Redhat and Intel Team Up for Linux Business 66
Red Hat and Intel announced today at LinuxWorld Boston that they would be entering a partnership to help customers "plan for, accelerate and optimize their deployments of Linux solutions." From the article: "'We're responding to what customers have told us they really need to support their advanced deployments of Linux and open source,' said Tim Yeaton, executive vice president of Enterprise Solutions at Red Hat. 'The programs Intel and Red Hat have selected are aimed at equipping customers with in-depth domain knowledge and providing hard core data to make complex architectural decisions.'"
woot (Score:1)
Now maybe we'll see performance improvements that can tightly take advantage of the Intel archecture.
-nB
Re:woot (Score:2)
I used to like AMD but recently... (Score:2)
Anyway, I think that Intel seems more interested in commoditizing complimentary markets (software) in order to sell more hardware. And by participating more in the community they may get additional credibility with the FOSS advocates. They are doing more in this area than AMD (which is not entirely surprising give
Proofs of Concept (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Proofs of Concept (Score:5, Insightful)
Some. But most will continue to use Intel for the near future, and even if in the farther future AMD passes Intel in Enterprise server sales, this'll still be worth Intel's time because they're not just competing with AMD; they're also competing with Sun and IBM in the server space. Linux competes with that even more (currently) than it does with Windows, in my opinion.
I personally prefer Ubuntu on AMD, but the Fortune 500 company for which I work uses RedHat on Intel, and it's a joy to work with but could be better. Hopefully this will help make it better.
Re:Proofs of Concept (Score:2)
If nothing else, this will be useful. (Score:3, Interesting)
I know that the company I work for is not unique.
I know that someone else had probably already done what I want to do in the way I want to do it.
So let me find out how they did it and I'll buy your product.
This is HUGE! (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's see what else comes out of this, but I think it's a wake-up call to other hardware vendors.
Re:This is HUGE! (Score:1, Insightful)
With a company like Intel teaming up with a Linux distro, it's a major endorsement from a large reputible company for open source products.
As for hardware vendors, yeah, this should be a big wakeup call. As it is, most Linux drivers are reverse engineered, and even the ones that are given out by the vendors are very poorly written (cough, ATI, cough), save a few (nVidia, LinkSys). Having to reverse engineer hardware in order to make drivers can only get you so much performance out of your hardware,
Re:This is HUGE! Huge-Ass Merger? (Score:2)
I thought IBM and RedHat had a thing going. Is IBM going to have a BM, now?
image work cometary
Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:2, Insightful)
This hasn't been the first Slashdot article that brings fears to mind about Linux being pulled too far in the direction of corporate interests. Don't get me wrong, though, some attention from big companies can be very beneficial to projects like Linux. But still, here'
Re:Mod Parent Interesting (Score:1)
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:1)
The Intel compiler for Linux is quite good (so I'm told) and since that's not a money maker for them you'd think they would make it part of GCC.
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:3, Informative)
steve
The GPL may handicap gcc in this regard ... (Score:2)
Intel may license patented optimization techniques. Such techniques would be unavailable to gcc.
How? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How? (Score:1)
But keep in mind there are lots of sneaky tricks that Intel can try, because sneaky tricks are the name of such a corp.'s game. For example, imagine trying a certain distro, distributed in binary (say, RedHat, or even a "downstream" one like CentOS) and finding strange problems when using it on AMD ha
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:1)
Also, see my reply to this post [slashdot.org].
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:2)
There's two ways to do this:
1 - Improve Linux on Intel architecture. We're talking about improvements here, can't see any problem with them doing this.
2 - Cause problems with Linux running on non-Intel architecture. Erm... I just can't see this happening. Eg, getting a patch into mainline kernel with improves it isn't the easiest thing in the world (with the amount of
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:2)
Did you not get the memo about this year's Underhanded C Contest [slashdot.org]? The task is to design innocent-looking code which runs well on one
There are no large corps that do no evil (Score:2)
But I personally have every confidence in what Intel is doing here. They are quite simply trying to help their resellers push less costly systems so that they can get a larger chunk of the pie. It is a really good move really.
The real victims in this manuver are the proprietary software companies such as Microsoft. Certainly not the FOSS community which stands to benefit quite a bit.
The idea that Intel could be doing some
Re:Intel Not Exactly A Do-No-Evil Corp. (Score:1)
I see this as a win-win situation. There's nothing like an arms race to push the boundaries.
Intel is not just processors (Score:5, Informative)
Here's something to watch: Intel has an entire line of telephony products (Dialogic) but the lack of open-source drivers has frustrated some development efforts. This is probably about to change. I spent some time at the Intel booth at VON in San Jose last month and he mentioned that Intel plans to open-source the Dialogic drivers over the next few months. This would be great news for those developing Linux telephony apps.
Re:Intel is not just processors (Score:2)
Wow, master of the understatement. That would be *HUGE*. Already there is considerable momentum behind projects like asterisk. Just imagine if we got access to good telephony hardware in linux.
That'd be a boon. Not only to those of us in the field, but to businesses world wide.
Re:Intel is not just processors (Score:2)
Re:Intel is not just processors (Score:2)
Digium makes the interfaces, and there ar
Re:Intel is not just processors (Score:2)
In the small to mid size business, asterisk ( and digium ) is where it's at ( as far as the free stuff. And I hear it's better than a lot of the paid for stuff ). Now picture intel hardware working with asterisk. Competition, pure and simple. And consumers would benefit.
Also, imagine what kind of attention Intel can bring to this area of linux. I know many linux admins who have never heard of asterisk. And with that kind of exposure on an already e
Re:Intel is not just processors (Score:2)
I saw an Intel linux telephony box at LinuxWorld last week. Lots of ports with both x86 and xscale processors on it.
I Fortell..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, I hope this is successful "service and support" that every corporate IT media pundit claims Linux is missing.
Re:I Fortell..... (Score:1)
Thanks - same here
One small step for Linux (Score:2, Funny)
Re:One small step for Linux (Score:2)
stupid (Score:1)
Re:stupid (Score:2)
They offered? AMD haven't? I'm sure Redhat wouldn't have made a decision to NOT work with AMD.
obvious doom (Score:1)
goliath is gonna fall.
Re:obvious doom (Score:1)
And ironically enough, the anti-trust suits against M$ have clarified the laws that are making it possible for AMD to slap Intel around in court in their anti-trust case.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/02/amd_subpoe nas_skype/ [theregister.co.uk]
Anti-MS types always crack me up with their stifling innovation arguments, while
Re:obvious doom (Score:2)
No one is as evil as Microsoft! Even Sadam's Iraq was run on OpenSource!
interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:interesting (Score:2)
So company buys intel chips, motherbords, network adapters, telephony, embedded solutions, yada yada yada..
Gives me a warm fuzzy knowing a company is backing its hardware, providing drivers and support for my operating system. While community built drivers are nice it doesn't necessarily e
Re:interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
Intel sells hardware, but for the hardware to be useful it needs software. Therefore when purchasing Intel solutions purchasers always have to look at the total price of the package including software. Commodity software lowers the overal price of the solution without touching Intel's margins at all. That makes it possible for Intel to sell the total solution at a lower price meaning more sales at the same profitability per sale.
This is basically what Microsoft has been doing to the hardware manufacturers for years. Because there was competition on the hardware side hardware prices have dropped dramatically over the years and Microsoft has ridden that wave to ever increasing sales and profit levels. Well, now Intel is finally wising up and realising that turnabout is fair play.
Long story made short. It is in Intel's best interest to see more competition in the software space as long as the software all runs on its chips.
Re:interesting (Score:4, Interesting)
Long story made short. It is in Intel's best interest to see more competition in the software space as long as the software all runs on its chips.
This announcement coupled with the recent, exclusive, partnership with Apple makes me think that Intel REALLY wants to get out of bed with Microsoft and the "WinTel" alliance. So what does Microsoft do now? Make their stuff work better on AMD and promote them? Cripple their support on Intel and let the benchmarkers talk about it? Price leverage?
It's interesting that Intel is dancing with others than brung them, and they think they can get away with it. They must have calculated the repercussions MS would impose--but decided they had to support multiple OSes anyway.
Very interesting. The upside is that if it works, both OS X and RH will have Intel-only optimizations, and as those platforms grow, AMD will be marginalized. The downside would be a strong AMD-MS alliance, such that neither OS X nor RH grow and Intel is relegated to being the CPU for "other" OSes but AMD is the best choice for Windows.
One can only surmise that Intel is seeing the alternative OSes reaching critical mass and preparing to break out of their niche markets, and Intel wants to be the favorite when that happens. And there are smart people at Intel that wouldn't make that forecast lightly...
2nd + 2nd = 1st? (Score:1)
Again? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, Intel indirectly employs Linus.... (Score:5, Informative)
Intel has been helping to make Linux better for years and doesn't get the credit for the millions of dollars and other resources it has put into Open Source.
Re:Actually, Intel indirectly employs Linus.... (Score:1)
The original Becker eepro/eepro100 driver stomped all over Intel's own driver. Vendors can't write drivers worth a crap. They make hardwar
Re:Actually, Intel indirectly employs Linus.... (Score:2)
Re:Redhat kills the Fedora Foundation. (Score:2)
Re:Redhat kills the Fedora Foundation. (Score:1)
Re:Redhat kills the Fedora Foundation. (Score:2)
Re:Redhat kills the Fedora Foundation. (Score:2)
"Did you save a joint"...
hehehe
In other news (Score:2, Funny)
Re:In other news (Score:1)
Something Wicked this way Comes (Score:2, Funny)
isn't microsoft like one of Intel's bigger if not the biggest partner? If this is the case, considering that a majority of the Intel Bauxes run Windows in some way/shape/oor form? With that being said, doesn't seem weird that Intel would be flirting with a MAJOR Competitor like RH?? Or just Linux in general be it Red hat, V/A, Gentoo, Etc.... This kinda smells like an SCO Sna
Re:Something Wicked this way Comes (Score:2)
Microsoft is about the size of Intel. IBM, Dell, and others are quite a bit bigger.
Again, I am very confident that this deal will be to the good of the community. How could it not?
Re:Something Wicked this way Comes (Score:4, Interesting)
So... being a good bedfellow of Intel, Microsoft kindly delayed the release of a 64-bit OS for quite some time, until Intel had a 64-bit chip ready as well. The thinking was that without a OS that used the 64-bitness, extra registers, and had a scheduler that understood the complexities of obtaining maximum performance out of a NUMA architecture, the Opteron would surely turn out to be a flop. Right?
Wrong. They forgot about Linux. Linux could already support 64 bits, and IBM had poured some VERY significant NUMA experience and technology into Linux. Linux completely carried the Opteron sales for at least the first year. It might have been two, but I don't recall off of the top of my head.
So... here's Intel right now, trying desperately to find a way to at least stop the bleeding on the high-end server market. It's not far-fetched to think that they said "Hey... Linux carried the Opteron, and has worked against us. It's helped AMD and IBM, maybe we should jump on that train, too."
Of course, that attributes much more intelligence to Intel's decision-makers than they have hitherto demonstrated, but it's possible.