[rescue] OT: Linux and USB on Intel

Linc Fessenden linc at thelinuxlink.net
Sun Apr 20 15:32:02 CDT 2003

On Sun, 20 Apr 2003, David Passmore wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 03:29:23PM -0400, Linc Fessenden wrote:
> > Hmm..  Seems to me that Sun and Ibm is pushing Linux as a solution on
> > their hardware which is decidedly not commodity x86 junk.
> I challenge you to point me to a SPARC system at a reasonably large company
> that came with Linux installed from the factory. As for IBM's push for Linux
> on the zSeries, I'd like to see an example of this as well running at a
> large company, and I'd like to know what applications it is running.

> > What??  This is that same hardware that windows runs on right?  And it's
> > Linux that thought them that?  Take a look around man - There are Linux
> > servers that are running on cheap commodity 486 hardware and early
> > pentiums that have been running reliably without so much as a reboot for
> > years...  How does that show people that hardware failures are normal and
> > it's ok to replace machines constantly.   Hell, I use Linux on older
> > machines to make them *keep* working and be useful.
> Are you claiming that x86 hardware in general, has an equal or greater
> mean-time-to-failure than dedicated UNIX hardware from manufacturers like
> Sun, HP, IBM, and hell, even Apple? I think several people on this list
> would disagree with you.

I don't recall ever saying that?  What I did say was that Linux has
nothing to do with teaching people that cheap hardware that blows up is
the way to go.  That distinction, my friend, belongs properly with
> > Got news for you there too - Your opinions are getting in the way of
> > established facts.  The software you are referring to is not Linux at all
> > but GNU software, which was a hot item *way* before the first Linux kernel
> > came out.  Linux, while it uses some GNU software, also uses and supports
> > some non-free software as well, in fact, quite a bit of it.
> Linux could not exist without GNU software, period. In fact, I challenge you
> to build a Linux system without any GNU software. Good luck.

I never said that either - sheesh!  What I said was that the GNU software
you are referring to is *NOT* Linux.  It pre-exists Linux by quite some
time, in fact, I recall it being the *hottest* thing to install a bunch of
GNU software on your early Sparcstations.
> As for my comment about intellectual property, there is significant
> intersection between the Linux 'community' and others... and I'll leave it
> at that, since it's a subjective observation that can't be 'proven', but is
> patently obvious.

And I suppose you lump in the NetBSD, OpenBSD and FreeBSD community there
as well?  It's the same stuff after all since we use all that GNU software

> > And as for the OS concepts from 20 years ago being OK today, Linux isn't the
> > perveyor of that, but look instead at Sun, and IBM, and HP/DecpaQ..
> I'm genuinely curious here. What do you mean? How is Linux more modern and
> mature than any of these operating system offerings? Can you name some
> examples?

Linux code base and userland software matures exponentially faster due to
it's huge developer base.  Linux/Gnu developers are not hampered by suits
dictating development lines and generally create and update software that
enhances and attaches to the current technology and problems they are
using/tackling at the time.

> > I am not picking a fight here, but dang man...
> Look at your domain name. You're a zealot, and I'm okay with that. I also
> realize that that means that this will be more of an argument than a debate,
> and that you see me as attacking Linux (and I am). In fact, if I weren't so
> bored, I likely wouldn't have replied. :)

Sorry again, that is not my domain name - that's my friend who hosts this
particular mail account for me.  My domain name is
linc.homeunix.org..  Furthermore I use and run SunOS, HPUX, Irix, NetBSD,
OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and MACOS, on every kind of hardware you cvan imagine
from junk x86 to old uVax - so a zealot I am not.  I am a fan though.  I
see a lot of advantages to running Linux and where is falls short, I am
willing to help out and or wait for the inevitable and quick improvement.
> The fact remains that several companies are migrating from big iron to x86
> boxes running Linux, and there are documented cases I could give you URLs
> for, if you like. I could also relate my personal experiences with this
> phenomenon. Though I have no figures to prove it at the moment, it is my
> conjecture and experience that Linux is eroding other UNIXes, *not* Windows,
> and that it is in fact killing the only real hope we have of ridding the
> world of Windows and x86, making Dave McGuire's worst nightmare come true
> (even though he doesn't seem to see it the same way that I do).

That is a fact that I will argue with you.  While you may see Linux taking
the place of Unix boxen, I see the other side..  In my company I have used
Linux to replace *countless* Windows NT, and 2000 servers - making the
hardware and services run infinately more stable than it's microsoft
equivilent (and I use that term very loosely).

I have seen several instance where businesses change from Unix to Linux
but mostly that was because of a necessaary hardware upgrade.  $1000 of
Linux machines can outperform $1000000 worth of old Vax equipt - for short
term use anyway, and byt the time the PC parts start to break down, they
have already been depreciated to nothing.

As far as I am concerned and I bet many will agree, the only way to get
rid of the windows and x86 problem is to convince Apple to lower their
darn prices.

-Linc Fessenden

In the Beginning there was nothing, which exploded - Yeah right...

More information about the rescue mailing list