Ubuntu is now worried about profits

[Chan Chung Hang Christopher]

Manish Sinha wrote:
> On 4/25/2010 6:08 PM, Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
>> Oh, I forgot, nobody on the Linux side, not even Canonical, is going to
>> try to take aim at the corporate desktop. Please do forgive me my pet
>> peeve. You want simplicity? Try OpenSolaris. It does not even ask
>> whether you want uber binary drivers from Nvidia. Same old GNOME desktop
>> too.
>>
>>    
> 
> Open Solaris? I first need to know whether Oracle will make sure it 
> lives or not.

Heh. The code is out there...there is stormos and nexenta so what Oracle 
does may not necessarily be the last nail on the coffin except for the 
sun cc build.


> 
>>> Esp for servers, you need a bare-bone setup and then install packages as
>>> per your requirements.
>>>      
>> Have you ever managed a cluster of servers and had to be prepared to
>> have them upgraded every six months ready to run the exact same
>> configuration without regressions?
>>
>>    
> 
> Upgrading servers every 6 months? Did I read it correctly? Or am I drunk?

What do you expect if you are mad enough to mandate Fedora? Of course, 
it is not you who get to suffer...it's your underlings who have to sort 
that out. PHBs are perpetually drunk.


> 
>> Since when did I ever mention customization? Do you even know what I am
>> talking about?
>>    
> 
> Then you need to explain exactly what you meant by it. If you use a 
> generic term, it can have multiple meanings.
> 

Oh, right, flexible. Let's take just one example, or maybe the only 
example since I never got round to taking a look at what else d-i had to 
offer (and no ubuntu-installer does not come close and is not suitable 
for mass rollouts...it is as you pointed out, a simple installer for the 
single desktop), partitioning, lvm and raid. You cannot use preseed and 
make recipes for both raid and lvm nor can you have exact partitioning. 
Guess why stuff like fai are around. Give me Debian, thank you very much.