Published at LXer:

The Linux Foundation says Linux is poised for significant growth in the enterprise, some of it at the expense of Windows servers. 76.4% of companies surveyed are planning to add more Linux servers in the next twelve months. 41.2% are increasing their Windows servers, while 43.6% will decrease or stay the same. Over the next five years 79.4% of businesses surveyed plan to add more Linux servers compared to other operating systems, while only 21.3% plan to add more Windows servers.

Read More...

Yeah... So what we will see is companies (like Novell and Red Hat) becoming the new M$.

Then, we will see either Novell or Red Hat using artificial inflation to push up the $$ of their enterprise Linux. Despite opening up all their source code, they will still be subtle versions of M$, Apple, and Oracle: evil monopolies out there to be greedy and make billions of selfish $$.

OK, how the hell will RedHat become the next Microsoft? MS uses vendor lock-in as a major pathway to keeping their pets in line. How is RH gonna do that? Furthermore, RH is one of the more significant contributors to Linux. We need more companies like RH, not fewer. Just because a company makes money doesn't make them automatically evil.

Okay, sorry about RH but Novell and Oracle? Seriously.

Actually, I'd hate to sound repetitive but Novell is in the same boat. They contribute tons of code to the open source world.

I just don't like Oracle. They can go out of business for all I care after that Google fiasco and attacking open source.

You do realize that open source developers need to earn a living, don't you? In fact, I would go so far as to say that open source is really only viable as long as developers do get paid. Sure, you may have your small projects that can exist off the charity of developers, but for anything even remotely like Linux to flourish, there has to be sources of money flowing into it. And by and large, contributions from individuals don't do the trick. Want to see an open source failure? Look at something called caBIG. They have managed to produce a ton of code through research grants, but as soon as NCI gets tired of it and stops funding it, it will pretty much fold up and die. Why? Because the caBIG brain trust has done a craptastic job of pulling in commercial support. The current crop of "commercial" support is from companies like Booz-Allen and SAIC, which are contractors and will walk away as soon as the funding dries up.

So while Novell has pulled some bone-headed stunts (like the whole licensing mess with Microsoft), they have put their money where their mouth is as far as open source is concerned. And even Oracle has made contributions. Bottom line is that without commercial companies supporting open source, it is going nowhere fast.

Yeah... As far as SLES goes: Trying to dual boot it with any other distro won't work (it will also overwrite the MBR like WinDoze). This proves my point: Enterprise Linux, unlike Linux on the desktop, netbook, or smartphone, is Darwinian just like M$.

Did you mean draconian, and if so how?

If I ever want a company that supports FOSS to become the next M$, it's Canonical and Canonical only. Why? Because Canonical, unlike RH, Novell, and Oracle, sells commercial support separately from the FOSS and does not lock the support to the FOSS like M$ locks the support to Windoze. With Canonical, you can opt whether you want commercial support or not. With RH and Novell, you're stuck with the commercial support whether you want it or not.

Not a fan of Cononical at all. They don't play nice with other FOSS projects. I like Novell better for that reason as a developer and not only an end user. The Linux kernel and Automatix come to mind when I say that. They make a good OS for new users to Linux though.

I think Kenny's trying to draw an analogy between the "survival of the fittest" principle of evolution and the fact that MS uses vendor lock-in to get people to use its products. So MS products "survive" the most because they're the "fittest" (i.e. most prevalent).

This, and they shouldn't. Neither should anything that has greed in mind.

WHAT? Pretty much ANY Linux distro will write over the MBR. And think for just one second about the intended customer for SLES. They are running servers and couldn't care less about dual booting. Nobody in their right mind dual boots a production server.

That is because Canonical is aiming for end users and RH and Novell are aiming for business users. Different markets with different needs. Businesses are buying RHEL and SLES because the WANT the support. It isn't being forced on them. Have you ever actually worked in a company? When something goes wrong, or they have a problem, they want to be able to pick up a phone and get help. THAT is why they buy RHEL and SLES. If they just wanted FOSS, they could use Debian or Slackware, but those don't come with support.


Welcome to the real world. The ability to make a buck makes it go round.

It's a false analogy because if the software world were "Darwinian" then products better suited to do a certain job would become the most prevalent. This is not the case because as we know companies use "artificial" means to keep stranglehold on the market.

IMHO, seeing that Kenny also likes tossing bible verses around every now and then, he's probably been indoctrinated into the "Darwin == Evil" bullshit that seems to be so common in the USA. Just my .02€ though.