Guenther Alka wrote:
If I would have the choice, I would always prefer a server distribution where such a management GUI is simply a service that I can enable or not. The separate "desktop distribution" is obsolete.
If someone wrote such a thing, I wouldn't object as long as it defaulted to "don't install" to keep attack surfaces and resource usage minimal. I wouldn't use it, nor would I contribute to its development or debugging. I don't sit at a console to a server. I manage them remotely, as do most people. IPKVM is a bastardization required to deal with legacy BIOS still used by most servers.
The one exception is where there is a GUI application with no CLI version. In those instances, we simply run X with xfce over SSH tunneled VNC to keep things tidy. In my perfect world, that GUI application would have a CLI version or at least a remote GUI client that didn't require the graphical stack on the server, a la XenServer/XenCenter.
Everything that one can manage in a GUI, I can do in a CLI more precisely and almost infinitely faster and more efficiently to multiple systems at once.
People are expensive. That used to be true only for skilled professions, but now even the burger flippers are getting in on it and pricing themselves out of a job. The trend is (and has been for a long time) to hire fewer people to do more. System administrators must manage systems en masse because there simply is not time or money to do otherwise. Now, this is true in capitalist societies such as the US. I have no experience with the realities of other types of economic systems.
Andrew ------------------------------------------- illumos-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182180/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182180/21175430-2e6923be Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21175430&id_secret=21175430-6a77cda4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
