Posted on 12/19/2017 10:51:15 AM PST by nickcarraway
Charlie Brown was too stupid.
LOL! FTW.
simple: It’s not Windows.
It’s JUST an operating system, not the all-encompassing bloatware that comes from Microsoft.
Free. No other explanation needed. Colleges and universities dropped all commercial operating systems when Unix came along so they could get the source code and then switched to Linux when they could get everything for free. That created a closed bubble where a lot of new ideas were forced to grow. but the operating system itself is still Paleolithic compared to what we should have by now, if OS companies like DEC, and others could have made money innovating their proprietary systems.
And it is free, unless you pay for support.
Factually wrong. Santa Cruz Operation (SCO) Unix was the defacto Unix for x86 long before anyone even heard the word Linux in Unix circles. But IBM stole their code, by way of a so-called partnership, and then "open sourced" (gave away) that code to Linux because IBM wanted to sell more hardware.
What made HPC take off? NASA, whose job is to explore space, made an amazing Earth-bound advancement. In the mid-1990s a team of programmers came up with a way to cluster x86-based servers for collective processing power for a cheap alternative to expensive, proprietary HPC systems at the time. Dubbed Beowulf, it was not tied to one particular operating system, any free and open source OS would do. But the inventors used Linux, and that started the momentum.
NASA then gave away this supercomputer building code to China, Russia, and others, for free as well. Those countries did not even have a supercompuer at the time. Now China is at the top. Thank IBM and their embargo-busting weapon Linux.
Linux is Unix.
It took off because it was not proprietary, open and free.
I liked it. An not just because there were very few other people that wanted accounts on it...
Cause you can operate approximately twice the number of CPUs for the same amount of money if you don't have to pay Microsoft for their server-grade Windows operating system?
I’ve built and installed servers for home, my firm, and small organizations. I like FreeBSD for file servers. I seem to be able to get them up and working on Macs and PCs faster than Linux. With that said, I’m having problems with Time Machine on my home FBSD server right now.
For a web server, however, Linux’s directory structure seems to be less confusing than FreeBSD’s. Maybe that’s just due to my inexperience as the setup I’ve done for Web has been strictly intranet (remember that term??). I do think Linux would probably be the better choice for the Javascript web technologies from the past decade or so.
beowulf cluster software
I agree with you. FreeBSD and OpenBSD are the way to go.
Would your prefer to rely on the coding prowess and benevolence of one firm (Microsoft) ...
OR
rely on crowd-sourced coding prowess and the attendant frontier justice-like retribution if people put bugs or viruses in open source codes?
I'm still pondering that one.
Intel needed memory beyond the 2G limit plus a real multi-site Enterprise solution.
MS said use Windows Enterprise and pay us big bucks.
Intel said FU and moved to Linux.
Windows at Intel is used for mail, Powerpoint and Excel.
That is about it.
What part of the Linux code base was founded on code "stolen" from SCO? I recall SCO hired a consultant to compare the open code base of linux with the proprietary code base of SCO, and the consultant found no copying. However SCO concealed this material fact. Also SCO sued Novell and discovered the interesting fact that SCO didn't own UNIX; subsequently Novell issued a waiver to IBM declaring there was no UNIX code in LINUX and the remains of SCO were forced to honor this by court order.
AHA! I see that SCO came back in 2016 but failed again and the most recent lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice! Bummer!
Exactly. Linux can have minimal overhead.
Microsoft=security flaws=temporary fixes= richest man in the world.
Most engineering networks I know about run CentOS.
Clean, capable, fast fast fast.
Never give money to Gates. Never.
There were several trials, but the end result was basically 2 conclusions - the contract that SCO had with IBM was “interpreted” to allow this, and the value of the code was listed as zero dollars, even though the entire Linux header system was identical to SCO Unix.
Bottom line, China now legally has the largest supercomputers in the world, based on US technology that was given to them for free. IBM's public defense was they have more employees outside the US than in the US, so no one should have expected them to act in any other manner.
Too late now, but this bunk of an article doesn't mention any of this, because it's sordid history they don't want anyone to know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.