> Should a company be willing to spend a comparable amount annually with
> their Linux provider and their hardware provider that they would give to
> (for instance) Sun Support, I believe they could easily achieve
> comparable levels of hardware and software reliability than any other
> commercial unix.
Perhaps an extreme example, but the NIH/CDC's recently signed
the papers on a supercomputer for the Seattle lab. The box
has 1000+ Intel It. procssors, 1.8Tb of core (no typo: Tera)
and runs linux. For $23M you can have one too :-)
The fact that people are using linux for something this heavy
duty is interesting. The main reasons for choosing the O/S
were scaleability, reliability, and support.
Similar results came up from the DoD's recent software audit:
they got better results for many app's from open source code
than proprietary -- Billy wan't pleased in the least.
Regardless of *NIX debates, linux is proving out as a nice,
stable platform for cheap, reliable federated systems.
--
Steven Lembark 2930 W. Palmer
Workhorse Computing Chicago, IL 60647
+1 800 762 1582
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Steven Lembark
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
