Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ BearItAll ] on Monday 22 January 2007 13:05 \__
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> __/ [ BearItAll ] on Monday 22 January 2007 11:40 \__
>>>
>>>> Sandman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am in the process of replacing my Linux server with a Apple Xserve
>>>>> solution (actually, three of them). I just wanted to advocate this
>>>>> Linux server some. It's a Debian system running on a dual3.6Ghz Xeon
>>>>> hardware with 4GB of RAM.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's serving up approx. 40 million web pages per month through my own
>>>>> content management system. And this is the current uptime:
>>>>>
>>>>> ~> uptime
>>>>> 12:09:35 up 199 days, 1:23, 1 user, load average: 2.40, 3.00, 3.35
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, the load average is pretty low this morning, it is usually around
>>>>> 4-5 and peaks at 20 sometimes (after which the web system closes all
>>>>> connections and waits for load to go down, happens a couple of times
>>>>> each month), which is why I am replacing it. I just think this is
>>>>> pretty good Linux advocacy, with 199 days of uptime in a system so
>>>>> extensively used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Go Linux! I just hope my Apple systems can deliver the same amount of
>>>>> uptime.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I keep looking at the apple servers but I've never actually known
>>>> anyone who used them. I'd be interested in your experiences with it,
>>>> what comes onboard and how well it works with the likes of MySQL
>>>> installs etc.
>>>
>>> Why not just BSD? They are stable and efficient. All that chocolate
>>> coating is pointless on the server side.
>>>
>>> L@@K. Shiny. Web server with graphical windows. And traslucent windows.
>>> And Doom 3.
>>>
>>
>> I have Linux servers and am very happy with them, all except two are
>> SLES10, the others being HPUX.
>
>
> What's wrong with SLES? The 'Microsoft tax' that's only covered for 5
> years?
>
>
I started switching my servers from RH's to SLES10 before the Novell-MS
agreement was made. It takes a lot to make me convert a server but SLES10
convinced me. After the agreement was made I had converted about 1/2 my
servers, then I paused to see what would happen. Then took a breather while
I watched the linch mob run past my window armed with pitch folks and
dustbin lids,
I reminded myself, during the pitch battles, that I am not actually anti-MS,
I have never been anti-MS, I don't use it myself but I have done and I am
not the least upset that other people use MS Win. I am angry with their
past dealings with security and user safety, but if they fixed that then I
wouldn't really have any beef with MS at all. From the security areas that
were listed in Vista they has been some serious work going on, ok so it
isn't perfect, I'm just happy that it is going in the right direction that
at last they are at least trying to get it right.
I decided to carry on converting the rest of my servers. All except the
UNIX's, and one other RH I forgot about earlier.
Simply put SLES10 is a brillient server distro. I believed that before the
agreement and the agreement hasn't changed that at all.
I don't feel that I have done anything at all that is anti-Linux.
Linux is building, it has been building since the day I had one of the first
versions on a PC many years ago. The reason Linux is building has very
little to do with politics and covert operations. Linux is building because
it is just such a bloody good OS that it is bound to grow irrespective of
what MS tries to do to stop it.
Look at the way the world is going, multimedia everywhere. I did a post this
morning about how I like to keep pictures/videos in hi-res, only reducing
them for emails or other views where you don't want or need hi-res. You can
work with hi-res with ease on Linux, you can not do that well on MS Win. MS
Win and Linux are very different OS's and that has little to do with the
shell, they are both very different right at the core.
By default that means that MS should be better at some things and Linux
better at others and that is absolutely true.
Linux is a fantastic communicator, where better to stream your media from.
It is also excellent at memory management, for both large and small items,
you need never worry about working with hi-res in Linux, there is never a
need to lessen quallity locally. For your own music from your own CDs,
there is no need at all to lesson the quallity by using lossy file formats.
So, no, I am not with Linux for any political reason, and certainly not
because of being anti-MS. I am with Linux for one reason and one reason
alone, because Linux is in my view a better OS because allows me to do the
things I like to do on a computer without having to worry about crashes and
memory leaks and security holes. I can just get on with what I want to do.
>> But each time I come to deciding the next generation of servers I have
>> had a look at the Apple Xserve. On paper they are good systems, basically
>> a UNIX so should be fine with all of the usual software I would add to a
>> server. It is only the price along with not knowing anyone with
>> experience of Xserve that stops the boy in me from giving it a go, it's
>> only works money afterall.
>
>
> Just remember that Apple are good at marketing. You say that they are
> "good systems on paper". Facts, on the other hand, are rarely advertised.
> People who Got the Facts^TM have been disappointed. Higher cost, worse
> performance. Adverts elevate price but guarantee no performance. In fact,
> the need to advertise is often driven by the need to eliminate and beat
> word of mouth. Red Hat servers needn't be advertised. People just
> recommend them to one another. Red Hat doesn't sell; it takes orders.
>
I know that, that is why the adverts themselves didn't sway me, but until
sandman mentioned it I hadn't actually talked to anyone who has touched an
Xserve.
Word of mouth isn't always the best way really, that way the only people
that hear of Linux are geeks and IT people, I am not assuming a difference
between geeks and IT people, except perhaps in quantities of mars bars.
|
|
