openMosix Is Shutting Down 252
jd writes "Despite having one of the largest user-bases of any clustering system for Linux, openMosix is to be shut down. Top developers have left and they lack the means or motivation to continue. Their official claim of multicore CPUs making clustering redundant is somewhere between highly improbable and totally absurd, as has been pointed out elsewhere. Why is this shutdown so important? Well, from a technical standpoint, the open-source bproc (the Beowulf process migration module) is ancient, MOSIX is very hard to obtain unless you're a student, and kerrighd is (as yet) immature. From a user standpoint, openMosix is the mainstay of the Open Source clustering world and has by far the best management tools of any. The ability of this project to continue will likely have a major impact on the future of Open Source in the high-end markets — if the best of the best couldn't survive, people will be more careful about anything less."
If it's really necessary... (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't that kind of the point of open source?
Re:If it's really necessary... (Score:5, Insightful)
As with any project requiring something a lot more than a hobbyist the level of expertise required to work on the codebase is rare, and not cheap.
The only real hope is that a company or university using it is happy to pick up the tab and pay someone.
Unfortunately the "everyone can see the source code" line doesnt give any comfort when you are talking specialised things like clustering. I probably know a total of one person with the skill to work on such a system, and last I spoke to him he was contracting at 130 an hour - for comparitively easy (and less stressful)
well you aren't in that line of work (Score:3, Insightful)
I would in fact maintain it if I cared. I don't care.
BTW, I have doubts about the
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, I'm sure they'd look down on a very well paying job that was far far less stressful.
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides, the person I initially replied to was of the opinion that nobody who could do the sort of work that openMosix requires would deign to "dumb himself down" (figuratively speaking) to writing c#/.net code even if it was netting the guy $130/hr. Personally, I call BS. After a while, you learn that you work to live instead of living to work.
Re: (Score:2)
Writing VB code is not stressful. Maintaining VB code is generally far more stressful than writing and maintaining C++ code put together.
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:5, Insightful)
a. don't want their minds and skills to rot
b. get bored by the easy stuff
c. are not stressed by difficult hacking (stress comes from office politics)
d. like to be admired for their ability to do the difficult stuff
e. like to be in the company of peers who can do the difficult stuff
You might get a great hacker doing lame stuff, but you'd have to pay him much MORE than you'd have to pay him to do the difficult stuff. The extra pay would compensate for the extra boredom. Since you can get a warm body for much less money, you're unlikly to hire the great hacker.
Since C#/.net is very lame compared to the challenges of something like OpenMosix, we can pretty reliably conclude that the supposed hacker is not really qualified to hack on OpenMosix. (alternate theory: his dad is the CEO and so the pay is quite absurd for the job being done)
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:5, Insightful)
For a lot of people, that happens about the time they have their first kid. For others, it happens sooner. Yet others experience it later, to the detriment of their families if they have them.
I also have to tell you that it's not uncommon for a good independant contractor to be paid more than $130/hour because most consulting companies bill out their contractors at that much or more. Honestly speaking, my top hourly rate thus far has been more than $130/hr.
You may learn that your ideal of the "great hacker" is rather off the mark some day. The truth is that the really good people often don't care about how great others think they are. They get things done, and move on with what they have to do.
Re: (Score:2)
And here I am posting on slashdot about it, I must be a great hacker, then...
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:4, Insightful)
Excuse me? So you're saying that the language dictates how "complex" the language is dictates how fun a project in the given language can be?
I certainly think it is likely that OpenMosix presents a lot of interesting technical challenges that any good developer would love to get his hands on, but a complex business system in c#(or java for that matter) present a DIFFERENT kind of interesting technical challenges!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
a. don't want their minds and skills to rot
b. get bored by the easy stuff
c. are not stressed by difficult hacking (stress comes from office politics)
d. like to be admired for their ability to do the difficult stuff
e. like to be in the company of peers who can do the difficult stuff
You're not describing hackers, you're describing anti-social assholes. Specifically the last two points, which sum basically to:
d. you want the idiot masses to bow before yo
Re:well you aren't in that line of work (Score:4, Insightful)
openMosix was doomed to fail like this at some point. Countless academic projects attempt to improve Linux for their specific needs in the wrong way. They release their work as patches never intended to merge with the kernel, or fork the kernel and never merge again. Over time you can guess what happens -- it becomes impossible to cope with the rate of change that others force on you, and the grant budget never considered ongoing maintenance costs, so the the patches become worthless, or the kernel fork unmaintained. So now Moshe is in deep, and nobody else wants to touch it.
Re: (Score:2)
sure, it would be very yucky (Score:3, Insightful)
That all comes under desire though, not ability. ("desire" as in "I'd like to do this", not "I'd like somebody else to do this")
I've known quite a few people with the ability. I expect that any of them, including myself, would actually maintain Mosix if either:
a. we had strong p
Re:If it's really necessary... (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't that kind of the point of open source?
It's a nice theory, but it doesn't really work out that way. If the lead devs leave a large project, the task of other people getting up to speed can be huge to impossible. It takes a long time to learn a system, especially if you're just doing it as a hobby.
Brain drain is a problem in any project, open or closed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, if no one picks it up, than clearly, it's not as popular as we are led to believe. Honestly, it it's that impotent, development will continue, otherwise, maybe it's not that important.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Skill retention is not easy (Score:3, Interesting)
There are many very valuable projects that get very little funding - insufficient to pay the programmers who give that value. If the contributors cannot live by their work then they have to go find payment elsewhere.
As open source matures, people will come to understand that taking without giving back is not a sustainable model.
Re:If it's really necessary... (Score:4, Informative)
The project will be shut down in March 2008, not before.
actually, it's Moshe only who will stop "leading" the project (as a reminder, he didn't really 'lead' many thing in the 2.6 version)
After march, we will see who will get the 'leader' position, but I don't think that is really an important change (call that politics if you want). The fact is for now, oM 2.6 has 3 core devs (me, risc, and g4saa) and we are quite all busy elsewhere. Anyway, if I can make interesting progress this year on the oM2.6 code, I'll take over the project.
Don't fear, oM project is not yet buried
Anyhow, if any of you guys feel like kernel/user cluster dev, please feel free to contact me (or the list directly, I'll answer it)
WE NEED MORE DEVS !! (as always anyway).
Re: (Score:2)
Open mouth, insert foot is the solution you did employ.
OpenSSI (Score:5, Informative)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ssic-linux [sourceforge.net]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
OpenSSI, however, works transparently to the userland, at least. Got a program that spawns bunches of processes? OpenSSI.
But don't get too excited. This is NOT exactly like SMP. Unlike multiple physical processors that can actually have threads of x application running on different procs, O
Re:OpenSSI (Score:4, Interesting)
OpenSSI was part of one-stop solutions, if I remember correctly, the doomed Compaq foray into clustering before HP took them over. Doomed? Well, HP has not exactly been Linux-friendly. Their efforts to be more so by hiring Bruce Perens never panned out and you certainly don't see them porting any of their HPUX security to Linux.
Re:OpenSSI (Score:5, Funny)
'fork-and-forget' in this context means our forking users forget which node they started the job on...
Re: (Score:2)
No ulterior motive or competing interest then... (Score:4, Interesting)
Wikipedia: Moshe is founder of the company behind the Xen software, XenSource, Inc. Moshe is also founder of the company Qumranet which is behind the development of the KVM virtualization technology in the Linux kernel.
Looks like Moshe is to busy for that old fashioned mosix stuff...
Huh? (Score:3, Funny)
Apparently the code doesn't count, only spurious logic about changing hardware factors. Oh, and apparently the sun does, in fact, set.
But how cool a name is Moshe Bar?
Uh, I think the summary misses the point of OSS... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that happens. People's lives don't stand still, they change: they take on other commitments at work, have relationships, travel the world, etc.
But that doesn't mean that openMosix is dead.
On the contrary. This is open source software.
The code isn't lost. Others can pick up the slack and join the effort as they see fit. openMosix can still move forward, perhaps not at the same pace as before, but forward nevertheless.
It seems to me that the summary misses the point of OSS. If this was a closed source project and the lead developers had walked away then, yes, openMosix would almost certainly be dead and buried.
But, unless I'm missing something huge this isn't the end of the line for openMosix, precisely because it is open source.
It hardly seems appropriate to look at this as a failing of OSS development. On the contrary, it's arguably an example of one of its strengths.
This a baton change not a retirement. At best, the new holder(s) of the baton will soon hit the same stride as the previous holder(s). At worst, the baton has fallen to the ground and it simply needs to be picked up.
Re:Uh, I think the summary misses the point of OSS (Score:3, Interesting)
In theory, you're right. It'll continue. But will reality live up to theory? Only time will tell.
Re:Uh, I think the summary misses the point of OSS (Score:5, Informative)
Its message and tone is that openMosix = dead, openMosix = OSS, therefore openMosix dying = OSS solutions are bad.
What it completely fails to address is that the situation would be no better, and in fact would be a lot worse, if this was a CSS tool. Indeed, the ray of light for openMosix users comes from the fact that it is OSS.
Bashing OSS solutions because one is dead/dying/in limbo/whichever way you want to look at it is patently ridiculous because it's not the openness of the code that's at fault here, or even the open source development model.
To put it bluntly, CSS projects that lose their core development teams don't exactly fair any better do they?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uh, I think the summary misses the point of OSS (Score:5, Insightful)
Some utility bits of open source of course do not need a lot of maintaining and reach full maturity pretty early and only require the odd tweak for hardware compatibility, for those projects maintaining a team is difficult, logically speaking those projects get pick up and carried by another open source project that can run them as a side line.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary. A CSS product could be rebadged as openMosix 2008 Horizons(R), given some fancy UI tools and sold for more than double to a bunch of mums and dads who believe they need a cluster of 4 new core duo PCs to run a web browsing platform which fully enables their personal web experience for tomorrow today.
It's soooo much easier to make money from closed source software.
Re: (Score:2)
As for money part, we are talking about project abandoned by original developers. With proper legal support though, OSS would be easier to profit from than CSS as other peopl
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
To put it bluntly, CSS projects that lose their core development teams don't exactly fair any better do they?
Probably they do. How much of the original development team do you think is still left for things like Windows NT(/Vista), Office, Solaris, NeXTSTEP(/OSX), etc ?
OSS projects tend to "die" when they aren't popular or "interesting" anymore - and the OSS world can be fickle. CSS projects, tend only to die when they aren't *profitable* any more.
It's a hell of a lot easier to hire more programmers f
"the mainstay of Open Source clustering..."? (Score:2, Insightful)
LOL what?! The poster must be on crack. OpenMosix/Mosix is nothing but an experimental/buggy piece of software used by hobby clusterers, it works with 2.4 kernels but never had good support on 2.6. Real cluster software consists of PBS/Maui or some other queueing/scheduler built in house.
Article summary is an overreaction (Score:4, Insightful)
Best of the best? I may get flamed for this, but I'd barely heard of OpenMosix.
When Apache, the Linux kernel, Eclipse and (name a popular GNU project) look like "shutting down", then maybe we can bleat about the failure of open source.
And as some have said, there's not real reason the baton can't be passed on to interested new parties.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
GCC? Without which, the first two projects you mentioned wouldn't exist (and which makes the third far more useful?).
Why this IS important (Score:3, Informative)
Our networks however have not kept up to this pace. Right now our very best effort for network speed is infiniband which tops out at 96Gbps theoretical limit. The AMD Opteron page lists a limit of 24GBps, that's 192Gbps, bandwidth using three coherent hypertranport processors. See the problem?
I see one of two things happening, either we'll find a magic bullet technology to significantly increase our network speeds; or some limit will finally end Moore's law. Otherwise there's simply no reason to tie together multiple processors. Despite Windows best efforts, our CPU's still spend most of their time waiting for something to do.
Dennis Dumont
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You might not have a need for a cluster, but that doesn't mean that nobody else needs them. We have quite a few of clusters where I work, ranging in size from about 4,000 processors to over 100,000 processors, and these machines aren't sitting idle. Multicore desktops
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The moderators are woefully uninformed.
We are not at the end of network technology. You're talking about essentially consumer-level stuff. There's a vast amount of network technology out there that goes beyond what Infiniband provides.
Software that needs very high bandwidth won't work on a cluster and probably won't work very well on a single-socket desktop either. Right tool for the right job and all that. There are plenty of codes out there that want tens or hundreds of thousands of cores. Some can
It is telling Moshe Bar is now doing Xen and KVM (Score:4, Insightful)
Using various ISA interfaces (MPI in the low end, or Hypervisor abstractions like Xen, etc. etc.) you can run many guest OSs in the space as needs require, and localize the shared-memory-ness as required to get maximum threading benefit with the lowest total latency you can tolerate. All this with minimally modified guest OSs in which to run the code. This is a much better situation then heavily modified kernels pretending to be a single system image (and then having to worry about forking/threading/VFS issues and propogation of that stuff).
On the flip side, grid technology and speciality message-passing libraries fill out the feature set for more embarassingly parallel problems that need lots of CPU and RAM... you have the luxury of spending time and money coding your applications for that environment if you are CPU limited.
Mosix doesn't have much use anymore as a general purpose product. Either it's too heavy-weight (and drowning in syncro overhead) and we should be relying on firmware/hypervisors that are customized for the hardware, or it's not necessary because we can handle the load balancing at a higher level.
Re: (Score:2)
if you are dealing with an (embarrassingly) parralelisable problem, clusters are the way to go. take for an example all those pictures in the late 90s of the mandelbrot set. the maths for each location does not rely on any other location, so you can divide the problem up on any number of processors/computers. if you have 1000 processors working on it, you will get the result a thousand times as fast as if you have one processor working on it (plus a fixed cost for initialisation and saving of t
Read between the lines people! (Score:3, Insightful)
The direction of computing is clear and key developers are moving into newer virtualization approaches and other projects.
"""
Translation: The developers have found new shiny objects to play with and are going to drop this to play with something new.
Remember that OSS is mostly about developers scratching an itch. Once that itch is scratched, if a new shiny object is put in-front of a developer, chances are they'll drop what they're doing to pursue the new thing. As seems to be the case here.
i.e. New is fun, maintenance is boring, boring sucks, do something new.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind that clustering in general isn't dead, just that much of it has moved to the language level. Parallelizing individual loops isn't something openMosix or anything else like it can do out of the box.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but even GCC and Linux started out as developers scratching an itch. With few exceptions, almost all OSS starts out as developers scratching an itch. Sometimes companies step in
Well, Richard had to hawk his turtles too (Score:2, Informative)
The premise for shutting down the project is correct. Multiple cores all but eliminate the need for the most extreme clusters. Throw PCI-X graphics cards into the mix, and you have even that much more computing power. That's not to say that there aren'
Probably the biggest thing that it needed (Score:3, Informative)
I see now that they have an alpha version out for 2.6.
Note that 2.6.0 was released in 2003.
a little inflammatory (Score:5, Informative)
At the time I used it it couldn't migrate web server processes or db server processes, so it was useless for what I do most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
HA and load balancing is a different type of clustering.
Re:a little inflammatory (Score:5, Interesting)
And it's no fun to develop something you know isn't going to be used, as the supercomputing 'industry' isn't moving in the same direction that Mosix was heading.
Wrong and wrong. (Score:3, Insightful)
Weather prediction almost certainly uses special-purpose math libraries (ScaLAPACK, etc.) in a MIMD environment.
Re:a little inflammatory (Score:5, Interesting)
The point of mosix is to avoid using a library (such as an MPI implementation) to handle parallel apps, and to make managing a cluster 'easier'.
The problem is that the performance just isn't there, and that the 'industry' as a whole has overall chosen to use MPI to handle parallelism, and use various other methods to manage the cluster.
Bottom line: The industry they targeted didn't move in the direction mosix was headed (which is exactly why the developers are shutting it down).
Important info (dammit, I have modpoints) (Score:4, Insightful)
See http://mulix.livejournal.com/199931.html [livejournal.com]
"Now the real project can get the credit it deserves. I hate it when people steal credit. It was so annoying to read interviews where it was claimed that behind openMosix are years of research, when all this research was actually behind MOSIX."
Imagine a (Score:5, Funny)
See what happens when you *stop* imagining a Beowulf Cluster?
the danger of OSS (Score:2)
1. a painful migration, and i mean painful in terms of giving birth or passing a kidney stone
2. maintain the code yourself, which could be even MORE painful and costly.
yes i know everyone will jump up and down about how this could happen to any project, but folks lets face facts here - In OSS projects where no one is getting paid to write code, you could possibly be hinging a key part o
Re: (Score:2)
Right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
my point is still valid though. MS has a much much better EOL policy then any OSS project.
Re: (Score:2)
It's clustering - something that's too small a market for Microsoft to put in much effort and requires too many Microsoft licences for anybody else to bother. Micosoft is the new kid on the block in this feild and has not yet produced anything that can be taken seriously - not that there is anything wrong with that since they cannot do everything.
Re: (Score:2)
solution = prepackaged software. a little intellgence on your part would be appreciated. .
use xcpu (Score:2, Informative)
It's about the architecture (Score:2)
My guess is that the advent of commodity NUMA hardware (Opteron) motivated more development of MPI applications and libraries, since HPC workloads often perform better on NUMA hardware using MPI between the NUMA nodes. If all your applications are MPI-awar
Use, Buy, D.I.Y, or Get Over It (Score:3, Informative)
OpenMOSIX is neat, but it ain't the end all be all, and it's been my experience that any shop that's serious about running a cluster manages to find/attract someone with the chops to get it up and running. Can just any elementary school pull one together for "free"? Maybe not. For them, there's Pooch [daugerresearch.com] or AppleSeed [ucla.edu].
Process migration? (Score:2)
Starting with the information in the summary, I spent a few minutes web searching. "bproc" appears not to be capa
Re: (Score:2)
It's coming to standard mainline unmodified Linux too, judging by comments made by people supplying the container patches that keep getting accepted.
Re: (Score:2)
I thi
openMosix != Beowulf (Score:2, Informative)
Most Beowulf clusters run parallel codes written to use the Message_Passing_Interface (MPI) [wikipedia.org]. MPI programs really don't want to be migrated to different nodes while they're running, so load management is achived through schedulers such as Grid Engine [sunsource.net], TORQUE [clusterresources.com], and others. These schedulers avoid the need for process migration by preallocating the resources (compute nodes) in advance, and prevent the load imbalance from happening in the first place. openMosix
In summary... (Score:5, Insightful)
*MOSIX was supposed to provide an EASY way of doing clustered worth. Low over head in terms of coding and administration. It was aimed at MODERATE clusters not massive beasts as it lacked performance/efficiency. While two extra machines may be worth the lower overhead two hundred probably are not so the immense clusters used other methods.
Advanced in computing, multiple cores and so on, have killed this low-to-medium cluster market NOT clustering as a whole.
Yes there are tons of things that still need clustering, think web data for example for a new one, but they are large and even larger. They need performance and so *MOSIX is not what they are looking for.
In other words the market for *MOSIX is effectively dead thus the project is joining it.
Moved on to virtualization? (Score:2)
I've looked into attempting an OpenMosix cluster before in my free time but the lack of a 2.6 version made it hard for me to justify the time - as all the work I do from day to day is on a 2.6 sy
Re: (Score:2)
It is true that this development rings badly for Xen, even taking out the involvement of Mosche Bar. Both were derived from university projects, involve the need of skilled developers, etc. Luckily, however, Xen is more general purpose and has a lower barrier of entry - although it is not quite suitable for home users - it can be found useful by businesses of all sizes. That was not true of OpenMosix, which was really only useful to
Thats one of the benefits of open source (Score:4, Insightful)
Others may have different solutions to the same problem, and you are all free to attack it in your own way. In a totally free environment, you can determine the best solution to the problem using proof-by-mindshare.
As time moves on, the landscape changes, and some/none/all of your assumptions about the problem domain that drive your solution get challenged.
If it appears that your solution is no longer relevant, and that other methods work better in the real world, then your project can successfully conclude, and you can move on to the next big thing. In this case, OpenMosix can see that it's solution to the problem is not the ideal way to go, as evidenced by the fact that MPI, load balancers, (insert other solutions), tend to be more applicable to most real world problems
In a way, an open source software development is a test of a hypothesis. You dont measure success just by proving the hypothesis - you can also disprove it (or spawn a new one), and still claim success.
If this had been a commercial / proprietry project, then everything would be different - there would be egos and money on the line, so the motivations for doing the project in the first place are very very different. If OpenMosix was commercial, higher ups in the company would be moving the goalposts to suit themselves, spending money on advertising and kickbacks, and putting effort into forcing it into sitations where it wasnt the ideal answer. The resultant mindshare and marketshare in a commercially driven enviroment yields sub-optimal solutions - its based on which solution has the best political backing and advertising budget, not the one that best fits the problem.
See, its like this - to an opensource mindset, the hottest person in da club is the one that gets _given_ the most phone numbers. To a non-opensource mindset, the hottest person in da club is the one who can _buy_ the most phone numbers. Someone thought that the flouro lime green shirt might be a good idea
The sort of people who read the headline of the story and see it as a bad thing, a negative thing, an anti-FLOSS thing
Thank goodness open source allows a project to go from conception to conclusion for all the right reasons.
I may have my cynical hat on (Score:2)
Someone has to do this... (Score:2)
"openMosix is dying and Netcraft confirms it!"
Forgive me.. just trying to keep the memes alive m'am!
hmmm.. (Score:3, Insightful)
To proclaim this is an object of example for the failure of OSS projects - my god, what a leap of stupidity that is. In reality, i'd be claiming the exact opposite in that it was one of the few SSI's to get into real world situations and be used quite heavily - which means it was actually very successful. It's a project that made it through a complete life cycle, birth, success and death. I would say its probably dying slightly before its time, but the authors reasons are quite sound in reality.
This is something you just don't often see in the CSS world - companies make something and want/need to make money off it (indefinitely if possible), so not only do they bring a new version with more bells and whistles every year (even when the prior version only had 10% of its bells and whistles used) they're continuously pushing to continue making money off the product, and that often means "never expire the product, morph it if we must, but every coder hour is less profit - sales are dropping, NEW VERSION TIME!". Wow, that was even less cynical than I normally am!
Two Problems with OpenMosix (Score:3, Interesting)
By that time, though, I'd already come to be uncomfortable with OpenMosix for two reasons:
- The develpers seemed to be completely uninterested in security issues. This is something that was less of a concern in The Good Old Days, but really should be on the frontest of burners now.
- The OpenMosix kernel code was so large and stuck its tentacles into so many places, there was no way it was ever going to make it into the mainstream kernel. This meant that, if any changes were necessary, we were either at the mercy of the OpenMosix developers or we were going to have to maintain them ourselves.
All of that being said, I loved OpenMosix when it worked. It's a great idea. I came out of a VAX/VMS cluster background, and OpenMosix was a serious step in the direction of resurrecting that functionality in open source. I'd like to see someone take over OpenMosix, make security a priority, and work to break it into small, digestible lumps that could slowly be merged into the mainline kernel.Ever heard of ROCKS? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, companies like IBM and HP love to push their own proprietary setups.
As well, there are some good commercial products that add lots of well supported tools.
For example MOAB
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I have never worked on an openMosix cluster, but did use several condor-based ones. Also, the NSF-backed grid project is targeted at large and relatively slow networks of computers rather than an emulation of a NUMA-like architecture.
So, while Mosix ideas are certainly cool, etc, it is not a mainstay of anything.
Also, what is it with "MOSIX is very hard to obtain unless you're a student" - is this the
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'm saddened by this development too. I've got a small network I've built over years of tinkering with Linux and I would have liked to explore what MOSIX and OpenMOSIX promised. I was hopeful that OpenMOSIX would release a stable branch for Linux 2.6, as that's what I prefer running on my machines. I may have even been able to contribute some a
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh, this clears it up - thank you ! (and sorry to the OpenMosix folks).
If they're shutting down... (Score:2)
Awesome 2.4 RPMs (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:YA, RLY. (Score:5, Insightful)
any enterprises relying on openMosix to run their operations are in a pretty bad spot right now, i agree. their enterprise quality support has evaporated.
of course, this would be a completely different story if it were a close-source program they were relying on... because... ?
companies go out of business, too. and when their close-source programs are no longer supported, *no one* has the ability to pick up where they left off.
Re: (Score:2)
Had?????
OpenVMS is an ongoing concern that was ported to Itanium and is still being upgraded on Alpha and Itanium.
clustering for ~15 years
Make that ~25 years.
Re:Open Source Conundrum (Score:4, Insightful)
MS regularly end of lifes things. Just recently the EOL'd foxpro. Sure its a crap language and a crap environment, but I know 5 people personally who are frantically trying to teach themselves
You can still get the openMosix code, if you had openMosix experts you could still fix things and move forward. If you have an existing system on openMosix you can look for a different solution and move to it or keep your system on the existing code. I really don't see how this is any different than MS calling for an EOL of Windows NT. When they do that you are forced to invest tons of hours and money buying new systems, developing a migration plan, deploying the new system, training users on it... It is no different in Open source or closed source, when vendors decide they aren't supporting you anymore, it costs you money.
Vendors regularly leave users out in the cold, both closed source and open. Only difference is, if a company wanted to pick up openMosix they certainly could. They could provide support, ongoing development, whatever. When MS EOLs something, your only choice is to take whatever MS gives you.
Re: (Score:2)
yep, like how they EOL'd win98 last year after 9 years of support, and foxpro after 10+ years.
yeah their real bastards MS, only giving a product a 9 year life span. Those linux projects they just never EOL... oh wait no they don't they kill versions off after 2 years or less!
Face it. people have known the writing was on the wall for foxpro for atleast 3 years. they've had shitloads of time to learn .net. it's thier problem, not MS's
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So here's a personal anecdote: Microsoft, Inc. held a free training session/love-in for devs and wannabee devs at a vacated movie theater in Bellevue, WA. It was ~2003 and I w
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But, i also will look forward to seeing what the dev's might move onto in the future!