Management
Technology
- Applications
- Business Intelligence
- Development
- Hardware
- Mobile & Wireless
- Networking
- Internet
- Operating Systems
- Security Products
- Servers & Datacentre
- Storage
Toolbox
Training
Books
White Papers
Webcast
Resource Centre
The Super Windows That...Couldn't
November 17, 2008
Posted by: Glyn Moody
One of the more bizarre accusations flung by Microsoft at GNU/Linux over the years is that it doesn't scale. This is part of a larger campaign to portray it as a kind of “toy” operating system – fine for low-end stuff, but nothing you'd want to run your enterprise on.
Sadly, that narrative has been rather undermined by the independent Top500 supercomputing sites ranking. Five years ago, the GNU/Linux family ran 36.80% of the top 500 supercomputers; worse, Windows ran on precisely one supercomputer.
Obviously, this was somewhat embarrassing for the company, which has poured huge sums into beefing up its Windows HPC operating system for use on supercomputers.
And all that money has produced some stunning results. Compared to five years ago, Windows has increased its share of the top 500 supercomputing site by a staggering 400% - that's right, it's gone from one machine, to five - 1%. Meanwhile, GNU/Linux has grown less impressively: it's only increased its share of the market by 51% in absolute terms, growing from 36.8% to 87.8%.
So, time for GNU/Linux to watch out for this super Seattle hotshot? Well, maybe not. It's true that Microsoft notched up five machines in the latest rankings – but it achieved that in the previous table.
And a year ago, it had no less than seven machines in the top 500: in other words the situation has worsened recently. For comparison, in the last five months GNU/Linux managed an increase of 2.4% in absolute terms. Now, what was that about it not scaling...?
Follow highlights from ComputerworldUK on Twitter
Sign up for our Daily Newsletter
The UK IT News widget Get it for your site!
<<newer entry | back to blogs index | older entry>>
Advert
Email this article to a friend or colleague:
PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story, and in case of transmission error. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.
- This article is now being printed.
What are your views on this subject? Use the form below to post a comment on this article up to 1000 characters.
Click below to add 'The Super Windows That...Couldn't' to your blog.
If you do not have a ComputerworldUK Account and would like to use this feature, please Register.
If you are a registered, logged-in user, this will post the title and first paragraph of this story to your blog to share with your readers.
Advert
Newsletters
Our Daily & Weekly Newsletters highlight breaking news, vital issues, expert analysis and solutions to help you stay ahead of developments in the industry.
WHITE PAPERS
-
Legal risks: Employee use of the internet and email
Exploring the challenges facing IT Mangers today and vital steps to ensure safe internet an email use by employees. -
Phishing for victims
This White Paper examines the phenomenon of phishing. It explains the potentially catastrophic threat it presents to all kinds of organisation. Exploding some widespread myths, it lights up the murky waters where phishing first emerged and where it continues to evolve. But it also highlights what your business can do to blunt the threat.
About the author
Glyn Moody Glyn Moody's look at all levels of the enterprise open source stack. The blog will look at the organisations that are embracing open source, old and new alike (start-ups welcome), and the communities of users and developers that have formed around them (or not, as the case may be).
Comments received
Arthur Dent said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
"nothing you'd want to run your enterprise on" and supercomputing are two different things. I am no MS fan, I just want things to be said correctly. The point is, Linux is not reliable enough for mission critical applications. I wish it were!
Zaphod Beeblebroz said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Hmmm, the NYSE runs on Linux, Google runs on Linux, Yahoo runs on Linux, the Bank of America runs on Linux. Sounds like mission-critical to me!
Dennis Murczak said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Oh, I must have forgotten that reliability is totally uncalled for in Linux dominated segments, like data centers, big iron, render farms and industrial control systems.
Felis silvestris said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
One of the world's largest sovereign wealth funds - Norway's - runs their processing on Linux clusters. A crash or a bug there may cost billions. Mission critical enough?
Glyn Moody said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
@Zaphod, Dennis, Felis: you took the words right out of my mouth.... Thanks.
David said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Don't drink the koolaid buddy. Even MS tells their customers not to use windows in mission critical situations, such as life support machines in hospitals. If you want to play a video game, windows is your platform. If you need to keep someone alive, or trade billions of dollars, use something else. When MS tells you this about their own software, believe them.
txtechdog said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Arthur Dent: You don't know what you are talking about. I work at a data center in Austin which has over 8000 Linux machines running mission-critical applications for hundreds of hosted customers as well as internal customers. And I'm not talking about web hosting either, but database and financial applications, ERP, CRM, etc. for Fortune 1000 customers and the federal government. Linux not capable or stable enough? I call bull**** on that claim.
Why use old data? said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
The latest data (11/2008) shows there are:
5 Windows (1%) and
431 Linux (86,2%)
supercomputers. http://www.top500.org/stats/list/32/os
Me said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
@Why us old data?
Well, it takes a few days to research an article, write it, run it through editing and fact-checking, get any needed revisions made, and then publish it.
Odds are the 'old' data *was* the most recent when the article was written.
MJ said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
"Even MS tells their customers not to use windows in mission critical situations, such as life support machines in hospitals."
Do you have proof of that, a link to a press release or something? I would love to see it. That would surely shut the MS fan crew up.
Zukuzu said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Yes, Linux successfully runs in places where people can improve it and fix its bugs by themselves. Everybody else runs Windows.
Glyn Moody said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
@Why use old data: actually, I linked to the latest figures for 11/08 (http://www.top500.org/stats/list/32/osfam), which gives the consolidated figures for GNU/Linux. The one you cite is broken down by distro.
Arthur Dent said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
Zukuzu:
I completely agree with what you said: "Linux successfully runs in places where people can improve it and fix its bugs by themselves. Everybody else runs Windows"
Linux needs a lot of expertise and can give you a lot of surprises between the releases. I do not mean the kernel, I mean everything around it (KDE, Gnome etc.).
I am an application developer and I want to spend zero time on operating system maintenance and I want to have up to date versions of tools easily installed without problems. No more, no less. Today, Windows XP is the best solution.
This spring I tried about a dozen Linux distributions. Starting a live CD and performing relevant setup, installation of software development tools, web browsers, office software etc. These are my "mission critical" requirements.
All distributions failed, except one: Mepis 7. But it is still worse than Windows XP because of occasional crashes of KDE. Windows scores better, because I can isolate the crashes better.
JonP said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
@MJ, it is written in their EULA.
donnybay said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
"I am an application developer..."
Just as I wouldn't presume to tell a graphical desktop application developer where his little icons and toolbars should go, I don't see why a server admin should pay much attention to an application developer when he or she comments on server reliability, scalability and "enterprise readiness".
Arthur Dent said on Tuesday, 18 November 2008
donnybay:
I agree: Linux is certainly superior on servers.
It is just a matter of clarifying what we are talking about.
huminahumina said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
Arther Dent says "I agree: Linux is certainly superior on servers.
It is just a matter of clarifying what we are talking about."
That's a direct contradiction to Arther Dent's first posting, where he decried Linux as not reliable enough for mission critical applications.
Where you want stability, reliability, scalability is in the server room first. That is where mission-critical applications run.
The desktop (and that's coming, mind you, and has surpassed Windows in some regards already) is not where mission-critical appliactions are run, unless you're in a Windows-only environment - because all Windows-based computers are desktop systems, whether they have a "server" label or not. In such cases, running "mission critial" applications is catch-as-catch-can.
pcolon said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
Point of the article was "Linux scalability" not window managers. Glyn articulated his point successfully, with statistics which can be proven.
CraigB said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
I have 2 computers been running 24/7/365 for 8 years no reboots (few unhappy power offs with power failures). WinNT4... Windows can do it if confiigured properly.
Jani Saksa said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
I am an application developer too... Today at work I *have to* use Windows XP - and I hate it. Unstable, unefficient and overally a poor toy OS. I also do development at home (as well as server administration as hobby & several other things) - both computers I have use Linux, the other one is a server and the second is a debian system that I use for all work (also remote administration of the server), fun and all kinds of multimedia from audio to digital television (/w DVB-card).
I moved to linux in 2002 with zero experience and have not wished to go back ever since - today a lot has changed from that and it's a lovely system even for regular desktop user.
MPS said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
Got my computer phobic 75 year old dad an Asus EeePC with Linux OS. He had all sorts of problems with a Windows XP desktop I got him earlier, including virus, malware and stability problems, and ended up not using it much. So I took it back and gave him the EeePC. He took to it like a duck to water - its Linux OS just works and works - no viruses, no malware, instability, no virus/spyware updates required, no maintenance (just tap F9 while booting to restore factory settings) etc. etc. He won't touch a Windows computer now.
James Tate said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
"Linux is not reliable enough for mission critical applications"
Then why did they put it on Fastest Computer in The world at Los Almos .
Boy you Windows Fanboys are losing creditbilty !!
Arthur Dent said on Wednesday, 19 November 2008
Well, it's quite simple. Mission critical can be anything, if it is very important to your business. It just depends on what you do and how you do it.
Quote from Wikipedia:
"The term mission critical (or mission-critical) refers to ANY factor (equipment, process, procedure, software, etc.) which is crucial to the successful completion of an entire project. It may also refer to a project the success of which is vital to the mission of the organization which attempts it."
Besides that, I was trying to convey that while Linux on servers is very good, Linux on desktops is a matter of luck. I hope it will improve when manufacturers preinstall it and fix the problems.
I am not a Windows fanboy as some people suggest. I am just trying to see things clearly.
Tux said on Thursday, 20 November 2008
Arthur Dent:
You might want to check to see if your local high school or community college offers any basic courses on computers.
My nephew who is only 13 installed Kubuntu from a DVD that I sent him without a hitch. You are obviously doing something wrong Mr. Gates.
Arthur Dent said on Thursday, 20 November 2008
Tux:
As I said, with desktops it is a matter of luck. You nephew has been lucky.
I am not a beginner. Your post is insulting.
Arthur Dent said on Thursday, 20 November 2008
Tux:
You do not even know which tests I have run.
Yes, you are right. It is all very easy to install - unless it fails or crashes, of course. But then you find out that some things do not work.
Tux said on Friday, 21 November 2008
Arthur Dent:
I'm very sorry to hear that you have been having trouble with your Linux installations. Might I suggest that you simply ask for help on one of the many Usenet or other online groups? Don't be bashful because no question is too simple.
Give it a try - I think you will find that Linux users are a very helpful bunch. They will be more than happy to help even you Mr. Gates.
I must admit, I thought someone like yourself that is independently wealthy would have better things to do with their time. But I guess I shouldn't really be so surprised. Like the article says; Microsoft is going absolutely nowhere awful fast these days.
Warm Regards, Tux
Arthur Dent said on Sunday, 23 November 2008
Tux:
Thank you for the encouraging words.
Meanwhile, I am still looking for something which works without me spending days in forums or fiddling around with the system.
Windows XP is only a temporary solution. I would never touch Vista or Windows 7 or anything that follows. The trend is clear here.