[linux-elitists] What to do about cluebatting such companies, that require possibly *YEARS* old Distros

Aaron Sherman ajs@ajs.com
Wed Jan 26 15:09:37 PST 2005


On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 17:03, Rick Bradley wrote:

> > If we're talking about successful companies, then I debate your use of
> > the word "improperly". The company is not in business to upgrade an OS.
> > They are in business to make money. Demonstrate the cost/benefit
> > analysis that shows them making more money using kernel 2.6 everywhere
> > and I'm sure they'll move faster.
> 
> Differ.  I know of a large state hospital which successfully operates in
> the way I'm describing.  I also know of a multi-billion dollar private
> financial company which operates this way -- who actually not only
> "upgrades" their software easily (and can revert almost instantly), but
> actually picked up and moved their entire operation from one facility to
> another with zero downtime, while continuing to run high-availability
> production, testing, development, and research environments spread over
> multiple user bases, without a hitch.

I read to the end of this, and still never found the point where you
described the benefit of the original thesis: "I [...] am disgusted with
companies that are stuck in the "Pre-Fedora" Era [...] on "Turbolinux"
[or] SuSE v8.*"

I understand why smooth deployment is a good thing, and would not DREAM
to argue against it. He didn't say and I wasn't replying to a suggestion
that smooth deployment was good. I was replying to the idea that there's
something "disgusting" about slow system upgrades when regular in-house
and mission-specific software upgrades are much more valuable.

Rick, once again I'll ask the question: show me an example of one
company that does better than their competition (not just "is big"),
where they do and their competition does not upgrade operating system
software more frequently than every 3 years.

I've seen some of the largest financial, Internet and special-purpose
software and service companies in the world, all successful, and none of
them upgraded their OS more often than once every 3 years.

So, why this push to put "Pre-Fedora" OSes behind us so damn fast? What
is this urgency?

-- 
☎ 781-324-3772
✉ ajs@ajs.comhttp://www.ajs.com/~ajs




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list