![[Don't Fear the Penguins.]](./gx/roelofs/linux-dont-fear.jpg) 
 The Future of Linux 
 14 July 1998 
 Prepared Question #1 
Is Linux superior, comparable, or inferior to commercial operating
systems?
[or something like that]
   - Jeremy Allison (Samba):  I think he was one of the panelists who
      made the comment that ``Linux is a commercial OS''; his answer
      amounted to choice #1:
      
         - Linux is very standards-compliant (e.g., Posix); a good approach
             is to develop first on Linux, then port to proprietary Unixen.
             For example, Samba has three separate pieces of code to deal
             with some aspect of file-system stuff; Linux supports all three
             interfaces, so they just choose the one that runs the fastest.
         
- He did give a wishlist of improvements he'd like to see, though:
             64-bit file-system support (``for those 20 GB Exchange
             databases''); access control list (ACL) support; asynchronous I/O
             support; NFS file-locking and improved performance
             [amen to that]; and a
             thread model like Solaris has.
         
- He noted that Linux has current support for more platforms
             than any other OS:  x86, SPARC, Alpha, PowerPC, 68k, etc.
         
- Bugs are fixed the fastest, especially security fixes.
         
- There's been a Linux ``iBCS'' module to support SCO Unix binaries
             for  a couple of years; at this year's Usenix, SCO announced
             (and/or demoed) a module to run Linux apps.
      
 
    
- Larry Augustin (VA Research):  His answer was ``yes'':
      
         - Linux is not (yet) as far along as Solaris in supporting 64-way
             symmetric multi-processing (SMP).  [I
             thought that the SPARC-based Fujitsu AP1000+ on
             which David S. Miller reported success last year was a big SMP box,
             but as Jason Riedy pointed
             out, it's a distributed-memory multi-computer similar to the
             Connection Machine CM5.]
         
- In his slides of user ratings
             (Datapro survey, which was mentioned several times
             during the evening), Linux was not only the overall winner in a
             field of half a dozen OSes (Windows NT placed last), it also won
             in all but two categories--and only Digital Unix was rated higher
             in those two (availability and performance).  The other categories
             included reliability, technical support, price, etc.
      
 
    
- Robert Hart (Red Hat):
      
         - Linux is a commercial operating system.  It is sold and
             supported commercially (Red Hat, Caldera and others); it is used
             commercially; its only difference is that the source code is
             freely available.
         
- Key ``commercial OS'' features like a journaling file system and
             database access that bypasses the file system layer are coming
             very soon.
         
- Many of Red Hat's users (more with every release) have never
             installed an OS, which means Red Hat has to ``reverse engineer''
             their hardware configuration.
         
- Why is Linux not ubiquitous?  It's still not suitable for everyone
             (he mentioned his ``75-year-old mum''), and although there are
             good office applications for Linux, there aren't any killer ones
             yet.  (There were follow-ups to the suitability comment by some of
             the other panelists.)
      
 
    
- Sunil Saxena (Intel):  He presented some slides that amounted to
      a ``yes'' response as well:
      
         - Strengths:  Linux is becoming the OS of choice of ISPs; on 32-bit
             Intel systems, Linux has broader device-driver support than any
             other Unix (e.g., SCO, Solaris/x86, etc.); its Open Source model means that
             updates, patches and bug-fixes happen in ``Internet time.''
         
- Weaknesses:  SMP support and scalability is still evolving
             (although he noted that Leonard
             Zubkoff did a successful two-day port to the brand-new,
             four-way
             Pentium II Xeon system that Intel
             and VA Research showed off); good server management is missing
             (e.g., using a remote serial line or modem to update things,
             including the BIOS); drivers for high-end hardware tend to be
             lacking; and large-memory support (say, multi-gigabyte range) isn't
             there.
         
- Making it better:  he said (and repeated several times throughout
             the evening) that Intel really wants to help and do more to support
             Linux, and in particular they see the following as likely areas of
             collaboration:
             
                - more than 4-way SMP (serious scalability, at least 16 to 32
                    processors)
                
- drivers for high-end platforms
                
- direct server control and management
                
- support for PII features such as 36-bit addressing (up to
                    64 GB of RAM), enhanced system calls and save/restore,
                    MMX instructions, the page attribute table, and on-chip
                    performance monitors
             
 
 
    
- Linus Torvalds:  He started off with a comment to the effect,
      ``What can I say?  I came to listen to the others.''
      
         - He noted that Linux originally was a one-person OS; it was never
             intended to be useful to others.  He also pointed out that it has
             just shown up on the list of the
             
             world's most powerful supercomputers (in a cluster design); he
             thought it made #316.  [actually #315 in
             the June 1998 list--see this press release
             for details]  At the other end of the spectrum, it's
             being ported to
             Palm Pilots.  ``I don't see that [its
             broad portability and usefulness] ending any time
             soon.''
         
- He responded to a couple of Sunil's comments:
             
                - 36-bit addressing on Intel:  ``We've been doing that on
                    Alpha for a while.''
                
- Page Attribute Table:  he didn't know about Intel's
                    implementation but said that he'd suggested it to an Intel
                    engineer a few years ago; ``I don't know if they did it
                    right, but if so, I'll be happy to use it.''
             
 
 
 
Click here to return to the main Future of
 Linux page.
Last modified 19 July 1998 by
newt@pobox.com , you betcha.
Copyright © 1998 Greg Roelofs.