Dimdows Mentality In A Linux World

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 5, 2009.

  1. So Symantec has released a Linux version of its “Backup Exec System
    Recovery†product <http://lwn.net/Articles/360221/>. Big bloody deal.
    They’re still thinking in terms of features that are hard to do in the
    Windows world, but Linux already deals with as a matter of course:

    * “Bare-metal†restore. Can already do that, just boot up with a Live CD/DVD
    and you have the full power of a full OS to hand, with all its file-
    manipulation tools, scripting tools, network stack etc, as opposed to some
    some proprietary vendor’s limited toolset.
    * “... new support for backing up and restoring entire server images
    including operating system or individual files from Red Hat or SUSE Linux
    servers won't be generally available until Decemberâ€. But who cares? I can
    already do this. The OS is already just a bunch of files, that I can backup
    and restore individually using standard file-manipulation tools provided by
    the OS itself. There is no complicated, fragile “Registry†to baby-sit, no
    deep filesystem voodoo involved that only an elaborate image backup/restore
    can safely handle; it Just Works.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 5, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > So Symantec has released a Linux version of its “Backup Exec System
    > Recovery†product <http://lwn.net/Articles/360221/>. Big bloody deal.
    > They’re still thinking in terms of features that are hard to do in the
    > Windows world, but Linux already deals with as a matter of course:
    >
    > * “Bare-metal†restore. Can already do that, just boot up with a Live CD/DVD
    > and you have the full power of a full OS to hand, with all its file-
    > manipulation tools, scripting tools, network stack etc, as opposed to some
    > some proprietary vendor’s limited toolset.
    > * “... new support for backing up and restoring entire server images
    > including operating system or individual files from Red Hat or SUSE Linux
    > servers won't be generally available until Decemberâ€. But who cares? I can
    > already do this. The OS is already just a bunch of files, that I can backup
    > and restore individually using standard file-manipulation tools provided by
    > the OS itself. There is no complicated, fragile “Registry†to baby-sit, no
    > deep filesystem voodoo involved that only an elaborate image backup/restore
    > can safely handle; it Just Works.


    As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    Linux not to make that choice.

    It suits us to use one backup product throughout the datacenter, with
    one central server running the backup tasks and writing the data to one
    tape robot. It also suits us to be able to shut the auditors up by
    saying "We have the <insert name of choice here> back agents and system
    recovery product deployed across all the servers".

    It suits us not to have to justify ourselves to some member of
    manglement who has read some piece of FUD put about by trolling linux
    sealots like yourself. Given that the FUD never stops, we find it
    easier to just ignore linux as a platform. For example we have just
    migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to MSSQL/Windows. Sure, the
    licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction in external bullshit we have
    to put with more than justifies the expense.
    EMB, Nov 5, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In message <hctmvc$f33$>, EMB wrote:

    > As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    > Linux not to make that choice.


    I’m not here to convince anybody.

    > It also suits us to be able to shut the auditors up by
    > saying "We have the <insert name of choice here> back agents and system
    > recovery product deployed across all the servers".


    Ahh, now we’re getting to the real reason for buying such a useless product:
    it’s because a bunch of PHBs further up in the pecking order than you have
    been preconditioned with kneejerk brand-recognition reflexes that you have
    to pander to in order to maintain your job security.

    It’s all about big corporations selling to other big corporations. People
    seem to think big corporations are really important in the world, but in
    fact they only account for a minority of world GDP. The backbone of the
    world economy is small businesses, not big ones.

    The only thing big businesses account for a majority of is business news
    headlines. It’s all a big corpora-wank, really.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 5, 2009
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    BigglesZz Guest

    On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:14:50 +1300, EMB wrote:


    <snip of larrys troll bait>

    >
    > As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    > Linux not to make that choice.
    >
    > It suits us to use one backup product throughout the datacenter, with
    > one central server running the backup tasks and writing the data to one
    > tape robot. It also suits us to be able to shut the auditors up by
    > saying "We have the <insert name of choice here> back agents and system
    > recovery product deployed across all the servers".
    >
    > It suits us not to have to justify ourselves to some member of
    > manglement who has read some piece of FUD put about by trolling linux
    > sealots like yourself. Given that the FUD never stops, we find it
    > easier to just ignore linux as a platform. For example we have just
    > migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to MSSQL/Windows. Sure, the
    > licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction in external bullshit we have
    > to put with more than justifies the expense.


    Is that trend of moving to microsoft solutions fairly wide spread here in
    NZ emb ?


    Biggles..
    BigglesZz, Nov 5, 2009
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    thingy Guest

    On Nov 6, 2:26 am, BigglesZz <> wrote:
    > On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:14:50 +1300, EMB wrote:
    >
    > <snip of larrys troll bait>
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    > > Linux not to make that choice.

    >
    > > It suits us to use one backup product throughout the datacenter, with
    > > one central server running the backup tasks and writing the data to one
    > > tape robot.  It also suits us to be able to shut the auditors up by
    > > saying "We have the <insert name of choice here> back agents and system
    > > recovery product deployed across all the servers".

    >
    > > It suits us not to have to justify ourselves to some member of
    > > manglement who has read some piece of FUD put about by trolling linux
    > > sealots like yourself.  Given that the FUD never stops, we find it
    > > easier to just ignore linux as a platform.  For example we have just
    > > migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to MSSQL/Windows.  Sure, the
    > > licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction in external bullshit we have
    > > to put with more than justifies the expense.

    >
    > Is that trend of moving to microsoft solutions fairly wide spread here in
    > NZ emb ?
    >
    > Biggles..


    I wouldnt think so....our trend is (slightly) to Linux....on Vmware
    ESXi in fact just about everyting goes on ESX (240 guests and
    counting)...we'd do more but lack the Linux staff..

    Ive used mysql and like it, but I have MS SQL for the virtual control
    centre(s) and SQL is pretty easy to do...however we pay peanuts for a
    MS SQL licence, a few hundred $ per CPU...which nakes the cost uplift
    from Mysql negligable.

    The area to watch is how Govn (if it does) moves to OSS now MS's
    overall licence is no more....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Nov 5, 2009
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    JohnO Guest

    On Nov 5, 6:14 pm, EMB <> wrote:
    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > > So Symantec has released a Linux version of its “Backup Exec System
    > > Recovery” product <http://lwn.net/Articles/360221/>. Big bloody deal.
    > > They’re still thinking in terms of features that are hard to do in the
    > > Windows world, but Linux already deals with as a matter of course:

    >
    > > * “Bare-metal” restore. Can already do that, just boot up with a Live CD/DVD
    > > and you have the full power of a full OS to hand, with all its file-
    > > manipulation tools, scripting tools, network stack etc, as opposed to some
    > > some proprietary vendor’s limited toolset.
    > > * “... new support for backing up and restoring entire server images
    > > including operating system or individual files from Red Hat or SUSE Linux
    > > servers won't be generally available until December”. But who cares? I can
    > > already do this. The OS is already just a bunch of files, that I can backup
    > > and restore individually using standard file-manipulation tools provided by
    > > the OS itself. There is no complicated, fragile “Registry” to baby-sit, no
    > > deep filesystem voodoo involved that only an elaborate image backup/restore
    > > can safely handle; it Just Works.

    >
    > As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    > Linux not to make that choice.
    >
    > It suits us to use one backup product throughout the datacenter, with
    > one central server running the backup tasks and writing the data to one
    > tape robot.  It also suits us to be able to shut the auditors up by
    > saying "We have the <insert name of choice here> back agents and system
    > recovery product deployed across all the servers".
    >
    > It suits us not to have to justify ourselves to some member of
    > manglement who has read some piece of FUD put about by trolling linux
    > sealots like yourself.  Given that the FUD never stops, we find it
    > easier to just ignore linux as a platform.  For example we have just
    > migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to MSSQL/Windows.  Sure, the
    > licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction in external bullshit we have
    > to put with more than justifies the expense.


    One of my clients is moving off MS and SQLServer to IBM iSeries and
    DB2-400! That's my two biggest customers now on that platform now. So
    I'm swimming against the tide a bit having moved from mainly *nix to
    mainly MS to mainly iSeries (but they all run windows clients). 10
    years ago if you asked me if I would be using a 5250 green screen on
    an IBM mid range box I would have laughed out loud.

    But the really surprising thing is the cost savings these customers
    are achieving by switching to these gold plated 400kg servers. I'm
    always urging other suitable clients to consider this move.

    Hoodathunkit?
    JohnO, Nov 5, 2009
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    EMB wrote:
    >
    > For example we have just migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to
    > MSSQL/Windows. Sure, the licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction
    > in external bullshit we have to put with more than justifies the
    > expense.
    >

    What do you mean?

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
    the same old personalities show through.
    Enkidu, Nov 6, 2009
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Enkidu wrote:
    > EMB wrote:
    >>
    >> For example we have just migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to
    >> MSSQL/Windows. Sure, the licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction
    >> in external bullshit we have to put with more than justifies the
    >> expense.
    >>

    > What do you mean?


    The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    across the enterprise. I don't necessarily agree, but if it means I
    have a quiet life an everything runs smoothly I'm unlikely to rock the boat.
    EMB, Nov 6, 2009
    #8
  9. In message <hd0ucc$9s7$>, EMB wrote:

    > The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    > allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    > across the enterprise.


    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 6, 2009
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <hd0ucc$9s7$>, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    >> allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    >> across the enterprise.

    >
    > Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


    That's a very good point. However the decisions about auditors are made
    at a level above the IS manager so all we (the IS department) can do is
    meet the audit requirements in a cost effective and efficient manner.
    EMB, Nov 6, 2009
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    JohnO wrote:
    >
    > One of my clients is moving off MS and SQLServer to IBM iSeries and
    > DB2-400! That's my two biggest customers now on that platform now. So
    > I'm swimming against the tide a bit having moved from mainly *nix to
    > mainly MS to mainly iSeries (but they all run windows clients). 10
    > years ago if you asked me if I would be using a 5250 green screen on
    > an IBM mid range box I would have laughed out loud.
    >
    > But the really surprising thing is the cost savings these customers
    > are achieving by switching to these gold plated 400kg servers. I'm
    > always urging other suitable clients to consider this move.
    >
    > Hoodathunkit?


    I've got a couple of clients who had done similar things although their
    move has been to Sun/Oracle. The catalyst for making the move has been
    performance improvement but the associated cost savings are a
    significant bonus.
    EMB, Nov 6, 2009
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <hctmvc$f33$>, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    >> Linux not to make that choice.

    >
    > I’m not here to convince anybody.


    ROTFL - why else do you spend vast amounts of time and energy
    proclaiming linux to be superior to all else?
    EMB, Nov 6, 2009
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Carnations Guest

    On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:34:19 +1300, EMB wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> In message <hd0ucc$9s7$>, EMB wrote:
    >>
    >>> The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    >>> allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    >>> across the enterprise.

    >>
    >> Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    >
    > That's a very good point. However the decisions about auditors are made
    > at a level above the IS manager so all we (the IS department) can do is
    > meet the audit requirements in a cost effective and efficient manner.


    So you chose the more expensive route rather than migrate away from using Microsoft software.

    You could have educated your auditors.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Carnations, Nov 7, 2009
    #13
  14. In message <hd255h$r3f$>, EMB wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In message <hctmvc$f33$>, EMB wrote:
    >>
    >>> As usual you're just convincing those of us who can *choose* to use
    >>> Linux not to make that choice.

    >>
    >> I’m not here to convince anybody.

    >
    > ROTFL - why else do you spend vast amounts of time and energy
    > proclaiming linux to be superior to all else?


    I could ask the same sort of thing of you.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 7, 2009
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    EMB wrote:
    > Enkidu wrote:
    >> EMB wrote:
    >>>
    >>> For example we have just migrated a database from MySQL/Linux to
    >>> MSSQL/Windows. Sure, the licensing has cost a bit, but the reduction
    >>> in external bullshit we have to put with more than justifies the
    >>> expense.
    >>>

    >> What do you mean?

    >
    > The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    > allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    > across the enterprise. I don't necessarily agree, but if it means I
    > have a quiet life an everything runs smoothly I'm unlikely to rock the
    > boat.
    >

    If you are going to have to backup your Windows machines with
    proprietary software and the software also supports Unix/Linux then it
    does make sense to do it with one solution across the board.

    Actually, I meant about the migration from MySQL/Linux to Windows. Is
    the reason the same?

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
    the same old personalities show through.
    Enkidu, Nov 7, 2009
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <hd0ucc$9s7$>, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem somewhat
    >> allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup solution applied
    >> across the enterprise.

    >
    > Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
    >

    No one. In my experience, no one questions the auditors, except on
    relatively trivial things. You certainly can't suggest that the auditors
    have made a balls up.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
    the same old personalities show through.
    Enkidu, Nov 7, 2009
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    Carnations wrote:
    > On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:34:19 +1300, EMB wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>> In message <hd0ucc$9s7$>, EMB wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The auditors understand and *like* MS environments and seem
    >>>> somewhat allergic to linux. They also like seeing one backup
    >>>> solution applied across the enterprise.
    >>> Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    >> That's a very good point. However the decisions about auditors are
    >> made at a level above the IS manager so all we (the IS department)
    >> can do is meet the audit requirements in a cost effective and
    >> efficient manner.

    >
    > So you chose the more expensive route rather than migrate away from
    > using Microsoft software.
    >
    > You could have educated your auditors.
    >

    And off we go to Lennierland. Check in your brains and your hold on
    reality at the gate.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
    the same old personalities show through.
    Enkidu, Nov 7, 2009
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Enkidu wrote:
    >
    > Actually, I meant about the migration from MySQL/Linux to Windows. Is
    > the reason the same?


    There were lots of reasons which all combined to make it the logical
    choice. We have a better Win/MSSQL skill base, it fits in with an
    existing cluster to give a failover option, it shuts the auditors up,
    and it gives management a nice warm secure feeling.
    EMB, Nov 7, 2009
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Enkidu wrote:
    > Carnations wrote:


    >> So you chose the more expensive route rather than migrate away from
    >> using Microsoft software.
    >>
    >> You could have educated your auditors.
    >>

    > And off we go to Lennierland. Check in your brains and your hold on
    > reality at the gate.


    You beat me to it Cliff.
    EMB, Nov 7, 2009
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    EMB Guest

    Carnations wrote:
    >
    > So you chose the more expensive route rather than migrate away from using Microsoft software.


    The cost difference is minimal in the overall IS budget.
    >
    > You could have educated your auditors.


    You've obviously never worked in a large corporate with external auditors.
    EMB, Nov 7, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Duane Arnold
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    807
    Duane Arnold
    Jun 28, 2006
  2. Have a nice cup of pee

    Linux... yeah linux.. Linux

    Have a nice cup of pee, Apr 12, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    640
    Bette Noir
    Apr 17, 2006
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Rapid Prototyping vs The Herd Mentality

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 16, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    368
    Enkidu
    Jan 18, 2010
  4. chuckcar

    Re: Wingnut mentality explained

    chuckcar, Feb 1, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    349
    freemont
    Feb 3, 2010
  5. RichA

    Samsung's P&S mentality is glaringly apparent

    RichA, Mar 16, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    279
    Bruce
    Mar 16, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page