Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business

Linux Support Services Shoot-out and Analysis 121

Posted by michael from the fast-busy dept.
securitas writes: "ZDNet has posted a huge article comparing and analyzing 12 Linux support services. It's 19 pages long plus tables! Happy reading!" Useful stuff, since a lot of companies want to make sure they've got someone to call if things go wrong.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Support Services Shoot-out and Analysis More

Linux Support Services Shoot-out and Analysis

Comments Filter:

  • Our support for Linux (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Spikelalala ( 521517 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:16AM (#2297982) Homepage
    The company I work for does a small amount of work with Linux. As such I am supposed to support it. The training a group of us got was basically - here is Linux, play with it - oh and if a customer has any problems get them to reinstall it. Thye probably know what thye are doing anyway so they won't call you.
    • Not smart. Reinstalling Linux usually causes more problems than solutions, by overwriting .conf files etc. I can count the times I have made some stupid decisions that led to a reinstall (f. ex. trying to "upgrade from RH6.2 to SuSE 7.1) and had to delete all files in the /bin, /sbin, and /conf directories before proceeding in order to prevent conflicts.

      Repeat after me-- "Support != reinstallation: Thou shalt not reinstall!"

      Tinkering is almost always better than reinstalling.
      • Indeedy. Reinstalling Linux usually causes more problems than solutions, by overwriting .conf files etc


        I have taken to backing up /etc and some other config files and keeping a hard copy before tinkering or re-installing.


        Has saved my bacon on more than one occasion.

  • This is perfect! (Score:3)

    by canning ( 228134 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:18AM (#2297994) Homepage
    The faster these support companies make an impact on big business the faster Linux plays a bigger part in large corporations. If they know that they can fix it and have support on it, they'll think more about using it. It's all about covering their asses.

  • Commercial Distributions (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Gothmolly ( 148874 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:22AM (#2298007)
    I think third party support services for Linux will be hampered by the variation of the various distros out there. Even strong distribution providers like RedHat will have trouble supporting non-pure RH installs. For instance, I always recompile a kernel from source at kernel.org, so that way I have a clean source tree to patch against if I want to apply patches. At that point, I no longer have a pure RedHat system, and RH might balk at supporting a system that I didn't use their kernels, their XFree86 RPMS, their package manager for everything, etc.

    Otherwise, it will turn into a mess of finger pointing and unanswerable questions.

    User: So I downloaded the latest ISC DHCP tarball and compiled it, and when I try and start DHCP, it fails with something about Netlink.

    Tech: Netlink is compiled into our install and update kernels, what is the exact error message?

    User: Um, yeah, well, I wanted to try the new USB2.0 stuff, so I downloaded kernel 2.4.17-ac23 and compiled it from source.

    Tech: Ah, please hold.(Goes away, gets a coffee, reads Slashdot)

    10 minutes later
    Tech: Sir, still there? The first thing to do is reinstall our kernel RPM package, rerun LILO, and reboot, and then call us back.

    User: %^$#@#*!!!
    • well....duh.

      there is no buissness that sells support for thier products that would not void the agreement if thier product was changed. this is to keep everything predictable so that the support staff can know everything about the product they need to. Its just good business.
    • You'd do this on a production server?
      I didn't think so.
      These support services aren't for knuckleheads like you,
      they are for businesses with better things to do than beta test third party software.
    • >At that point, I no longer have a pure RedHat
      >system, and RH might balk at supporting a system
      >that I didn't use their kernels, their XFree86
      >RPMS, their package manager for everything, etc

      You actually expect them to support and/or debug problems stemming from software that didn't come from them? Oh come on now. RedHat (or any other support team/system) shouldn't have to troubleshoot or debug problems that YOU may well have introduced or debug software that hasn't gone through any of their usual QA procedures.

      • From this point of view we can realize that Linux will NEVER have a serious tech-support. 99% (80% of the statistics are invented) of Linux users use apps that do not come with the regular distro, mainly RH based (but not compatible) packages. Alpha, beta, tarballs, alienized debian packages (and vice-versa)...

        That's sad. Linux need standads, in order to offer basic support services.

        You cannot fix a system if you don't know it. And open-source systems can be anything between a boot disk and a full critical application server.
    • They won't provide standard support for this sort of thing. However, many companies may be willing to consult with you about it. Hire a consultant at a high fee to help you customize your system.

      This is the only way real support works anyway, and Linux is no different than any other product in this way. Some people just expect way too much.
    • People who buy support services don't compile their own apps and certainly don't compile their own kernels.

  • Support Time is one of the most important aspects (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lostman ( 172654 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:26AM (#2298024)
    Just looking over the the table [zdnet.com] of response times -- for some of these companies, they seem to be missing the big CLUE.

    Yes, if something goes wrong at a company they will need support.. in fact that is the only way they would actually use linux as their workstation/network/etc -- but support should probably be replaced with "immediate support." If a network goes down at a Fortune 500 Company JoeBlowDrinksSoda Inc., they arnt going to take the chance of missing productivity for 2,3, even days (as some of the response times are.

    For the companies that have immediate response to linux issues --> now these are what we need. Maybe they are more expensive, but if the figurative "bomb" hits your network and you have deadlines, missing a deadline is going to cost more in money and in respect for your company than having to shell out a few extra clams...

  • It's a start (Score:5, Informative)

    by why-is-it ( 318134 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:31AM (#2298051) Homepage Journal
    I work for a large multinational tech company, and there has been considerable resistance to Linux because of the support issue. If we install an RS/6000 with AIX, IBM will support the hardware and software issues. Same with Sun hardware and Solaris. But the management is not sure who we would go to if we built some Linux servers and we needed some critical patches. Worse still, if we uncovered a bug in the OS, who would fix it for us, and how long would it take.

    This is a start. There are companies out there who will support Linux for corporate accounts. The fact that a fairly mainstream website is posting this sort of information is an aid in getting the PHBs to believe that Linux is supported and ready for the corporate environment.

    All we need now, is a fork of Linux that is specifically designed to run on enterprise-class servers and scales to be able to handle the amount of memory and resources that these servers have.
    • One of the things that has made Linux so compelling against many other versions of Unix is the fact that it has not been forked. Once the kernel has been forked, it will only take time before the different versions are incompatible.
      • Is is not the forking of the kernel. FreeBSD will run most Linux binaries, for example (well, at least those that don't require a framebuffer). More to the point, I think the bigger issue is the c-libs which have not been forked, These actually handle most fo the actual functionality of the environment and are user-mode.

        I think that Linux is, in many ways as a whole, more supportable than UNIX, but then I have more experience with Linux, so I am not completely sure... (I will say that it is much more supportable than NT4.0 though...)

    • Re:It's a start (Score:2, Informative)

      by the_2nd_coming ( 444906 )
      All we need now, is a fork of Linux that is specifically designed to run on enterprise-class servers and scales to be able to handle the amount of memory and resources that these servers have.

      IBM is actualy porting Linux to its rs6000s and other enterprise servers. hopefully, work will be done in a year or so, and next time you buy a new server, you will get an RS6000 with linux from IBM, and supported from IBM.

      BTW tell your PHBs to contact Red Hat and ask them the questions they are wondering about such as support turn around, and OS bug fixes.
      I bet they will find that RH takes care of its large customers very quickly. and let them know that if they find a bug in the OS, RH will most likely give them a patch in a day or so, though I will let RH tell you, don't take that as gosple

  • Now, I understand feelings and tempers are running pretty high right now, but we must be logical and think about what we are doing here.

    First, this article has nothing to do with the Horrid WTC and the Pentagon acts of war that were commited last tuesday against. I understand we lost many lives, I too had friends in the navy and other military that were endangered in that attack. I haven't heard from them yet. So, you see I feel your pain, but, Let's keep the comments out of here and posted to the patriotic stories where they belong. Please refrain from off-topic posts to make the moderators jobs a little easier.

    Second, It's nice to see support for linux service growing. I was fortunate enough to have a desire to learn and work with *nix when I began working at my company. Many new-hire co-workers were thrust into it. Luckily later, we were given training books to help us teach ourselves as we went along.

  • This is good. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Valar ( 167606 )
    The most common comment I hear when I sugguest a linux solution is that there is no support, therefore once it is broken, it is broken. While this is simply wrong, bug business thinks that tech support people are magicians, who are the only ones that can fix computers (and not only that: THEY FIX IT THROUGH THE PHONE, WHOA). This is a excellent way to show business that they can still get a great operating system real cheap, AND there will be a group that has their backs if something goes wrong.

  • Correction (Score:3, Informative)

    by ReelOddeeo ( 115880 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @09:49AM (#2298118)
    Useful stuff, since a lot of companies want to make sure they've got someone to call if things go wrong.

    Useful stuff, since a lot of companies want to make sure they've got someone to sue if things go wrong.

    • Common misconception. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Jerky McNaughty ( 1391 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @10:30AM (#2298288)
      Go read the license agreements for software you buy. They disclaim any and all responsibility if things go bad. When you buy a piece of commercial software, e.g. MS Office, you get no warranty that it will even work as advertised. It can delete all files on your hard drive, email they out to anyone, cease to function, whatever. You can't sue anybody.

      Tough.

      There is no documented case of anyone ever winning a lawsuit because commercial software sucked.
  • IBM has paid more in advertising dollars than Microsoft did, so we now get the report that is so badly needed...

    Now, where's the same report on Microsoft Support?

  • Support (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sir_Real ( 179104 ) on Friday September 14, 2001 @10:37AM (#2298321)
    I have never run into something that Google, linuxdoc.org, or time on IRC wasn't able to fix. MS may have the "knowledge base." (A horrid tangled nest of pages loosly grouped by, as near as I can tell, md5 hashes), but Linux has a dedicated, knowledgable, sometimes prickly, and definately motley following of people who have it in their best interest to see this operating system thrive. This means that, by and large, they're more willing to help.

    Andrew

    • Odd, I consider Microsoft's docs one of their strengths. I've never ran into a problem that couldn't be solved by:

      Now, for tutorials on learning a new MS technology, I often go to third parties, like Wrox and others.
      • Thanks for the pointer to the howto on searching the knowledge base. It goes a long way towards de-mystifying the dark art of knowledge base traversal.

        Andrew
      • Odd, I consider Microsoft's docs one of their strengths.


        Like their being so creative that on most of the (admittedly few, like 10 or so) occasions that I've had to use them they were wrong. Now I stick to Usenet.



        Most of the MS environment programmers I've talked to admit that the MS docs are by far the worst thing around but that they "got used to it". Linux docs aren't that great compared to what commercial systems offer, but at least they don't tell you the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do (or don't forget half the args to a function).

      • I once spent three days there trying to figure out how to penetrate a proxy server with VB. No luck at all. The fourth and fifth day I spent with deja news and found about six suggestions from various people. I implemented all six of them but none of them worked. It was a wasted week of my life.
    • No, that is NOT the point of the article. This article was about *corporate* support systems for linux and corporate support is a very different beast from user tech support.

      Companies do not want to have their workers fixing their linux servers for most of their time but rather have them do company work. That is why they contract corporate support system.

      Why would company like Nike want be an expert in fixing Linux problems? They would rather just have a very stable OS sitting in a corner and use the technology to market/develope better atheletic products. That is the point of corporate support system.
    • I think people think that support programs are put in place by companies to help fix their products. This is not true. The real value of support is in the fact that it makes CEO's, CTO's and CFO's more comfortable about using a certain piece of software in their companies.

      In general, most problems of most products are resolvable by a little research. However, companies like to know that they are not putting money into a system which will not be supported. This is also how Red Hat makes their money...
    • Linux has a dedicated, knowledgable, sometimes prickly, and definately motley following of people who have it in their best interest to see this operating system thrive. This means that, by and large, they're more willing to help.

      Could you find some of that motley crew to help me find out why sound doesn't work on my IBM 380Z Thinkpad. It has the CS4237 chipset, and I've been trying for weeks to get it to work, even sent it in for warranty repair. 'Course it worked when they installed a Windows drive.

      I'm not disagreeing that the motley band of helpful following isn't there, I'm arguing that they are hard to find when your down. Two different problems entirely.

      And yes, I refuse to use windows on my thinkpad, because if I did the only good sound would do is let me hear how much windows sucks.

      • The web address you want is here [tripod.com]. As far as I remember, you have to rebuild the kernel, which is rather annoying. You may not have to with newere versions of the operating system. Instead, you might be able to build just a module or two and load them instead of redoing everything.

        For laptops, the RedHat Linux on Laptops [redhat.com] page is really useful.

    • I've had the same experience as you. The online Linux community is wonderful. I still think there are niches where support companies can thrive, though. For example, you talk management into using Linux. Then, for whatever reason, you decide you'd like to move on. You don't want to leave your former coworkers in the dust. What do you do? Maybe they'll be able to find a replacement, maybe not. Maybe it will take a while. Being able to contract the work to someone with a good reputation in this arena, if only temporarily, would be a good thing. Management will always be (should be, anyway) concerned about continuity. If you can't quell their fears, Linux might not even get a toehold.
  • I posed the question to my company "What the difference between a 3rd party Linux support contract, and Microsoft support (who contracts out their first 2 lines of support 3rd parties)?!?!

    you have to beg and plead for 2 days if you want to talk to somebody that actually works for microsoft when you call in. and those two days are going through various people that have probably never written a line of code in their lives (Ummm... ok, did you click or double click on File? CAREFUL, Double click CAN BE TRICKY!)

    so what if we have to purchase a support contract for FreeBSD or Linux, with MS, you have to pay for the product AND THEN pay for a support contract. And the frontline support at Redhat has been shown to be a bit more knowledgable about the product than the frontline support at MS for windows..

  • Separating vendors (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Separating vendors like Dell from Linuxcare is a bit misleading, since Linuxcare IS Dell's Linuxcare support arm. Linuxcare answers the phones on behalf of Dell and Sun's Helpdesk for Linux and Solaris calls. You can merge those two together in the table shown on that page.

    • Separating vendors like Dell from Linuxcare is a bit misleading, since Linuxcare IS Dell's Linuxcare support arm.


      Actually, it's Red Hat. At some point you could choose Linuxcare instead, I'm not sure if you can anymore. Linuxcare is certainly not what they once was.

  • SuSE (Score:2)

    by wishus ( 174405 )
    Yesterday I wrote a piece [slashdot.org] in my journal [slashdot.org] about my experiences with SuSE tech support.

    It sucks.

    They are responsive, I'll give them that, but they assume you are an idiot and treat you as such. They would rather tell you how dumb they think you are than help you fix your problem. They are polite about it - meaning they don't call you an idiot to your face - but their condescending tone gives them away.

    They shut up real fast, though, when it turns out they were wrong.

  • The table doesn't show Debian. As a new Linux user who has chosen Debian as his inaugural user experience, I've been very impressed with the speed and quality of support from Debian volunteers.

    Example: When I loaded 2.2r3, the thing wasn't seeing my hard drive. The Debian community (for free and in no time after my request) showed me how to work around the problem.

  • Only 19? (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by update() ( 217397 )
    It's 19 pages long plus tables!

    Should I be impressed? I've seen teenage overclocker sites devote that many pages to a review of a fan. Including a table, with entries like Noise: Yes.

    Obligatory BBSpot link: Video Card Review Sets Page Record [bbspot.com]

  • Our India office works with an Indian company that supports their Linux server. It is so much more reliable than our horrible (yet brand new) w2k one. The company they use (I think it's called starcom or something similar) also has services in the US but they prefer to deal with hosted servers (in farms) and that was too complicated and costly for our small office. I wonder if the experienced and educated people they have in India are enough to overcome such a large geographic divide. I know they also send people to the US but I bet that then it is economically equivalent to a US firm, and then why not hire locally...
  • Last bullet point reads: Linux support offerings purchased via an annual contract with unlimited incidents should permit a minimum of three individuals (named callers) to submit incidents. This would enable the enterprise to cover three eight-hour shifts for a 24x7 shop

    Minimum of 3 huh? For 24x7? So I guess they're assuming 7 day weeks then, because three people can cover 24 hours in 8 hour shifts, but unless you're working them 7 days a week you'll have to hire 3 more for the weekend. Sheesh. Sorry, but I've had this argument 2x over the last 2 jobs.

    Ctimes2

    Sorry I'm late...

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close