Deciding Between SCO and Linux? 105
wolfbane01 asks: "I spend some time giving tech suggestions to a medium sized business firm (~100 employees) with a large amount of demand placed on their file server. Their current server is a dual Pentium 500 with RAID array and they are looking to upgrade it. The dilemma is the current server OS is running SCO OpenServer 5.0.5, and their new raid array requires 5.0.7. Their programmers have demonstrated that a Linux box can process records much faster, but are still worried about the investment and potential problems that switching OSes would entail. I have already mentioned the cheaper price and the community availability when problems come up, but what other reasons have Slashdot readers come up with for a switch? What arguments am I forgetting that make Linux more attractive then SCO? Should I advise against switching to Linux and advocate them sticking to SCO? Is SCO going to even be in business long enough to make the upgrades product cycle?"
OK..... (Score:3, Insightful)
There are a lot more software packages that will run under linux, there are many packages that will compile with less effort under linux, there are more people with experiance administering linux than there are on SCO.
If the software they are currently running can demonstratably run under linux then its hard to imagine reasons to continue running SCO. There are commercial vendors who will support linux (RedHat,SuSe,Mandrake) and there is only one company that will support SCO's products.
Re:OK..... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would presume from the post that they likely don't NEED any more software packages. They likely don't NEED more people with experience administering Linux.
What they need is to maintain the existence that their business has, but get their shiny new RAID to work.
What we know:
(1) They currently run SCO, and everything they have runs in SCO
(2) They need support for this shiny new RAID
What we don't know:
- How much the upgrade is going to cost them from SCO
- If there are any gotchas that they will run into trying to run their applications within Linux
- If the staff is capable of administrating Linux reasonably
So, is it worth the money to investigate Linux? I certainly wouldn't change something that Works for a new Unknown, even if it is demonstrably cheaper, without putting in some serious Time and Effort to test the new Unknown, and that's going to eat up a lot of that Demonstrably Cheaper difference.
As the article says, the programmers have demonstrated that Linux can process their information much faster, but do they need much faster? I mean really.. do I need a 2.5GHz P4 to word process, or can I continue using my P5/100 laptop? I highly doubt I would notice any difference except that the load time for OO.ORG would decrease from about Forever to about Half of Forever.
I would say to start testing Linux. Make sure that Linux can do what needs to be done. But if you need it up and running --now-- with the new hardware, you're gonna have to go with SCO for now.. but I would definitely say get into the Linux testing right now, because as everyone else here points out, SCO may not be around when the lawsuits involving Linux are done!
Trust me, I have no love for SCO, but look at things realistically with your mind, and not with just your heart.
Re:OK..... (Score:1)
1. Linux is low cost which means you can have alot of test systems. Each developer can have a Linux box in his cubicle. Having the ability to play with and test things on your own with out screwing everyone else up is a big benefit.
2. Linux is more wide spread so much of the common software you use probably works better there anyway.
3. Linux isn't going anywhere. Despight SCO's be
Re:OK..... (Score:2)
A dual P500 with a raid is no problem for Linux I use a dual P3 450 and my raid smokes.
Re:OK..... (Score:1, Insightful)
True, but it's not the software that caused you to buy a SCO box in the first place.
Linux: More MP3 players, desktop doodads, dev tools
SCO: More vertical market apps and sales terminal stuff, etc. (still!)
Re:couple of reasons (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:couple of reasons (Score:3, Insightful)
SMP... (Score:2, Informative)
SMP support in Linux is gettting better and better.
SCO dont have one yet, they got one in their *Ware, but they will probably remove it as it uses an IBM patent
Re:SMP... (Score:1)
Re:SMP... (Score:1)
Bartender, I'll have what he's having.
Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Long Answer: With the uncertain status of $CO , you really have to ask yourself: What happens if IBM wins? Or drags the case out for 10 years? IBM is the Master Litigator(tm). Throughout their existence they have used the courts to smash other companies into bits, or drag things out long enough to bankrupt the other guy. The only company that was worse than IBM for this was NCR (circa late 1800's to early 1900's --- several of their board got convicted for crap like that.)...
But I digress... IBM will keep the fires going for a really long time, and SCO can't last forever. By going the SCO route, you are essentially betting the farm that SCO wins, which seems a bit strange. If you go with Linux, you can be fairly confident that linux will be around for a hell of a lot longer, as SCO *may* have a case against contract breach by IBM, but they have't a leg to stand on against anyone else.
Given, that after the lawsuit is over, the entire community will shun them, they will have nowhere left to turn for customers, and let's face it: SCO never had many anyway. Aside from making a shitty product (And I've been exposed to SCO for over a decade now) they won't be spending any of their new found wealth on development, that money would be earmarked for the investors.
Linux is here to stay. No force in the planet will change that. Even if all the top Linux Kernel hackers died, Linux is going to persevere forever.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Funny)
and then went on to form IBM
Re:Well... (Score:1)
Simple (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Simple (Score:2)
--
Evan
I suggest you go for SCO! (Score:4, Funny)
well, the new Linux kernel 2.6 has support for:
[fill in 95% of all hardware on the market]
BUT, the SCO OpenServer is much better:
1. it is based on the UNIX v7 source. hell, it _is_ the UNIX v7 code.
2. comes with a nice 1000 page EULA (that premits SCO to take your wife and kill your dog at time of their choice).
I say, go with a winner, go SCO!
Re:I suggest you go for SCO! (Score:1)
Re:I suggest you go for SCO! (Score:3, Funny)
But, wait! Given your comment marked #2 above, we can't just "go for SCO"! We have to implement the following branching structure:
if(wife.IsHot()){
goWithSco.Decision = "Fuck, no!";
}else if(wife.likesOral()){
if(wife.doesntBite()||wife.swallows()){
goWithSco.Decision = "Aw, HELLZ no!!!";
}else{
goWithSco.Decision = "Maybe";
}
}else if(wife.isADog){
if(wife
Don't switch yet (Score:4, Informative)
(Unless that little update breaks your system. In that case you've got nothing to lose with switching :)
so now we know! (Score:3, Funny)
shame on you for supporting the terrorists!
Oh Yah! Are You READY TO RUMBLE...? (Score:2)
Here are some good reasons... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
Why not say that at the top of your comment text, rather than drag us through a 25 point rant first?
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:5, Funny)
A cadre of menacing lawyers?
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:3, Funny)
SB
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
Not sure on the exact limits, but the largest I used it in was a 1.6tb array, first raid then LVM. (raid b0rked, not linux's fault.) iirc it was 8x200gig, and it ran great.
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:3, Funny)
SCO has that cute Mickey Mouse ear logo... Hey, wait, does Disney know about that? Maybe someone ought to tell them.
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:2)
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
Linux is NOT free! It costs money to develop, and people *are* getting paid for it. How could it be otherwise?
You'll kill Linux by proclaiming it free (as-in-beer).
But who's going to support kernel 2.2 and KDE 2.2 until the end of time? And why not run SCO until the end of time?! This point is rea
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1, Insightful)
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Commercial support for vendor Linux (like Red Hat) will increasingly be fore the "Professional" version of the OS and will cost more and more money. My budget for Red Hat Linux support is higher than my budget per node for Sun Solaris on Sparc systems. Anyone who would suggest a heavily used system for 100 people rely upon newsgrous is insane. That is clearly a situation for vendor support. That means $$. Better
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:2)
You aren't exactly comparing apples to apples. Yes both are operating systems. But with SCO, you have a source to go back to when problems arise that is ultimately liab
Re:Here are some good reasons... (Score:1)
"Linux has Tux, the cute/cool little mascot. What does SCO have? "
They have Darl(ing) McBride of course !
Now he must be far more cute and cuddly than some old moth eaten penguin !
I am sure that Darl can stir the kiddies onto greatness !
What sort of a wanker name is DARL anyway ??!
Rob.
"For Every Pleasure There's a Tax."
is this a joke? Some kind of test? (Score:1, Flamebait)
Okay, forget about the fact that they are trying to destroy the entire computer industry outside of Microsoft (i.e., Linux).
How about the fact that actually paying money for a x86 Unix license (rather than just support) these days is an incredible waste of money??
Find a Linux vendor like Red Hat that will give these guys support, and hook these guys up.
Cripes, I was recommending Linux over SCO more than *5 years* ago, I thought by now SCO would f
Re:trick question (Score:3, Interesting)
You are do have a point (sorta), if linux or freebsd support it perfectly, then why wouldnt you change and save money.
If the support for the raid system is still in beta, the drivers are untested, go with SCO. *GASP* But I suspect the RAID hardware whould have good BSD/Linux support, seems most people support Linux now a days.
Leaving sco behind will let you focus. (Score:5, Informative)
I was involved in a business that migrated from SGI and SCO boxes to Linux, we saw a dramatic drop in IT costs and at the same time increased flexability. Not to mention we didn't have to pay $150 for a tcpip stack (this was back in '97-99 might have changed).
Not to mention, that you have a lot more commercial
applications available on Linux. Really, sco is a mess technically
they're behind the times, expensive and just plain crufty. Your programmers will learn to love linux in short order. Further, the C*O's will love linux too. With SCO they're probably used to hearing "Can't be done" or "we'll have to buy a license", it's a nice change to hear "sure, i'll do that this afternoon" or "we can already do that".
Ok, here's my exp (Score:2, Informative)
Oracle 9iAS RAC(clustering)
Dell RAID array for share storage of the cluster nodes
RedHat 9.1 Advance Server(I wish I'd use something else but Oracle only support RH)
The setup is simple atm, two 2-way Xeon to form a RAC(cluster) which share the same RAID array, running on RH AS. The entire deal is around US$40000 before best offer.
The hardware is r
Re:Ok, here's my exp (Score:1)
And BTW Oracle supports SuSE SLES 7+, and basically United Linux [oracle.com].
Re:Ok, here's my exp (Score:2)
They also support United Linux. Look in the Oracle Linux FAQ, here [oracle.com] for example.
Umm... (Score:2)
Easy... (Score:4, Funny)
I'd recommend sabotage. With little effort, you can ensure the SCO specific hardware never really works right. Putting the RAID card in the microwave for a few seconds seems to work.
Am I missing the question??
Show me the money! (Score:1)
migrating from SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want a second opinion, here's some more advice [practical-tech.com]; he also confirms that it's easier to move existing SCO stuff over to UnitedLinux than it would be to switch to RedHat Linux, for example.
Re:migrating from SCO (Score:2)
Doesn't say anything about ease of transfer from SCO UnixWare/OpenServer/Xenix/whatever else might be SCO branded to anything else.. though it does recommend getting the hell outta Dodge as far as that goes.
This is Everyday Stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
Summary: you have a working SCO 5.0.5 system, required hardware upgrades are driving a minor software upgrade to 5.0.7 with presumably low associated risks.
Question: is it worth a major software change to Linux with high associated risks? This change is unplanned and the programmers have already said they're worried about potential technical problems.
Answer: no. You shouldn't be using a required hardware upgrade to drive a major software change. That's a bad practise to get into. You should be approving the minor software upgrade to SCO 5.0.7.
However: given the lower TCO of Linux and the proven higher performance with your application, you should also be proposing a long-term project to evaluate a migration to Linux. The evaluation should include a risk assessment, full technical approval from the programmers, consideration of knock-on costs like training and support, etc.
Never use minor changes with low risk to drive major changes with high risk. It makes you look like a cowboy. If the SCO system was failing and there was an impending deadline and the 5.0.7 software upgrade carried a high risk... THEN and ONLY then would a hasty Linux migration have any merit. I doubt that's the case. Don't put your balls on the block when this should be a simple low-risk software upgrade.
Re:This is Everyday Stuff (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly. I'm glad to see a reasoned answer to this here, and rated 5. Upgrading Openserver 5.0.5 to 5.0.7 presented absolutely no technical challenges or incompatibilites with our software when we did it in my company.
Re:This is Everyday Stuff (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever you do, just stay the heck away from unixware. Now that stuff is just plain evil.
unixware=evil (Score:2)
What, and OpenServer is a fluffy bunny? No, I've worked long enough with the f**ing thing to know it's a dog of an OS. Probably not too bad for an ancient UNIX, but still pretty poor given the amount of devel and testing time involved.
scohttp crashes out after a few days/weeks ; printing gets stopped up and the entire print system must be restarted ; changing hardware is a matter of extreme tip-toes, since if drivers are not removed at the ri
Re:This is Everyday Stuff (Score:1)
same thing? (Score:4, Funny)
I read somewhere that they are the same thing. right?
Correct me if I'm wrong.. (Score:3, Interesting)
As in, Linux kernel and GNU userland..
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong.. (Score:2)
I've had the "privilege" of installing OpenServer. It is, IMHO, shite. I'd relate it to compost, but compost is usefull.
I'm very happily consuming a bottle of Crown Royal, celebrating my un-recovery, and don't want to depress myself by thinking aboot the pain that OpenServer 5.0 caused me. 3 years ago.
Suffice it to say that I'd rather use a Pharlap DOS extender than anything SCO has ever written themselves. Bleah.
*pours another arf-and-arf in order to forget*
Soko
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong.. (Score:1)
It's obvious, really... (Score:5, Funny)
SCO is a professional secure, and most importantly real unix, based on the original unix source code. Sometimes hobbyist projects such as fetchmail and linux can be used as cheaper alternatives to professional software, if you are a student or someone else with lots of time and no money. But for a succesfull american corporation, you will quickly find out that you need the real stuff if you are to succesfully compete in todays difficult marketplace.
Throughout the computer industry, SCO is commonly recognized as the best unix out there, and as the forthcoming lawsuit will show, probably the only legal. There are companies, such as IBM, Sun, SGI, and others, that have their own version of unix, but their unixes are nothing but cheap off-shoots from the original SCO source code, and their legality is certainly questionable. Some of these companies are even founded by famous hackers, such as Bill Joy [sun.com].
Switching to linux may be the worst of all possible alternatives. While it is possible that other companies, such as IBM or Sun will be able to license the original unix source code, there seems to be no hope for the linux community to come up with the money needed for that. Among those with knowledge and an interest in the forthcoming SCO trial, there is no doubt that linux will probably become not just unavailable, but it will most likely be a federal offense. Betting on linux in these times, is as stupid as not accepting jesus and the lord as your savior.
I think that by betting on SCO, you are putting your money on a real winner! There is no doubt that SCO will continue to dominate the marketplace for as long as we can predict the future. Nevertheless, SCO is still pretty old technology. If you some day bring your kids to work, they will be frustrated by the lack of modern games on your server system. If this is a thought that bothers you, I would recommend upgrading to the industry-standard Windows 2000 system, surely a system for a new millenium!
Re:It's obvious, really... (Score:2)
Kris
Re:It's obvious, really... (Score:1)
Re:It's obvious, really... (Score:1)
True. To make your decision easier, you can think of Linux as the software equivalent of a bicycle, while SCO is the software equi
Just Do It. (Score:2, Interesting)
Take them a Linux box with things set up, ready to roll, go over on a Sunday afternoon with a case of beer, if you have to not interrupt workflow, and do a demo switch with a Linux box inline with their old SCO machine.
For bonus points, I'd convince them to let me take their SCO disks offline, and do an install of Linux on a fresh disk on their *same old hardware*. If you can't get them to let you do that for some reason, then this is all the more reason to keep trying.
Put the old SCO disks aside, bring
Wrong place to ask (Score:5, Funny)
- I'm thinking about donating some money to charity. Should I give it to the FSF or Al Queda?
- I currently work for Satan but I'm thinking of quitting and working for God. What does Slashdot think?
Half Solved Already (Score:4, Insightful)
Their programmers have demonstrated that a Linux box can process records much faster
If this is true, then it seems to me like a small step to just create a Linux shadow system operating in tandem with the existing SCO system.
If the shadow system demonstrates the needed performance, reliability and maintainability that your organization requires after some weeks or even months, then it will be a simple matter to switch the roles of the two systems and ultimately unplug the SCO box and redeploy it if the cost of that "security blanket" is too high.
Re:Half Solved Already (Score:3, Insightful)
It may not be this simple. If they only have one raid device, they can't run two machines simultaneously.
Also, if it's a file server, keeping data on both machines in sync would be
Re:Half Solved Already (Score:1)
Re:Half Solved Already (Score:1)
The best reason customers might not want to hear (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason is that the decision making processes in most enterprises in incredibly inefficient and cumbersome. The ability and willingness to get things done is distributed along a bell curve. Most organizations have a small corps of change agents, a bulk of people who go along, and a small corps of obstructionists. Formal decision processes and policies are the natural friend of the obstructionist, and while the constructionist can sometimes use these to his advantage, they almost always slow him down. Where policies allow for free software, people who want to get things done don't aren't left cooling their heels while the management hierarchy decides whether (a) it can be paid for and (b) whether the current licenses allow this use and (c) whether it fits with this year's grandiose-plans-that-will-never-see-the-light-of-
The problem with giving individuals the power to get things done is that it is scary for many organizations. Individual initiative is seen as a chaotic (which is somewhat true) and destructive (which may or may not be true) element. In an organization with clearly articulated goals, and a sensible and flexible strategy, and well thought out policies -- in short in a organization with strong leadership-- individual initiative is a powerful advantage. In organizations that have vague or unacheivable goals, badly conceived or articulated strategy, and accreted years of policy that is tied to neither goals nor strategy --- in other words ones with weak leadership -- suffocating individual initiative is the closest semblence to order that can be acheived.
The great power of a piece of free software like Apache or Linux is not in any technical advantage it has over its proprietary competitors. It is that a free software package empowers the individual and the small team that are close to customers to create new solutions for customer needs.
It it ain't broke (Score:1)
Duh.
So they have to upgrade their existing OS to support newer hardware. Big deal. This is common, even with Linux.
They are running a business, and if it's not good for the business, switching is silly. Doesn't matter which OS we are talking about. I would say they same thing if they were thinking of dumping linux in favor of insert_os_here.
Just upgrade the darn SCO and move on to more interesting problems.
WTF? (Score:2, Funny)
BIGGEST
SCO-HATING
SITE
OF
THEM
ALL?
I think SCO is a close 2nd to Microsoft on the "least wanted" list here. Dumbass.
WTF indeed! (Score:2)
(OK ... I don't think this is surprising at all. Perhaps you shouldn't either.)
Go with the best (Score:1)
Since you need to do some sort of upgrad
Other costs of going with closed-source (Score:1, Insightful)
It was a simple change that an in-house developer could have done in a single afternoon, but unfortunately we didn't have that option.
Are ya prepared to break whats not broken? (Score:2)
Are there other processes that run on this machine that are sort of SCO dependant? Or does everything migrate perfectly over to the Linux side of things? If everything migrates over perfectly then it might be worth looking to.
about stickin' on to SCO (Score:1)
It depends on how well tested the Linux version is (Score:1)
There are a couple of big reasons I see for migrations away from SCO, from the perspective of both the admin and the developer. I have a lot of clients on SCO, mostly running apps written in (seriously) Business
Minor Upgrade now and then do Linux Later (Score:1)
You don't want to move to Linux only to want to do another major upgrade in 6/9 months time. So I'd recommend doing the minor upgrade now. Do more testing and wait for 2.6 to come out. If 2.6 comes out in October you should be able to start testing you port. Wait for atleast Redhat and Suse to bring out a 2.6 version and wait a couple of months
Re:You have got to be kidding! (Score:1)
is it weekend already?
hmmm... maybe i should go home now...
Re:Since you're using Intel hardware... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Since you're using Intel hardware... (Score:1)
SCO sux!... (Score:1)