In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Thu, 17 Aug 2006 06:00:14 +0100
<7060199.DCdZ2LFoy3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Wednesday 16 August 2006 22:00 \__
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Hadron Quark
>> <hadronquark@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote
>> on Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:25:03 +0200
>> <87hd0csfls.fsf@xxxxxxxx>:
>>> 7 <website_has_email@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Google talks up smart software for reliability
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>> | However, Pike did say that nowadays Google's servers are
>>>>> | custom-designed and run Red Hat Linux with a modified kernel.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | [...]
>>>>> |
>>>>> | Pike said he doesn't believe Google could have achieved this level of
>>>>> | reliability with Windows.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | "It was a good decision [to choose Linux] because it made it so
>>>>> | flexible in the way you can do it," he said.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | [...]
>>>>> |
>>>>> | Pike then jokingly said if Microsoft's claims about the number of
>>>>> | Windows administrators required per server were true compared to
>>>>> | Linux, "Google would be a much bigger company".
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1225434946;fp;2;fpid;1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If Google invalidated micoshaft sys admin studies, then there
>>>> is no reason for ANY small, medium or large sized businesses,
>>>> educational establishments, charities and governments to
>>>> believe micoshaft funded studies ever again.
>>>
>>> Who or what is "micoshaft"? Some kind of census company?
>
>
> To elaborate, the number of machines that one sysadmin at Google is
> responsible for, is vast. Imagine yourself rebooting and patching some
> under-performing Windows servers. Imagine the cost and the poor
> infrastructure one can devise to combine the power of the Windows machines
> (HPC). In an interview I was told that one skill Google seeks is the ability
> to connect large networks. Windows XP Professional Edition cannot even VNC
> to more than one machine at a time, unless I am misinformed.
>
>
>> 7's imaginary friend, apparently. The real McCoy (Elijah, even!)
>> is of course at
>>
>> Microsoft Corporation
>> One Microsoft Way
>> Redmond, WA 98052-6399
>>
>> as listed in
>>
>> http://support.microsoft.com/contactus/?WS=mscorp
>>
>> Google can invalidate what it likes, but it and IDC are going to
>> have an interesting time of it. Microsoft may want to purchase
>> Google then reimplement its database servers using Microsoft
>> SQL Server, for a 41% savings, according to IDC.
>>
>> (Color me skeptical, but that's the figure.)
>
>
> It's a good thing that Google was a Linux company since day one. Otherwise,
> at point time along the way, Microsoft could present some big bucks and
> eliminate an enemy. Google have since become a foster home to Open Source
> and Linux. And Microsoft cannot be happy about this. Google shows Linux in
> its full glory and serves as a role model/poster child.
Indeed. Although part of Google's success is its
salesmanship (it's primarily financed by advertising),
it does deliver the goods as well.
>
>
>>>> If you develop something new, switch to Linux technology and
>>>> save tons of money in the process.
>>>> Where better to start than a personal tour of some of the
>>>> hundreds of livecds http://www.livecdlist.com
>>>>
>>>
>>> Live CDs are great.
>>
>> But Microsoft is better, according to IDC. Whom to believe?
>> An interesting question.
>
>
> Ghost, you're crazy! *smile* $Employer has had you brainshed.
It's a fine line between genius and madness. :-) And I'm never
sure which side I'm on...
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Roy
>
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
|
|
