Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Linux Case Studies Collected 46

Posted by CmdrTaco from the stuff-to-read dept.
Black Parrot writes "Linux Today posted a link to this collection of case studies of Linux in the enterprise. It makes interesting reading, and will be a good advocacy reference for when your boss comes around asking whether Linux can really do the job. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Case Studies Collected More

Linux Case Studies Collected

Comments Filter:
  • As good as Unix is, I REALLY wish MS would use NT for hotmail. Only then could their spam service be slowed down enough to be merely annoying than damned annoying. Really, how many of their users are using it for normal email, 5%?
  • Case 1: The ancient Novell 4 server is dying! Our 20-workstation system is in danger! Panic! Panic! Buy $Oz20,000 worth of NT server gear (multiple Xeons, bucketsful of RAM, hot swappable drives, the whole box 'n' dice) to replace it with! Well, almost... Settled for $Oz2400 worth of Linux gear and get brilliant response time now that the IPX protocol's been axed (MARS ain't so efficient). RAID-1 with caddies plus automated CD burning and checking for backup included.

    I work at a fairly large company. They have 12 outlying offices around the US and Canada with 5-20 employees in each. Lord knows why, but they decided to hook each of them up with 56k dedicated lines. To salvage it, and let there be file sharing with the HQ here, I put together a plan to use spare P133s lying in the back, Linux, Samba, Perl, etc to mirror a lan drive every night to each office for a couple hundred dollars. What do they say? "We can't do that, we'll need a 'server' (that is, a machine that IBM has labeled as 'server' in the marketing brochure, at least $15k for each office), and it must be NT Server (several more hundred dollars). We can't use anythign else." And they wonder why the two NT print servers lock up and need rebooting about once a week (I won't start on the file servers). Sheesh.

    Some companies, especially really large ones, latch onto a name and won't let go until the ship is 3/4 sunk. It's unfortunate, but that's the way suits can be sometimes.
  • Posted by d106ene5:

    Yahoo has been using FreeBSD for ages - since very early in the company's history. The use is widespread - from development to serving. They are by far the most "succesful" company to use open source software to date, and their use of it is very extensive.
  • As much as I dislike NT, I must say that it is more appropriate than BeOS for a server. What?!? Yes, that's right; you actually heard me, one of the most anti-Microsoft people on the planet say that. Why? Simple. BeOS is single-user! I think it would be even more insecure than NT as a server platform. At least NT has filesystem security (heck, it even has ACLs, if you're into that sort of thing).

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell, BeOS has zero, zilch, nada filesystem security. It's much like Win 9x or MacOS in that respect (although I understand that MacOS 8.7 will have some sort of filesystem security, and of course Mac OS X has normal UNIX-type security, AFAIK).

    --
    Get your fresh, hot kernels right here [kernel.org]!

  • Well, of course you'd be better off with Linux/UNIX/BSD/Solaris/etc.

    I was just trying to point out that BeOS probably isn't going to cut it as a server, since its single user...

    And, no, I don't even know what MPE/iX is, although it sounds fun... :-)

    --
    Get your fresh, hot kernels right here [kernel.org]!

  • This could be included as some chapters of the Linux Advocacy mini-HOWTO, written by Paul L. Rogers, Paul.L.Rogers@li.org.

    I was looking at the v0.5, 7 May 1998 version: "This document provides suggestions for how the Linux community can effectively advocate the use of Linux." It has many sound ideas and appears to be a starting point for advocacy and could at least have pointers for studies for justifying Linux.

    If someone wanted to write up a lengthy howto as you suggest, that would me most excellent!

  • I suppose.

    But isn't that like saying "I'd rather have my nuts crushed in a vise than scooped out of my scrotum with dull spoons"?

    Why not just load your favorite *ix-based OS and be done with it? ;)

    ps: Anyone know what I can do with an MPE/iX box, besides use it to keep doors shut? SAMBA comes to mind...
  • Most people don't even understand it, but what they can understand is that it gives MS everything short of the right to take your firstborn and VCR, rape your missus on the way out and leave you with a bill for their time. Not so much a case of "who do we sue?" as of "how do we avoid being sued!"
  • Case 1: The ancient Novell 4 server is dying! Our 20-workstation system is in danger! Panic! Panic! Buy $Oz20,000 worth of NT server gear (multiple Xeons, bucketsful of RAM, hot swappable drives, the whole box 'n' dice) to replace it with! Well, almost... Settled for $Oz2400 worth of Linux gear and get brilliant response time now that the IPX protocol's been axed (MARS ain't so efficient). RAID-1 with caddies plus automated CD burning and checking for backup included.

    BTW, all other boxes there are Windows: some 3.11, some 98, one 95, some NT 4.0 -- and not only did each OS have its own unique problem to deal with, but each machine had a separate different problem, except for one 3.11 box! I've spent four times as long tinkering with moronic workstations as I have on anything server-oriented to get the system on-line. Three of the workstations are about to become Linux, so that they don't need maintenance any more.

    Case 2: We want to demo a brilliant new Web Commerce app... do we invest in an NT server and an NT client and $$$ worth of security stuff?

    Naah, we patch Apache for 128-bit SSL, patch Netscape [hawk... spit; roll on Mozilla] for 128-bit SSL, and run the whole thing, SQL database and all, through a TCL/Tk plugin-and-app pair on one 32M Linux box that happened to be handy - or two Linux boxes, it makes no difference to security. Total elapsed development time, 16 working hours; hardware cost, nil; software cost, nil. Windows can't even keep the passwords secure - "How you say, emm dee five?" - and last week NT lost $2000 worth of telephone records here when it silently froze.

    The halloween docs admitted that there were no one-day NT drivers, but forgot to mention the scarcity of NON-TOY one-day applications, even with the much-vaunted "Visual everything-in-sight" tools (ask the FoxPro developer community about that one - and remember to use words like "compatible" and "upgrade path" a lot).
  • Prince said he will replace the dumb terminals with Pentium-based PCs but hasn't yet decided whether to scrap the SPARC machines or install Linux on them.

    Heh, I'd be more than happy to take them off their hands.

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?

  • Let's take a pair of scissors to this article, and do a little happy trailing, shall we?

    SouthWestern Bell: Linux for monitoring a telco network

    "One example of a large company deploying Linux in mission critical areas is SouthWestern Bell, said manager Scott Young in Houston. The company is running Linux on 36 online desktops and workstations that monitor switches, fibers and call centers as well using the alternative OS on file and web servers." (CNN)

    Maybe BellSouth should follow suit, and perhaps start to support Linux under it's Internet systems. There would be a lot more happy customers, and Why Bellsouth won't take the opportunity is beyond me. Unless......"Bellsouth is a Registered trademark of Microsoft, Inc." Perish the Thought.

    After poor results testing a memory-intensive application with Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows NT, a colleague had asked Kessel why, if he thought Linux was so great, he did not try it.

    "So we took a mission-critical operation and we deployed a free operating system there," Kessel said. "And now we spend a tenth of the administration cost for those desktops that we do for the rest of the 315 we use."

    Did you need proof that Linux can take on the tough tasks? Did you need proof that Linux could hold up better then a Windows platform on that tough task?

    "The legal department says, 'When it fails, who do we sue?' "

    Um, instead of a kneejerk reaction to SUE if your system hiccups, how about trying to fix the problem? It's probably something simple. (besides, are you going to sue Microsoft everytime NT gets a Blue Screen?)

    "The IT department says, 'It's not a proved product.'

    Funny, considering how your own tech department proved it themselves.
    P.S., The IT department needs to brush up on grammer.

    Corporate security says, 'It's hackerware.'

    So? What's your Point?
    P.S.: "Corporate Security" is an oxymoron.
    ---
    The University of Nebraska Press replaced an outdated Novell network with a Linux server with Samba software to emulate Windows NT.

    Based on my OWN experience, Linux on a P150 with 64MB RAM running Samba outperformed NT on a Pro200 with 128MB as a heavy load file server.

    I won't ramble on anymore, You can read the rest and draw your own comparisons. I just had to pick a few things apart. :)

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?

  • Your Idea is good, and would even be helpful to the community. A HOWTO on this subject would doubtlessly give companies and IT professionals alike the info needed to possibly sway the corporate monkeys into trying something different.

    But the immature "First Post!" ruinied the credibility of your comment.

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?


  • At least the "United States Postal Service" story seems unverifiable. Prove me wrong, or it should be erased. Link to claim itself is 404, and usps.gov does not mention Linux (according to altavista).

    This is not a way to boost respect, IMHO.
  • Wouldn't it be handy if there was a HOWTO describing the most common investment appraisal techniques (ROI, CBA, boundary values, etc) and providing skeletal material from which to write a full justification report?

    Microsoft, Sun, et. al. provide white papers and sales material intended for exactly this purpose, and while there's a fair amount of source material available these days, so far I haven't seen anyone pull it together into a trivially-usable form.

    -Graham
    ps. First post!
  • Well, it's good to see you have a life.

    Good God, go out and get some fresh air.
  • Dude, no one reads the license agreement anyway,
    and I've never heard about anyone suing Microsoft
    for crashes so I must agree with your comment.

    Buggy software is now expected from many
    companies, this is because they have been trained
    to believe Microsoft is the best software company
    that ever existed and if they can't do it no one
    can. I once read a time magazine article stating
    "Microsoft is the best software company, if you
    need reliability Microsoft is the place to go."
    And then I noticed that the man who was speaking
    was a financial expert. The obvious problem with
    this is how does this financial expert have the
    right to judge what software company is the best
    or not. He probably cannot tell the difference
    between assembly programming and assembly lines.

    The problem is these people's opinions
    often matter more then that of technology experts.
    And thats who managers and bureaucrats listen to.
  • Actually, according to this the 3.51 certification is still good (at least for a few more months):
    http://www.microsoft.com/mcp/certstep/mcse.htm#N T 351

    --

  • Re:Who do we sue? (Score:3)

    by IntlHarvester ( 11985 ) on Sunday June 13, 1999 @09:59AM (#1852685) Journal
    Dude, no one reads the license agreement anyway, and I've never heard about anyone suing Microsoft for crashes so I must agree with your comment.

    Individuals/small businesses may not care about the EULA, but if your corporation is big enough to have a legal department, you aren't exactly going down to the CompUSA and buying shrinkwrap stuff and pressing "I Accept".

    Larger corporations have seperate licencing and support contracts with Microsoft/Sun/IBM/whoever, and work out all of the details seperately. These contracts certainly preclude the standard shrinkwrapped licences.

    I don't know about Microsoft, but IBM has been sued many times for systems that didn't deliver.

    --
  • "It runs well and doesn't cost an arm and a leg."
    I think that sums it all up. If NT ran 3 times better than Linux, then it would be worth it, but it doesn't. Linux will pick up in the business world simply because other Unix's may cost too much, and NT is not the raving success that MS has it cracked up to be. As there are more and more Linux success stories, and NT5 does not pan out to be what MS wants it to be. More businesses will pick up on Linux. All the Corp FUD with Linux will melt away.
  • But I think the IBM systems were big Custom jobs. No one ever sues for small to medium size jobs or systems.
  • Here is a link [linuxcare.com] to some more case studies over at Linuxcare [linuxcare.com].
    ---
  • I followed some links from this page and I finally arrived here. (http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/webservers.html). Hotmail of course has been the property of M$ for over one and a half years now (since early 1998). So, if Micro$oft does not trust NT to run one of their most popular and critical services( critical in terms of requiring continuous up time) , what does that tell us? I think we can draw our own conclusions.
  • I just saw this script over at Netcraft [netcraft.com] that outputs the webserver and OS any particular site is running.
    Can be useful if you want to quickly show your boss that the competitor who is trouncing you is running Linux and Apache.
  • Hehe

    Actually, it's my understanding that M$ tried move hotmail to NT, but NT just couldn't handle it so they moved it back.
  • Now really... "There is a business who use Linux, and it really works!"
    I've seen stories like that some 3-4 years ago, when it was unusual to have Linux in productive use.
    Having a list of "companies who use it" today reminds me very much of the similar lists made for OS/2 (and those lists are shrinking...)
  • I think a good conclusion is if it works, regardless of its operating system (NT and various BSD's), regardless of the distribution (for you Linux guys), regardless of the software used, if it's working fine, without a hitch, don't break it.

    Now now, I didn't say which OS's and which softwares work best. But to each his own.
  • I would think that be a bad way to show your boss what you should be doing. If you want to convince him/her, setup a demo. Setup various httpd's (apache, roxen, fhttpd, iis) on various os's, write up a report and submit it. Not only will you show some competance on what's right and wrong, you'll help the company make a better decission.

    If you don't have 20 machines to test this on, test it on one. It takes a day to install an OS and an httpd to confiugre it with some rudamentary tests such as cgi/serverside-language on just one. A database is just as easy to setup. Spam it to hell and see what numbers you get.

    The week of testing is surely worth the year or two minimum of usage.

  • Even so, he met resistance. "The legal department says, 'When it fails, who do we sue?' " he said.

    Take a look at the Microsoft licensing agreement. You accept this every time you install a Microsoft product. At this point, you absolve them of responsibility for everything conceivable.

    "Who do we sue?" I'll tell you this: It's certainly never going to be Microsoft.

  • Assuming for the moment that they meant "crackerware", they are just revealing their ignorance -- as you say, "Corporate Security" is an oxymoron. I've heard many similar statements, although usually about Unix in general. If you ask them to explain you get some argument like "it doesn't run RACF". These are people who will never know the Dilbert comic strip is about them. ;)
  • When I read the Bell-South excerpt it did not suprise me too much. I used to do UNIX support at a Bell Labs site where they had a bunch of switch engineers building the next generation of digital switches for Lucent's customers. For testing and simulation they used Sun sparc 5's hooked up to the switches running Solaris 1.x (heavily hacked)and a host of customized tools they developed to do so. Can NT be used for that?
  • Let's take even more scissors to it:

    ...The company is running Linux on 36 online desktops and workstations...
    "And now we spend a tenth of the administration cost for those desktops that we do for the rest of the 315 we use."

    Gee, 351 total computers, and 10% of the total
    cost is spent supporting 10% of the machines. What a statement about lower TCO!

    One other thing that hacks me off. The Kirch paper, which forms the basis for one of those stories, is written by an (alleged) MCP. So I check out his resume, and he's NT 3.51 certified, and his links to the MCP program are 404s. FYI, certification runs out 6 months after a new exam (read new product) is released. Gee, has it only been 6 months since NT 4.0 replaced NT 3.51?

    It doesn't do the Linux/Unix community any good when the guy is misrepresenting himself as an MCP.
    A wise man once said, "Be yourself, but be your best self." We're not going to convert CEOs and CIOs by looking like a bunch of rabid jihaders.

Slashdot Top Deals

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.

Close