> Should a company be willing to spend a comparable amount annually with > their Linux provider and their hardware provider that they would give to > (for instance) Sun Support, I believe they could easily achieve > comparable levels of hardware and software reliability than any other > commercial unix.
Perhaps an extreme example, but the NIH/CDC's recently signed the papers on a supercomputer for the Seattle lab. The box has 1000+ Intel It. procssors, 1.8Tb of core (no typo: Tera) and runs linux. For $23M you can have one too :-) The fact that people are using linux for something this heavy duty is interesting. The main reasons for choosing the O/S were scaleability, reliability, and support. Similar results came up from the DoD's recent software audit: they got better results for many app's from open source code than proprietary -- Billy wan't pleased in the least. Regardless of *NIX debates, linux is proving out as a nice, stable platform for cheap, reliable federated systems. -- Steven Lembark 2930 W. Palmer Workhorse Computing Chicago, IL 60647 +1 800 762 1582 -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Steven Lembark INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists -------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).