Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:5131 comp.os.linux.misc:34231 comp.os.os2.advocacy:76584 Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!wraith.internode.com.au!tipellium.apanix.apana.org.au!cleese.apana.org.au!gumleaf!mike From: mike@gumleaf.apana.org.au (Michael Talbot-Wilson) Subject: Re: Linux thoroughly insulted by Infoworld! Message-ID: <D31H4A.1BL@gumleaf.apana.org.au> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 00:52:57 GMT References: <950116203411@lambada> <3fjcn4$24u@nkosi.well.com> <3fmi6c$ang@galaxy.ucr.edu> <3fvqbd$6v1@nkosi.well.com> Lines: 59 In article <3fvqbd$6v1@nkosi.well.com> henryh@well.sf.ca.us (Henry Hwong) writes: >Joe Sloan (jjs@dostoevsky.ucr.edu) wrote: >: In article <3fjcn4$24u@nkosi.well.com>, >: Henry Hwong <henryh@well.sf.ca.us> wrote: > >: >Nobody in their right mind is going to use Linux as a >: >production database server. > >: I don't understand what you are trying to say here; can you explain what >: you mean? Linux is currently being used in real-world mission-critical >: applications. Perhaps those using it should hear your warning, if you >: would care to explain it - > >Sure. I am in no way dis'ing Linux itself, but, rather, lamenting its >state as a chaos-bred operating system. Fortune 500 businesses want >certain things for their IS departments, one of which is support. >Contracted support. Something you can hold over vendors when you don't >get what you need. Contracted support is widely available. There is an issue of credibility when the support is not provided by a large consulting firm. Different decisions, I guess, will be made on this. Who can second-guess large corporations? But they will only make an issue of support if they need it, and if Linux has been taken in there by Linux people they possibly don't. But if they already have a monochromatic policy (only "Windows"), as many do, the question becomes irrelevant. >Another thing they want is a skill that they can either hire (buy) or >train their IS people for. See above. > Businesses want to have interchangable people >(it's a harsh, cruel world out there), and, until Linux is used by a >ton of other IS departments, which would create a large pool of people who >could support Linux in a business environment, they aren't going to use it. Same point. Support is there. >Besides, Linux is (*gasp!*) just an operating system. Until Sybase, Oracle, >or Informix port their products to Linux, why use it? You have a narrow view on DBMSs. But these three had better support it soon, because Unidata runs now and Advanced Pick support is coming RSN. A free operating system has the potential great advantage to application vendors that they can supply it with the application and configured therefor, rather than requiring the customer to go buy a Unix system. >: I have been looking for ways to move more and more services from Sun >: machines to linux machines, emboldened and encouraged by the spectacular >: successes and rock-solid reliability I've seen so far... >Stability should only be one factor when moving platforms. You should also >consider what support you're going to get, as well as the cost of training >your people on the idosyncracies of Linux. Get off the cat's tail.