Apple and Windows Will Force Linux Underground 554
eastbayted writes "Tom Yager at InfoWorld predicts: 'At the end of the decade, we'll find that Apple UNIX has overtaken commercial Linux as the second most popular general client and server computing platform behind Windows.' That's not a gloom-and-doom omen for the ever-popular Linux kernel, though, he stresses. While Apple and Microsoft will grapple for dominance of client and server spaces, Linux will be 'the de facto choice for embedded solutions.' And by 'embedded,' Yager means 'specialized.' With a push of a button and a flip of switch, he predicts, you'll be able to create a configured database and a mated J2EE server — all thanks to Linux."
O RLY? (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you ever tried to get Oracle running on anything but Red Hat? When are we going to face the fact that Linux distros are different from each other? When I say "I run Linux" I've really said something as vague as (here comes the car analogy) "I drive a car" (as opposed to "I drive an Oldsmobile"). When people pick on "Linux" what are they really picking on?
Yeah, maybe in a web monkey's dev lab (Score:1, Interesting)
No way on the serverside, though. MacOS is unreliable, balky, slow, RAM-hungry and generally inappropriate. It makes a lovely desktop but doesn't make an ideal server by any stretch of the imagination. In addition, their hardware is sub-par (although very pretty) and underpowered compared to what other vendors are putting out there.
Give me Sun opteron boxes running either Solaris or a certified Linux for all the small jobs and give me big, solid, heavy SPARC hardware for the big iron. I work in a *very* large (over 10k servers) environment and Solaris still completely dominates the database server/large app server end with Linux running web servers, the occasional customer firewall and other small jobs. HPUX is still a big force with a lot of appplications only running on HPUX, although migration to Solaris is a happening thing.
There is no way any serious organisation is going to start switching to Xserves. They're just not up to scratch compared to the current Opteron lineup. Maybe when I can get a 16 or 32 core Xserve with 32Gb of RAM they might start having the grunt, but until then they're just pretty looking.
Entrenched in Serverland (Score:2, Interesting)
I've never touched an OSX box that did anything really important.
Most don't take it seriously, and Apple has not built many 1u rack mounts, but I guess they have a new product now? I just checked..
Re:Except for the fact (Score:5, Interesting)
Slower than Linux or Windows? I'd like to see those numbers, please!
As for serious, by what standard? I'd readily admit I would not recommend running OSX on servers unless OSX adds geniune value (as it might in a Mac-based business).
In my world, Linux is best for backend. OSX is best for front-end. (while Windows is probably best at the standard business desktop)
Re:Embedded. (Score:5, Interesting)
Now they run on Windows and they do... the touch screen is (seemingly) required for operation and they stop working all the time.
IF my life depended on Windows... really depended on it... I'd be long dead by now.
Re:overtaking linux at whose expense (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yeah, maybe in a web monkey's dev lab (Score:2, Interesting)
The server world is a lot bigger than rack dense x86. Rack dense machines are cheap and fun and useful but they don't run big database loads (no, a stack of them in a RAC doesn't count), don't saturate their Gig-E running CPU intensive applications and more to the point:
NOBODY CARES HOW EASY TO USE ENTERPRISE APPLICATIONS ARE.
Seriously. Nobody cares. Nobody wants it to be too easy. The vendors don't want to lose out on selling consulting and service, integrators don't want to lose out on that work, Oracle DBAs are paid well for a reason and everyone likes it that way. The customer pays up and doesn't worry about it. Nobody cares whether or not the application is easy to deploy, they've already paid a huge amount of money in licensing/development costs and paying another sysadmin or DBA to look after things is a drop in the ocean AND keeps sysadmins and DBAs in work.
Re:Except for the fact (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed - it's ridiculous. You notice the weasel way they have to qualify things as well:
That could mean that 90% of x86 systems will be bare bones by 2008, as OEMs will choose their own version of linux to install
Re:Except for the fact (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think this is true at all. OSX is different enough from windows that your usual run-of-the-mill Windows admin would go crazy trying to admin it. Even the usually desktop admin stuff is so different than windows, not even getting into the differences in server administration. Notice i'm saying it's different, and not that it's difficult. I believe that Mac OS, and Linux, are no harder to operate than Windows, but that they are different, and do require different training. Also, if you admin is capable of admining Mac OS, then they could probably do a pretty good job with a modern Linux distro. With modern Linux distros, it's no harder to operate than Mac OS. If you think it is, then you haven't familiarized yourself enough with Linux.
I less than balanced opinion I suspect... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:skewed vision? (Score:3, Interesting)
Pretty dumb.
That said some mac configurations are pretty hard to get in that ff from another vendor. It's the 13" that people seem to be getting - and purely for the weight.
If it was me buying, I'd probably go for the equivilant Asustek model. Smaller, lighter, made in the same factory, cheaper.
Article's author scared of free software (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yeah, maybe in a web monkey's dev lab (Score:3, Interesting)
No, big huge companies with million dollar IT budgets don't care, but companies where the IT is limited to one guy or half a guy will care. If they can have a homebuild solution cheaper than an out-sourced solution, they'll go for it.
You assume Apple's looking at all markets. They aren't. I'm trying to highlight a market (small businesses) that Apple could reasonably shoot for with some work.
re (Score:1, Interesting)
I, have my freedom.
I, have access to everything I need with Linux.
If the rest of the Software world chooses to go down the same old roads, I say let them. It will be the 1980s all over again, with Apple, Google, Sony, Yahoo and Oracle making inroads into Microsoft's monopoly.
Again, the difference between the tides of the fortunes of the major software vendors is that people have the freedom now to simply switch off and run a full and complete Open Source OS.
Let the fools destruct themselves in Apple/Windows land, those who jump ship and come to Linux country have made the smart move.
Re:Except for the fact (Score:2, Interesting)
If you think the Apple and Dell laptop battery issues were bad, eMachines and their ilk have been plagued by such things as well as POWER ADAPTERS THAT CATCH ON FIRE. Sure, you can get lucky buying a cheap PC, but from my experience said PCs are usually more of a headache than they're worth. Such is the risk of business, what makes it so bad for them is that since they ship SO MANY units they now have to make a major recall.
Now, that's not to say that apple uses higher quality components than everyone else. I'm sure Lenovo and Dell use very similar components in their high (or mid-high) range models. But they are similarly more expensive than lower-end machines with subpar quality. The only other main difference is how the cases are engineered (both outside and in). It's been my experience that the end-product of an Apple laptop is very solid and durable.
Remember, like Toyota, Apple tries to rely on their "just works" image: their machines are pretty solid. Toyota doesn't import their parts from another planet, they use similar (or the same) parts as other car companies. They just try to make sure they pick good parts and put them together well. However, like Toyota they can easily slip if they stop paying attention, as demonstrated by Toyota's current problems.
Re:US-centric outlook (Score:2, Interesting)
On the other hand, the Bulgarians I've spoke to in person say that almost everyone in Bulgaria uses Windows and Office at home as it's freely available from about a bzillion warez sites.
Re:Not really (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is YOUR fault (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.ubuntulinux.com/ [ubuntulinux.com]
http://www.mandriva.com/ [mandriva.com]
http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/ [novell.com]
I look at the usability and overall experience comparison between Ubuntu Dapper Drake and Warty Warthog, and I'm amazed.
Interestingly, even smaller, specialized distros have taken up the charge to be more friendly and accessible. For example, look up the DreamLinux distro sometime.
And if you don't think the masses will ever "smarten" up and use Linux, take a closer look at your Tivo.
http://www.tivo.com/linux/linux.asp [tivo.com] (fair enough, it's not a desktop, but then Linux is only the kernel anyway...)
Re:Embedded. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Article's author scared of free software (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh, and this BS about Linux suddenly not being free anymore if it's bundled with hardware? WTF?? Which orifice did that come out of? Linux will continue to be free and companies or individuals will continue to pick it up, tweak it to suit their needs, and, hopefully, come up with some nifty products that we would be willing to BUY. Yes, BUY. Or are you implying that because a HARDWARE device uses a free OS Kernel for its software core, that therefore the HARDWARE should be free also?
Re:Article's author scared of free software (Score:2, Interesting)
Isn't that true today? This is a hollow arguement that amazes me that it got marked as insightful. The question of hardware never being free isn't much of a question at all. As far as bundled apps... this is also not free unless the app provider provides it for free.
Ultimatly an embedded system that can not be customized by an end user becomes less valueable the more the speific the role of the hardware is. Take a cellphone for example; with todays multimedia styled phones the inability to apply ones own music would make the multimedia cellphone near useless outside of the original communications features. That's why this is modifiable.
You get into an area of an embedded system such as a PLC Linux could be used to make a more end-user friendly system where the user doesn't need to know C to program it. This is added value and the more flexible this system is with custom user software the more valuable it will become. Locking down features in such an embedded system would only be bad for the producer, they've already sold you the hardware, why should they cripple the app or the ability to modify the app?