Ubuntu shops believe in Ubuntu

Mission Critical?

"Interestingly, 20 per cent of those polled said they run Linux (not just Ubuntu) on homemade servers, and another 23 per cent said they run Linux on tower or desktop PCs."

Don't make me laugh!

RHEL and Windows 2008 are the only platforms, and on HP ProLiant is the only Mission Critical environment I'd look at supporting.

Ubuntu on a home made box.... give me a break.

Ubuntu server

Do they bundle pulse audio with that as well?

I quite agree its no RHEL. But the special thing about RHEL is the support. Do Shuttleworths Canolonical offer a simiar level?

Bigger Businesses get targeted by MS Sales

That appears to be a good reason for it.

Ubuntu, is more of a gateway, home user Linux distro isn't it?

It is not something to get your freaky geeky on. Still, it would be nice if those home users and soho's paid for support, then they could stop posting inane questions about their xorg.conf files to the web.

Yes, you should hand roll your own xorg.conf, locate all the fonts, be ready to switch the /dev/input/event number each time you hand roll your own patched for performance kernel, or update udev. If you cannot do that pony up the dosh to get some Ubuntu support, you are not l33t, you are not clever, you are but a user, act like one, and stop kidding yourself you are getting it on tick to pay back later.

The Ubuntu hoards have really dumbed down the average Linux user, and they are a bunch of freeloaders, they don't care about open source, they don't look at the code, they just see free as in not having to pay any money for it. Boy they just don't get it.

And it is not Ubuntu's fault, they are trying to make it viable, they have put money into the desktop, they have the support lines, they make a pretty good distro for users.

There is no such thing as free, you have to win the knowledge somehow. And to expect developers who have won the knowledge both in software creation, copious man pages and technical literature to just dole it out for nothing, in easy don't make my brain boggle portions, and to be their own personal unpaid hell desks, just stinks of selfishness, over inflated self importance and arrogance.

The open source world doesn't need market share, they don't get paid for it. It is just plainly evident that when you understand computer systems, and develop solutions, open source is a lot better for many things, but not for users for that you need Ubuntu or RedHat support.

djb.bell@gmail.com

We run Ubuntu Server (No Pulseaudio btw). On it we run Apache which fronts 3 JBoss servers running Confluence, Jira and Fisheye (5 million lines of code) from Atlassian. This has been running now without problems for 4 months. Database is Postgres running on the same server.

Confluence has around 700 users and Jira about 500 all over the world. Response time is good. We have no complaints at all. We can adminster it from anywhere via ssh. Life's good and as an admin, I sleep well at night.

This is what it's all about. We test Disaster Recovery each year and all is well.

at use it swear by it those that don't say it's not ready.

So I am personally, through experience, am satisfied that Ubuntu is ready.

It all comes down to the same thing. Those that use it swear by it :)

Linux ve Windows

Windows servers have some important features that seem to be missing from Linux. Once you have the server doing it's job you reaally don't have much to do. The hardware will break at some point, how easy it is to recover from that is vital.

Now the users PC's are a different matter, they alway seem to be going wrong.

Windows bites - Ubuntu just works!

After over 12 years of experience i now refuse to work with windows servers (for ALL the obvious reasons), and yes i still house,transport,cloth and feed myself and my family very comfortably.

It took a while to convince my employers - but like my boss now says: windows is like smoking - once you've given it up life is a lot easier!

My impression is that there is too much auto-FUD generated in any Ubuntu story in The Register - so perhaps those FUD comments above are from..... we know.

using ubuntu server 2 years now

We use ubuntu servers for file/print/collaboration/web purposes - have been doing so for the past two years. We're a charity, and by philosophy we don't waste donations on overheads - so free software on homebrew hardware was the first step.

Fortunately this past year there were loads of specials on server hardware, so now we are running the same stuff on proper server boxes.

The attractive thing with Ubuntu is that we don't *have* to pay for support, but the option of paid support is always there if we get out of our depth or run out of people.

The predictable release cycle is a major plus because we can align our project plans with the LTS schedule.

The other plus is that if Ubuntu goes to the dark side, we aren't stuck - it is easy to migrate to one of the other "spawn of Debian".

For a bigger organisation RHEL might be a better bet, but Ubuntu allows us to do all the basics, including DR (which is very cute, because hardware upgrades can be done during the normal working day rather than in the wee small hours of the morning).

I try to avoid getting too attached to any one vendor - one ends up being at their mercy.

"Ubuntu Hoards" --- Enough Already with the Unfounded Elitism

The average Linux user is one who affects a deeper understanding of Operating Systems than is in fact the case. Something like Ubuntu is absolutley needed to get this show on the road and force more desktop innovation and competition to take place.

Errata

A couple of corrections to my comment above.

"Resenting Shuttleworth for starting to deliver on the often-made promises is about as disingenuous as it gets"

should read:

Resenting Shuttleworth for starting to deliver on the often-made promises is about as perverse as it gets".

"They don't need to write code to be useful community members"

should read

"They don't need to write code to contribute to the community"

and:

"Personally I expected a billion people"

should read:

"Personally I expect a billion people"

As encouraging as recent adoption rates have been, I think we've got a way to go before we see the one billionth Linux desktop user ;)

I agree ....

Most comptuer users are barely computer literate. They learn the bare minimum to do what they need to get done. To them a good OS is whatever one that will simply work without them having to learn anything.

If Linux wants to get out of the sever room ... it needs to take seriously the complains of those who can't be bothered to read the manual.

@David Wilkinson

You have a good point, but it contradicts your apparent position.

From what I've seen, Vista doesn't "simply work". In fact, it seems to be a complete nightmare to a lot of people. I would point out that the comments I've read about it "working perfectly well for me" always seem to come from people with a degree of technical competence.

Have you used Ubuntu? Not only does it "just work", it updates cleanly and provides a user interface that is just as easy to use as Windows, if not easier.

I agree with the key point you made, that most computer users are barely literate. They are the ones who should be given Linux on their desktop because they don't know any better :-)