:
I think 2010 will be a big turning point for x86, well specifically Intel's x86 anyway. There will be a convergence of technologies: Intel's new QuickPath Interconnect enabling high speed links between Nehalem-EX chips and IO Hubs on the motherboard, with affordable 10GigE ethernet, 8Gb/s FibreChannel and 6Gb/s for SATA. You'll probably still be pinning your big database tables in memory though as your expectations will be higher;-)
Slashdot Mirror
They won't steal that much market share by doing just that. Long term, once they've got Chrome OS established on Netbooks I expect them to turn their attention to desktops. Many enterprise business apps are now web apps, with (for example) Oracle and Java EE backends. Organisations that run these apps today will plop Windows desktops in front of people, just for the purpose of running a browser and email. If google can create an alternative to these desktops using Chrome, and replace Exchange, IM, and Project organisation with Google Wave, then there is a chance that they will grab significant market share off Microsoft. There is also a sizable market in home users too. I know lots of people who only use their PCs to browse the web, do email, and do write the occasional letter. They would be a shoe in for a home Chrome desktop. So while Google might now bury Microsoft with this strategy, they will weaken them. The combined challenge from Apple, Linux desktops and Chrome is going to be a real challenge for MS to meet in the coming years. Their competition has never been so strong, and its getting stronger (albeit slowly).
Thats because Apple aren't out to change the Windows mindset. They are out to make money, and have chosen to do that by targeting the premium slice of whatever markets they choose to go into and out performing any competitors they find there. Judging by their financial results and cash reserves they've built up over the past few years they're doing very well at it.
So "Eye candy is just unimportant at best, and distracting at worst", but "I'll probably move to Enlightenment eventually. It's pretty as hell" ??
Make your mind up.
Which was my point in the first place, that other distros do focus more on desktop features. So unless you have a burning need to run CentOS on your laptop, you'll get a more functional experience choosing something else.
I'm subscribed to the Planet CentOS feed in Google Reader. Shortly after the Open Letter was published this blog post appeared. It's authored by Ralph Angenendt who is one of the 8 signatories on the Open Letter. In this blog he says: "Lance vanished from the project some time in 2008".
All good, valid points in a work context. I expanded on my comments though in my previous reply to the AC if you wish to have a read (no point in repeating myself).
Ok if you're using it as a portable mirror of your customers configurations, then I can understand that.
I was specifically thinking about the benefits that newer versions of software and drivers would give you, for example with hardware support. I would be willing to put money on the table that Ubuntu or Fedora do a dam sight better detecting and configuring Wireless cards in newer laptops (and desktops) than CentOS. And that they deal with sleep/suspend better due to improvements in more recent versions of the kernel. And I know from my own experience on the Desktop that CentOS, being tied to the (old) RHEL versions of the X server does not do so well with newer monitors. I have a 19" GNR monitor at home that Ubuntu, OpenSuSE and Fedora will happily detect and use at the correct resolution. It's impossible to get the correct resolution with CentOS however because it's not supported with that version of X yet. It doesn't bother me that much because I'm using my CentOS boxen as servers and if I need a graphical login on those systems I just use NX Nomachine from elsewhere. But my point is valid.
Rubbish. Redhat target small business through to enterprise customers, not the home hacker, and (strangely enough) business people place greater value on something if they have to pay for it than if they don't. They might want to be charged less, but that's a different kettle of fish.
I was going to bring up Redhat as an example too but you beat me to it. Totally agree with you.
No. According to the Open Letter from Ralph Angenendt that kick started all this Lance dropped off the CentOS radar sometime in 2008.
While you can run CentOS on a laptop why would you want to? There are other Linux distributions out there (Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, etc) that are designed to provide a better desktop/laptop experience using more up to date software. CentOS = Redhat commercial, and is really built to get the most out of server systems.
They did. Washing your dirty laundry in public is never pleasant, but in this case they needed to find a way to get Lance to engage and had run out of options. Shining a public spotlight on him seems to have done the trick, so it was the correct move.
They've been trying to resolve this quietly for about a year and they were getting no where.
Hm, I smell the fresh scent of manure in the air. From your tone I'd bet that you never have used CentOS for anything important, or you wouldn't be so quick to give it up. Not that this is going to be an issue for much longer, which makes your objection pointless.
The author of the article thinks so. He's predicting btrfs will be the default Linux filesystem 2 years from now.
The layering in Btrfs is done internally. As the Wiki says:
And Linus has obviously already accepted this, as Btrfs is part of the Linux kernel now.
Keep one to experiment on, but teach the other all about how to build systems and how to design itself, then tell it to go and design a better version. Call it Multivac, ask it if entropy can ever be reversed and wait for the salvation of the human race :)
Fair point. I hadn't thought of either of those. Guess I'm just not devious minded ;)
Huh?
If you have physical unrestricted access to a system to the point where you can power it off/on at will then all bets are off anyway. What's the point in trying to crack the password when you can just CD/USB boot, mount the drive and then browse away to your hearts content.
And anyway, you won't get very much in the way of Rainbow tables on a CD or USB drive. The full complement of Rainbow tables weighs in at just over half a TB now.
Where exactly does it say in TFA that this has been used to do a remote attack? It doesn't, and the YouTube demo shows quite clearly that Brad Spengler is already logged into the box he's cracking using his own account. Trailrunner7 is trying to sex this up. Of cause if there were a sizable population of consumer Linux desktops out there, and an active virus hacker community targeting the said consumers with all the social tricks they use in the Windows world to get them to execute attachments, then we would be in a world of trouble at this point. But of cause we're not are we.
You think so huh. You've obviously never tried or you'll have discovered a nice little feature called login retry delay. Usually set to about 2 seconds. Doesn't matter how fast your laptop is.
[ this a general comment for anyone interested in Zabbix ]
I'm currently working on a project in a Hospital. We chose Zabbix (1.6.4) and myself and a colleague have set it up. It's currently monitoring 169 hosts (mixture of Windows, Tru64 Unix, Linux and UPSes) with 7108 items monitored and graphed and 1,704 trigger alarms. And this is really small potatoes compared to what Zabbix can handle. We've not had any issues with the Zabbix server processes. It runs just fine.
What I really like the most is its graphing capabilities: the ability to zoom in on a section of a graph by just dragging and selecting the time interval you want. This also works with "Favourite Screens" containing multiple graphs, where selecting a time window on one graph automatically zooms the rest of the graphs on that screen at the same time.
There's an excellent FireFox plugin too that gives you a summary icon at the bottom of the browser, a single bar to display the most recent event, and clicking on the icon slides a tabbed pop-up frame into view that contains all the information you'd expect to see on the Dashboard.
Like any monitoring tool of this size though, getting all the data in for the systems you want monitor is time consuming. My advise would be to concentrate first on getting a few systems just how you want them, then work out whether it's faster for you to clone them and mod system specific information or export the XML for those systems, use those as templates for other systems/hosts of the same time and work with XML import.
Zabbix gets a big thumbs up from me.
Ok sequential IO is going to improve some as more data will pass under the head compared to todays disks. But Random IO isn't going to feel the same benefit because that's influenced more by Rotational Delay (fixed by spin speed) and the time it takes for the head to shift between tracks: Disk Seek. So your figures are going to be wildly off in real life.
Well this is all fine and dandy for storage space, but what about performance? Drives are getting bigger all the time, but you're still stuck with spindles that rotate at the same speeds as the ones from last year, or the year before. I can't see anyone wanting to replace their speedy many-spindle database disk farm with a single 320TB disk that still spins at 10Krpm and only delivers ~125 IOPS. Performance is going to suck big time. All the top TPS benchmark results for example are achieved using 1000's of disks to max out the IO speed and make the database fly.
whoops, I'm getting sleepy.
prstat =ps
You're not seriously attempting to take a back handed swipe at Linux by bigging up Solaris's command line admin tools are you? I mean, have you actually looked a recent release of Redhat or SuSE? You must be barking mad. Linux has a very rich and comprehensive set of command like tools at its disposal. Your few examples are easily matched:
dtrace = systemtap
truss = strace
ptree = pstree
prstat, prset = taskset
I think 2010 will be a big turning point for x86, well specifically Intel's x86 anyway. There will be a convergence of technologies: Intel's new QuickPath Interconnect enabling high speed links between Nehalem-EX chips and IO Hubs on the motherboard, with affordable 10GigE ethernet, 8Gb/s FibreChannel and 6Gb/s for SATA. You'll probably still be pinning your big database tables in memory though as your expectations will be higher ;-)