[luau] Linux in Hawaiian Industry

[Keith]

* Dwight Victor <dwight at aikanaka.com> [25/08/2003 2224EDT]:
> Hi Keith,

Greetings from the East.  :)

[...]
> I worked at Pihana Pacific, Inc. (now known as Equinix) for three years.  We
[...]

> During my three years, I held various positions in our Network
> Operations as well as Product Development groups.  In my experience,
> the PHBs preferred to go with more "well known" unices, such as
> Solaris and HP-UX (basically becuase of all the wheeling & dealing
> going on with the vendors) and Microsoft products.  All desktops, file
> servers, application servers, mail servers, VPN servers, etc. were
> Microsoft based systems.  Our billing systems and CRM ran on Oracle
> and HP-UX.  Solaris powered the customer-facing website.  Cisco was
> our routing/switching brand of choice.

Granted my experience is not as in-depth (I consider myself an
enthusiast that gets to fiddle with a hobby for a living), I've come
to learn that those with cash will spend that cash on that which has
been around and has a track record.  Certainly Sun, HP, and MS have a
history, and invovled ones at that.  They are established and have been
trusted for years.  Why not go with what's tried and true if you can
afford it?  As far as I'm concerned (and probably many on this list
too), Linux is tried and true and extraordinarily solid with an equally
solid user-base (both enthusiasts and corporations alike) and support
base (fee- and non-fee-based), with a price tag that beats all others
hands-down.  But (and there's always a "but"), trying to convince old
dogs of any of this is, more often than not, like talking to a brick.

I have worked for two startups, one that has failed and one that is
failing, not directly because of their devotion to linux but because of
foul leadership and a lack of technical knowledge higher up in the chain
of command.  I believe the strength of linux is derived from the
underlying enthusiasm and know-how of its users and creators, but to
get anything out of it its strength and its capabilities (which are
nearly endless) have to be well known, as with anything else.  And that
which is new (relatively) and unknown to the naive tends to be feared
regardless of how great the enthusiasts say it is.

> We did have a few Linux boxes (Redhat & SuSE, as well as Trustix),
> primarily run by Linux enthusiats as internal development support
> systems and other non mission critical systems (i.e., group file
> server/website, some web development, etc.).  In fact, I ran a Quake
> II server which we used to "test the network" occasionally.

:) I think we've all run a Qauke server to test the network.  I've more
than once stated, "Hey man, the network's fine.  At least it likes UDP
packets, and lots of 'em."

[...]
> Today, based on what I know, there is no real impetus on the part of
> business to want to migrate to Linux anytime soon.  I think many
> companies are testing the waters, but prefer to stay status quo.  Now
> the reason I think they want to stay this way isn't so much based on
> fear of the unknown, or little-known OS, but because of the huge
> leverage the dominant vendors can bring to bear in terms of discounts
> and other perks...and, like they say, no one ever got fired for buying
> Microsoft (or Sun, or IBM, etc.).

A migration is costly, indeed, and a migration to the unknown is riskly
_and_ costly.  I wouldn't mind being a part of "testing the waters" and
spreading awareness and knowledge.  It would be an excellent opportunity
to make a difference.

Fear of the unknown is a huge factor in any decision, whether personal
or industrial.  I'm about ready to ditch life on the east coast and move
1/4 the way around the world to a remote cluster of islands to start
over with a virtually clean slate.  Is it a risk?  Sure.  Taking risks
is how we, as people, get places and discover new things.  One can't do
much to stay on top of the game by hiding under a rock or hiding behind
dominant vendors.

I really need to be in an R&D kind of environment where folks are
financially capable of and not afraid to take risks, and, more
importantly, highly knowledgable of what they're into and equally
enthusiastic.  Out there, on those islands, this would be an utter
utopia.

> Anyways, good luck with your search.  Hopefully you'll be able to
> prove me wrong and sign on with a company devoted to Linux.  If you're
> looking for a sysadmin type job, the federal government (i.e.,
> contractors) are looking for people who know Solaris and Microsoft.

Thanks.  I'm by no means limiting myself to linux-only opportunities.
To do so would be a hinderance to the objective at hand and contradict
my resume`.  :)  My day-to-day routine and track record involve making
linux, windows, and solaris play nice with one another and to live with
just linux and not the other two would remove me of lots of valuable
knowledge and worth.  Linux is merely a specialty.

> Hope that helps,
Indeed it does.  Mahalo!

krjw.
-- 
Keith R. John Warno                  [k r j w  at  optonline dot net]
"Some people are like Slinkies: not really good for anything, but you
still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs."
       -- anonymous