Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] VMWare Made GNU/Linux Highest-priority Platform

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 08:07:29 -0500, Linonut wrote:

> * Erik Funkenbusch fired off this tart reply:
> 
>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 07:20:45 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> The GigaOM Interview: Dr. Mendel Roseblum, Chief Scientist, VMWare
>>> 
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| It took a lot longer than I thought it would take. We released it first on 
>>>| the Linux platform, because we felt the Linux community would adopt it much 
>>>| faster. That proved to be a good move.  
>>> `----
>>> 
>>> http://gigaom.com/2007/12/26/vmware-mendel-roseblum-interview/
>>
>> What's more, his company treats Linux like a third rate citizen as far as
>> management goes.  They don't offer a Linux management client for ESX
>> server, or a Linux Virtual Center client.  They require MS SQL Server, and
>> won't run on MySQL or Postgre.  
> 
> You sure about that?  
> 
>    http://www.petri.co.il/5_ways_to_adminster_esx_server.htm

Well, certainly, you can get into the console and command line it, and most
things are available that way, but it's pretty cryptic... even for Linux
users.

> Besides, it looks to me like VMWare provides an ESX API, and it is third
> parties doing the client.
> 
>    http://www.petri.co.il/3rd-party-tools-available-esx-server.htm

That's interesting.  Still, the point was talking about support by the
company itself.

> And so what if they're concentrating on Windows for the client, if
> they're using Linux to do the heavy lifting?

Not exactly.  VMWare claims that they use linux on ESX server only as a
boot loader, and console interface.  They claim they take over the machine
and do all the "heavy lifting" themselves.

>> Oh, then I love this comment:
>>
>> "idle machines use as much energy as fully utilized machines"
>>
>> Lol.  This guy's a "scientist"?  He thinks an idle CPU uses the same power
>> as a fully loaded one?
> 
> I don't see anything there about idle CPUs.

How, precisely is a machine "idle" if it's CPU isn't?

> I bow to you, Erik.  You're the only guy I know who can quote out of
> context even with the context present! <grin>

Obviously an idle machine has an idle CPU, does it not?  That's like trying
to say "The car is idling doesn't mean the engine is idling".

>> More Roy Lies.
> 
> More Erik stammering and nitpicking to try to minimize a pro-Linux post
> and spin it back to benefit Microsoft.

How is it nitpicking to point out that Roy's article doesn't say anything
like what he claimed it did?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index