RSS
|
  Is It Time for Linux May 31, 1999 Being a Guru Still Helps We've seen Linux on 486s pull off scripting jobs that you can only dream of handling with Pentium-based servers running NT. We've built servers in less than 10 minutes, with single reboots, that proceed to demonstrate system uptimes exceeding 300 days. But when it comes to packaged solutions, commercial applications or transitioning administrative control of machines to non-Unix-savvy administrators, preaching Linux to the masses can get ugly...real ugly. For integrating disparate systems, Linux's utility and performance is unparalleled. But for the uninitiated, learning Linux is no picnic. Linux documentation is about as unfiltered and raw as it gets. While the various Linux distributors have endeavored to improve it, the bulk of the documentation effort still lies in the hands of the Linux Documentation Project. The quality varies widely. Documents such as the "Serial-HOWTO" will teach you more than you've ever known about serial communication, but others such as the "VPN-HOWTO" leave you scratching your head and wondering what happened to IPsec. Some documents are updated regularly, while time and inattention has rendered others almost worthless. Many organizations have the luxury of contacting vendors such as IBM, Sun, Microsoft or Novell directly for their OS support needs, but most smaller companies can't afford this level of support. While there is arguably more public material circulating on the Internet about Linux than about all four other OSes combined, searching through this material is a chore. The current state of the Linux knowledge bases is far from acceptable; none of the existing knowledge bases provided by Caldera, Red Hat or Linuxcare remotely rival the depth of those for Novell or Microsoft. Red Hat's search engine has always been difficult and lacks controls for any kind of targeted searches. Linuxcare has the beginnings of a good knowledge base, but it groups together trouble-ticket incidents, HOWTOs, FAQs and mailing-list archives, creating a huge hodgepodge of data that's difficult to wade through. Of all the Linux vendors, Caldera boasts the most useful, if underpopulated, knowledge base. But Linux is quickly gaining ground in terms of direct support. A year ago, organizations in need had nowhere to turn; now, support options keep coming out of the woodwork. Red Hat launched a 24x7 call center earlier this year. Caldera has built a 24x7 support network of internal staff and outside partners. Customers can call Caldera as the first line of support, and Caldera will act as the gatekeeper, farming requests out to partners as needed. Compaq is retraining its Tru64 support staff to double as Linux engineers, and Linuxcare offers 24x7 support and consulting contracts for any Linux distribution. Other vendors are in the process of creating an internal support structure for Linux or outsourcing to one of the more support-oriented firms. Looking at support costs purely on a call-in, per-incident basis, things line up about even: Microsoft charges $195 per incident, Novell charges $200, and Linux costs range from $150 to $299 per incident (see "Comparison of Linux Support Costs"). But when assessing overall support costs, one also has to factor in internal expertise, the availability of experts (finding an MCSE [Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer] or CNE [Certified NetWare Engineer] is far easier then finding a Linux guru) and reliability. Most administrators who support Linux state firmly that Linux-based servers tend to need far less maintenance than their NT counterparts.
GUI-Based Admin Tools While all these tools are far from adequate for administering an enterprise OS, at times we've found ourselves drawn to the concept of basic command-line configuration. While configuration via text file may seem archaic, the thought can be comforting when you've been burned again and again by multiple layers of abstraction. Take Microsoft IIS v4, for example. On a number of occasions, we've seen the MMC display a site or directory that didn't exist, or had problems connecting to a remote server because of a failed RPC call, or just a flat-out refusal to work until a reboot. Microsoft has inserted a layer of abstraction that saves administrators from the under-the-hood complexities of NT, but it means the administrator is that much more removed from what's really going on. It's the classic trade-off: granular control versus ease of administration. If the Linux administration tool effort matures, it may let Linux offer the best of both worlds. However, right now, as with many other parts of Linux, configuration complexities contribute to the learning curve. This is another judgment call: Administrators who prefer granular but less polished control may prefer Linux. Others who'd rather rely on a vendor-supplied GUI environment may want to stick with the more polished solutions.
|
Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Next Page |
 Print This Page E-mail this URL |
