19 ms·

More than Fedora + CentOS + RHEL? Are web-hosting or shared-hosting providers using Ubuntu? What do you thing Amazon or RackSpace are using?

by c00p3r 16y ago

moe 16y ago
http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=%20Centos%2C%20RedHat%2C%20Fedora%2C%20RHEL%2C%20Ubuntu&cmpt=q http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=%20Centos%2C%20RedH... RPM based distros generally have a tough standing since Ubuntu began to eclipse everything else in terms of popularity.
- c00p3r 16y ago
  OK. I'll try to explain. This search results showing that there are a lot of Linux home users who're using Ubuntu because it is most popular Desktop distro. Its popularity in a large extend due to money Canonical spent on promotion. (Remember free shipping of CD's and other actions) But if you're considering a server segment, there are traditionally CentOS, RHEL or Fedora. Or even that stupid Unbreakable Linux. Why it is so? (Because it got that way!) First, because most of really important key developers, like mr. Ulrich Drepper, works for RedHat or with Redhat. Redhat also actively supported by IBM, that's why RHEL is a such huge success. Second, since RHEL4, when they made that stupid decision to maintain all the patches by themselves (RHEL4's kernel source rpm had up to 300 patches in it, but I'm not quite sure you know what it is all about.) Now, they work with a mainstream kernel developers, so all their code got a most extensive testing possible. This is what Google's Linux engineers still cannot understand - the best testing and bug hunting is in primary linux source tree. So, what about Ubuntu? Compared to Fedora it is outdated, very conservative, desktop-oriented distro for an average mediocre user. I don't want to go deeper and try to compare source packages of key components, such as kernel, glibc and related, but I'm pretty sure there are different set of patches. One can compare common packages like perl, python, erlang, gcc, php by themselves. Conclusion? OK, 3-5 years ago using Ubuntu or Debian as a server instead of Fedora-derived distros was a sign of non-professionalism, if not a fanboyism or even ignorance. What changed today? Almost nothing. Ubuntu is following the same conservative policies. There are some so-called server editions of Ubuntu, but it is rather a marketing movement. And, you might be surprised, but key kernel developers are using Fedora. =)
  - moe 16y ago
    using Ubuntu or Debian as a server instead of Fedora-derived distros was a sign of non-professionalism Funny. In my circles it's considered a sign of masochism to run a RPM based distro in this day & age. To each their own, let's keep the evangelism off HN.
    - c00p3r 16y ago
      Please re-read the part about RHEL4 and kernel patches. Take into account that some people were using Oracle and Informix before any Unbreakable things.
      - moe 16y ago
        How does your response relate to what I just said?

More than Fedora + CentOS + RHEL? Are web-hosting or shared-hosting providers using Ubuntu? What do you thing Amazon or RackSpace are using?

by c00p3r 16y ago

More than Fedora + CentOS + RHEL? Are web-hosting or shared-hosting providers using Ubuntu? What do you thing Amazon or RackSpace are using?

moe 16y ago

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=%20Centos%2C%20RedHat%2C%20Fedora%2C%20RHEL%2C%20Ubuntu&cmpt=q http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=%20Centos%2C%20RedH... RPM based distros generally have a tough standing since Ubuntu began to eclipse everything else in terms of popularity.

c00p3r 16y ago
OK. I'll try to explain. This search results showing that there are a lot of Linux home users who're using Ubuntu because it is most popular Desktop distro. Its popularity in a large extend due to money Canonical spent on promotion. (Remember free shipping of CD's and other actions) But if you're considering a server segment, there are traditionally CentOS, RHEL or Fedora. Or even that stupid Unbreakable Linux. Why it is so? (Because it got that way!) First, because most of really important key developers, like mr. Ulrich Drepper, works for RedHat or with Redhat. Redhat also actively supported by IBM, that's why RHEL is a such huge success. Second, since RHEL4, when they made that stupid decision to maintain all the patches by themselves (RHEL4's kernel source rpm had up to 300 patches in it, but I'm not quite sure you know what it is all about.) Now, they work with a mainstream kernel developers, so all their code got a most extensive testing possible. This is what Google's Linux engineers still cannot understand - the best testing and bug hunting is in primary linux source tree. So, what about Ubuntu? Compared to Fedora it is outdated, very conservative, desktop-oriented distro for an average mediocre user. I don't want to go deeper and try to compare source packages of key components, such as kernel, glibc and related, but I'm pretty sure there are different set of patches. One can compare common packages like perl, python, erlang, gcc, php by themselves. Conclusion? OK, 3-5 years ago using Ubuntu or Debian as a server instead of Fedora-derived distros was a sign of non-professionalism, if not a fanboyism or even ignorance. What changed today? Almost nothing. Ubuntu is following the same conservative policies. There are some so-called server editions of Ubuntu, but it is rather a marketing movement. And, you might be surprised, but key kernel developers are using Fedora. =)
- moe 16y ago
  using Ubuntu or Debian as a server instead of Fedora-derived distros was a sign of non-professionalism Funny. In my circles it's considered a sign of masochism to run a RPM based distro in this day & age. To each their own, let's keep the evangelism off HN.
  - c00p3r 16y ago
    Please re-read the part about RHEL4 and kernel patches. Take into account that some people were using Oracle and Informix before any Unbreakable things.
    - moe 16y ago
      How does your response relate to what I just said?