LOL, OMG. You surely act like some Russian bitard on this this one. What does who I am or what do I do for a living have to with a topic? It's completely irrelevant, and even if I told you, you probably woldn't get a chance to check anyway.
The point is, whatever is your opinion of "mission critical", you are still wrong. Check out RT embedded devices, operations control systems, high performance systems - Linux is everywhere. And you sound like an old-timer who still hadn't gotten over it.
@stopthrm "way more intuitive and does more" - you're looking at this from the perspective of an end-user, which is fine, but this thread is not about the end-user - it's about providing server solution. In this context, windows does not do more, it does less.
I would guess the main reasons behind the reliability of some of the more "mature" flavors of unix don't have to support as many hardware models, and also the consistent analysis of core files (crash dumps) to identify and remedy failures through patching.
alot of servers run Linux, but when you talk about reliabilty you are probably comparing it to XP.
When considering all OS's - Linux is not particularly reliable. I did mention 5x9 uptime - I don't kknow if you missed that - but you will not get a 5x9 from any flavor of Linux.
Also - in terms of volume - remember that you will find Linux on blade type setups - a 128-way Solaris Server will get counted once - even tho it may have 500+ times the compute.
quesmind - do you realise that there are many many varieties of UNIX - Solaris, AIX, HPUX, AIX, OSF, Ultrix, Irix, and more.
Suggesting that UNIX and Linux are competing paradigms shows your lack of experience in this area.
From my experience, the Linux supporters who see it as vastly distinct from UNIX are ex-wintel idiots who resented the fact they got paid 25% the money of a UNIX guy.
LINUX is fine, but you won't see any serious business using it if they want 5x9 reliability.
>LINUX is fine, but you won't see any serious business using it
LOL, oh wow! Just out of curiosity, do you happen to know what Youtube runs on? Or Google? Or Amazon? Or Wikipedia? Or did you ever check Netcraft site to see what are the sites that have longest uptimes and shortest downtimes running? Frankly, I think all you know about UNIX comes from some 1980-s book or, maybe, some old-timer ramblings. You are totally out of context of modern situation.
OK, our difference of opinion is basically about the definition of the word serious.
When you hear serious - you probably think of the size of a companies brand.
When I say serious - I am talking about "business criticality". For example Real Time Trading Systems or Transaction processing.
If one of youtubes 5000 blades go down - no-one gives a f**k - it just get's rebooted. If a user has to click again on a hyperlink for his video - no big deal.
.... and as for the comment on what I know is from the 80s - in actual fact a few years ago - we had the largest blade farm in europe. Which we would use for cheap compute power which is not mission critical.
I would switch out my XP system for OSX if Apple didn't insist on making me buy their ( high-priced and non-expandable)hardware. In other words, if Apple just sold OSX Leopard off the shelf and installable on a generic x86 box I would buy it in a heartbeat. As for the *nix OSes, they're great as web servers and for people who like to mess around with computers.
5x9 availability is about the three Rs, not the skill of the admins.....
kbdkbd99 1 year ago
Love it.
Dog bit :)
wisteela 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you like programming check out my blog CodeJustin(.)com
chjustin69 2 years ago
LOL, OMG. You surely act like some Russian bitard on this this one. What does who I am or what do I do for a living have to with a topic? It's completely irrelevant, and even if I told you, you probably woldn't get a chance to check anyway.
The point is, whatever is your opinion of "mission critical", you are still wrong. Check out RT embedded devices, operations control systems, high performance systems - Linux is everywhere. And you sound like an old-timer who still hadn't gotten over it.
g0r3n 2 years ago
@g0r3n Linux is everywhere ONLY because of servers. You get over it and face the fact that WIndows is WAY more intuitive and does more...
stopthrm 1 year ago
@stopthrm "way more intuitive and does more" - you're looking at this from the perspective of an end-user, which is fine, but this thread is not about the end-user - it's about providing server solution. In this context, windows does not do more, it does less.
kbdkbd99 1 year ago
I would guess the main reasons behind the reliability of some of the more "mature" flavors of unix don't have to support as many hardware models, and also the consistent analysis of core files (crash dumps) to identify and remedy failures through patching.
kbdkbd99 3 years ago
alot of servers run Linux, but when you talk about reliabilty you are probably comparing it to XP.
When considering all OS's - Linux is not particularly reliable. I did mention 5x9 uptime - I don't kknow if you missed that - but you will not get a 5x9 from any flavor of Linux.
Also - in terms of volume - remember that you will find Linux on blade type setups - a 128-way Solaris Server will get counted once - even tho it may have 500+ times the compute.
Solaris-x86 is a decent alternative.
kbdkbd99 3 years ago
quesmind - do you realise that there are many many varieties of UNIX - Solaris, AIX, HPUX, AIX, OSF, Ultrix, Irix, and more.
Suggesting that UNIX and Linux are competing paradigms shows your lack of experience in this area.
From my experience, the Linux supporters who see it as vastly distinct from UNIX are ex-wintel idiots who resented the fact they got paid 25% the money of a UNIX guy.
LINUX is fine, but you won't see any serious business using it if they want 5x9 reliability.
kbdkbd99 3 years ago
>LINUX is fine, but you won't see any serious business using it
LOL, oh wow! Just out of curiosity, do you happen to know what Youtube runs on? Or Google? Or Amazon? Or Wikipedia? Or did you ever check Netcraft site to see what are the sites that have longest uptimes and shortest downtimes running? Frankly, I think all you know about UNIX comes from some 1980-s book or, maybe, some old-timer ramblings. You are totally out of context of modern situation.
g0r3n 2 years ago
OK, our difference of opinion is basically about the definition of the word serious.
When you hear serious - you probably think of the size of a companies brand.
When I say serious - I am talking about "business criticality". For example Real Time Trading Systems or Transaction processing.
If one of youtubes 5000 blades go down - no-one gives a f**k - it just get's rebooted. If a user has to click again on a hyperlink for his video - no big deal.
If a trading system goes down .......
kbdkbd99 2 years ago
You replied with a big LOL - and you were unfamiliar with the context of serious.
Do you work for a small-time IT sh*it hole earning shite money minimum wage ?
kbdkbd99 2 years ago
.... and as for the comment on what I know is from the 80s - in actual fact a few years ago - we had the largest blade farm in europe. Which we would use for cheap compute power which is not mission critical.
You sound like a kid who has run a few scripts.
kbdkbd99 2 years ago
quesmind 3 years ago
Very good, I think when vista came out people opened their eyes, smelt the fresh air and realised that windows really does suck
HLA91 4 years ago
I would switch out my XP system for OSX if Apple didn't insist on making me buy their ( high-priced and non-expandable)hardware. In other words, if Apple just sold OSX Leopard off the shelf and installable on a generic x86 box I would buy it in a heartbeat. As for the *nix OSes, they're great as web servers and for people who like to mess around with computers.
tedorcon 4 years ago
Very creative!! Inside for unix peeps is right.
Cyborg9799 4 years ago