Re: [TCLUG:13660] Tradeoff between Linux vs Solaris (et.al.)

[Bob Tanner <tanner@real-time.com>]

Quoting George Swan (g-swan@maroon.tc.umn.edu):
> I recently asked for and got this opinion about linux from a web service
> for businesses provider.
> 
> >Linux is fine as a "cheap" non mission-critical server OS. It is very
> >efficient compared to NT. In business it's a tradeoff between having
> >enough techno-geeks around to ensure they are running or paying for
> >the Solaris (et. al.) OS.

Real Time was Solaris (Sparc/Ultra) and NT (Alpha/Intel). We now have only 2
Solaris machines and 1 NT machine. The rest are Linux (Sparc, Intel, Alpha).

So, I'll put my money where my mouth is, Linux is perfect solution for running
mission-critical servers for Real Time.

Linux runs everyone of our critical services. The solaris machines have been
delegated to secondary servers or when an application does not have a Linux
port (like Solstice Domain Manager).

Our NT box is left for Microsoft Access for Cold Fusion (but CF is running on
a linux box).

The Sparc version of linux is solid as a server or workstation. The ultra
version is solid as a server, but X/GNOME/KDE have some problems as a
workstation on a ultra.

The Alpha version rocks, except when the battery dies on the alpha and you
loose the ARC. :-(

Now, we are all techno-geeks here at Real Time, so I cannot counter the
statement that you need enough techno-geeks to make it work. But I can tell
you that we have the platinum support from Sun for our Solaris machines and
RHMember More from RedHat.

RedHat and the 'net give FAR superior support then Sun/Sun Solve.

Just my two cents.

-- 
Bob Tanner <tanner@real-time.com>       | Phone : (612)943-8700
http://www.real-time.com                | Fax   : (612)943-8500
Key fingerprint =  6C E9 51 4F D5 3E 4C 66 62 A9 10 E5 35 85 39 D9