Posted on 03/10/2005 9:38:47 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Senior OSDL executive tells vnunet.com of systematic campaign of disinformation
So-called "enemies of Linux" are conducting a systematic campaign of disinformation which aims to undermine the enterprise credibility of the open source operating system, a senior executive from the Open Source Development Labs has told vnunet.com.
Nelson Pratt, marketing director of the pro-Linux organisation, which boasts Linus Torvalds among its top brass, said that unnamed vendors are trying to scare firms with a campaign claiming that Linux is inadequately supported for enterprise use.
However, Pratt argues that these charges simply do not hold up. "There are enemies of Linux that will introduce questions about the stability and ability of some companies to offer service and support, but there is the same quality of service and support available for Linux as there is for any big enterprise version of Unix," he said.
Linux is expected to become a $36bn business by 2008 and well over a quarter of all servers shipping are running the open source OS, according to Pratt.
"It's not surprising that the revenue is so great. More and more commercial organisations choose to buy Linux rather than download and deploy it independently," he said.
"They are increasingly treating the operating system as an enterprise product and engaging commercial firms of the calibre of Computer Associates, HP, IBM and Dell to support deployment."
Pratt also insists that the security of Linux
is perfectly adequate for enterprise use. "Linux is absolutely a secure operating system to the extent that it does not suffer any more or less than any other mature enterprise operating system. The 2.6 kernel is a key step forward in terms of boosting security and reliability," he said.
Specifically, Pratt disputed recent US research suggesting that measuring the time between security patches shows that Linux is less secure than Windows.
"Not every patch going into an operating system is in response to a security breach. Some enemies of Linux would say that the issue of patches shows how secure an OS is. I'm not calling out one vendor here, but it depends which side of their mouth they are talking out of," he said.
"They say that too many patches and we are not secure, or not enough patches and we are not addressing security well enough, but the arguments begin to sound specious."
Another allegation disputed by Pratt is that the distributed development processes of Linux make it impossible for any one firm to effectively take responsibility for the platform.
"It is nonsense to say that nobody owns Linux and nobody is responsible for it. Linux has a development process that is very similar to any enterprise operating system. It is not like we are talking tens of thousands of developers responsible for the kernel and subsystems," he said.
"Full time kernel core operating system developers number in the hundreds. There are very well defined professional processes in place for the development of the kernel and subsystems.
"Is there a kernel development community to fix problems fast and professionally? Yes, absolutely. There are requests for changes that come from mature enterprise users and these requests are taken very seriously, even if the enemies of Linux say differently."
Current market share figures detailing operating systems on shipped servers are potentially misleading, Pratt claimed. "It is not what has shipped. You need to look at redeployments when firms have taken a server and installed Linux onto it after purchase," he explained.
"The true installed base of Linux is being undercounted if all we do is look at the server shipments alone. We need to look at what companies actually do with the servers after they have purchased them."
To support these assertions, Pratt cited a recent poll of OSDL members which asked how many had purchased servers with an OS pre-loaded and then removed and replaced it with Linux. Virtually all of them claimed to have taken this action.
"However, going the other way was totally different. We asked how many had swapped out Linux and installed Windows and nobody had," said Pratt.
Linux is moving beyond its traditional role as just a web server platform, according to Pratt. "Look at Oracle and IBM. Oracle is using Linux as the OS for its grid. This shows that there is a solution stack on top of Linux that is not just Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP/Perl, but a mixture of open source and proprietary software. ISVs such as Oracle, CA, SAP and IBM are fleshing out the Linux stack," he explained.
"As the big sophisticated software vendors start putting more and more deployments onto Linux, all the questions about Linux only being suitable as a web server go away."
Pratt was careful to emphasis that Linux is not a panacea and should only be deployed where it is appropriate.
"At OSDL we are trying not to be religious about Linux. We do not want to be evangelists about Linux where it is not practical to put Linux. For example, enterprise resource planning and data warehousing are on the horizon but there are not robust solutions yet," he said.
"We are not saying that all applications need to be Linux when the operating system is not ready for it. If there is a failure this could taint the feeling for Linux in general, so we say that the OS should only be used where it is appropriate."
Very good point and I think you are 100% correct. Better documentation would help solve a LOT of these problems. What is needed is a good repository for Linux FAQ run by someone who can help out the Linux-challenged.
I have no problems with the way Linux runs or it's stability, my gripe all along has been getting up and running as easly as possible.
Your denials are hilarious. Not only are there well known terms for these problems in Linux, called "dependency hell"
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=linux+%22dependency+hell%22&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&fl=0&x=wrt
and "rpm hell"
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=linux+%22rpm+hell%22&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&fl=0&x=wrt
According to many, you can't even cut and paste reliably between two applications running on the same version of Linux! Here's a plea on Slashdot on how to do it, that resulted in 800+ responses.
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/02/1832201&tid=189&tid=104&tid=4
LOL
You're welcome, it was a good article. There are a few decent guys that support Linux, like that guy, who admit it has some serious issues, and want them corrected. They know the guys that go around telling everyone within shouting distance how great linux is are only hurting their cause, because as soon as someone starts to believe them, then tries to load it up and deal with all the BS, they'll probably lose those potential users forever because they will feel they have been tricked into trying to rely on something for their computer needs that simply isn't good enough.
I think you fall into that category yourself, as does Poser, and others who were misled by the Linux "hype". It makes you start to wonder why these guys are pushing this stuff on everyone, when we know some of the things about it like I have posted above, and how Democrats and socialists the world over are trying to ram it down everyone's throat as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/05/technology/05systems.html?ex=1246766400&en=269f1a83d00e9e51&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1617712,00.asp?kc=EWNKT0209KTX1K0100440
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7239
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=democrats+%22open+source%22+laws&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8
I went to a few Linux sites and posted questions and got one-word type answers. I had gotten the opinion that most Linux guys were smug know-it-all prix. Luckily, I found a few patient people here to help disprove that stereotype (particularly n3wbi3), otherwise I would have scrapped it and probably never gone back.
We'll see where this goes ... I think Linux people should pay attention because people like me are the ones they are trying to "convert".
Knock yourself out, but there's plenty of other bonafide US Unix products already as far as I'm concerned, and I won't be wasting any of my time with foreign born knockoffs being pushed on us by socialists. If you don't like Microsoft why not give Apple a try? Or if you want Unix on Intel, Sun is releasing a new version of Solaris with cutting edge technology you won't find in Linux. You can even download it for free if cost is a priority. Simply put there's no reason to promote GPL software or its founders that jeapordize the US software industry, with their lies about Linux capability and the shell games their vendors play on Wall Street. Have a good evening.
Thanks for the info and opinion.
Used Apple, not a fan. Actually, I like Microsoft, I am just open to other possibilities. Also, I do software development and am looking to freelance again soon and don't want to turn down potential projects just because it's a Linux server and not MS.
I'd suggest spending more time with the new Solaris. It has some advanced server management capability that Linux doesn't offer, plus Sun is the originator of Java technology.
I think we're going to see significant growth of Solaris over the next few years, as it will offer a standardized platform (unfragmented like "Linux") that commercial vendors won't be afraid to develop commercial applications and hardware drivers for. Lots of programmers are rightfully afraid of mixing their wares up too much with GPL code, as they will send their lawyers after you to confiscate your code if you accidently tie any of yours too closely to theirs.
http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/14/cz_dl_1014linksys.html
Certainly. These guys are trying to fly under the radar in my opinion and not too many were aware of the dangers for a long time. There's still a long ways to go, Wall Street didn't even catch on till last year.
Never tried it. I guess I should give it a try. Do I get it from Sun or do you recommend somewhere else? What version is best? Are there different types?
Is there anything about that installation that I should know/fear?
Can I install it with Linux and Windows?
Nothing wrong with flying under the radar IMHO. I do it all the time.
Point is even windows service packs have broken applications. We are on an nt4 domain which I used to use the domain management tools right off the DC, when I went to SP they no longer worked. I also had to wait a good long while before third party apps like cygwin worked on XPsp2.
US I run three different versions of Linux on the same box! I have changed from one to the other all the time, its really not all that hard.
I have installed dozens of application by simply typing
yum install (application)
Nice way to try and ignore the actual package management systems and focus on putting packages on one at a time. gators problem (and I told him as much) was that he tried to do all the installs up front without putting a package manager on first (actually I would almost bet mandrake has yum or apt by default).
Remember US when you use linux your supporting communism...
/sarcasm..
I like solaris but after using the x86 versions I think Ill hold off for a bit (talk about limited driver support). Also all the neat features on solaris ten are kinda useless on an intel architecture.
Solaris is a great OS, but saying its not fragmented is like saying RedHat is not fragmented. Compare Solaris to other UNIX operating systems and there is a huge difference.
If you really want to try solaris and have a few bucks I would highly recommend going to Ebay and picking up some sun hardware (you can get something which will run Solaris 10 for less than 200$)..
That's okay. I voted for Bush, so I am also branded a War-For-Oil, murderous Nazi.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.