Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu vs RHEL in enterprise computing

markshuttleworth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–25 of 25 posts

Re: Ubuntu vs RHEL in enterprise computing

#21

Post by peterwwillis »

Is Ubuntu a supported platform for proprietary enterprise software & hardware the way RHEL is? Most of the time i've seen RHEL picked not only for its own support contracts but because it's supported by vendors like Oracle, Dell, RSA, VMware, etc. I'm sure apt has the same core features as rpm/yum, and probably similar stability with regards to patchsets, but vendor support is the killer enterprise feature for any distro.

(P.S. it's true that CentOS is used a lot in place of RHEL for cost cutting; they just change the redhat-release files and RPM provides and lie to the vendors about the platform)

Re: Ubuntu vs RHEL in enterprise computing

#22

Post by nknight »

cs702 wrote: post #20
trotsky wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debian and ubuntu are clearly two substantially different distributions with different packages, policies and goals. As are RHEL and Fedora. The only difference between Centos and RHEL is some branding and whether you paid a license fee.

There's one other important difference between RHEL and CentOS: many enterprise applications are certified for the former but not the latter. (Many corporations and governmental organizations are not allowed by internal IT policy to use CentOS for critical applications.)

Those same, clueless organizations prohibit use of Ubuntu, too, because RHEL is the only thing they've certified. None of this changes how badly misleading and disingenuous Mark's statements are.

Re: Ubuntu vs RHEL in enterprise computing

#23

Post by Terretta »

trotsky wrote: post #7
cs702 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find the post misleading at all: it points to a meaningful shift in OS adoption. See Mark's response here: http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1072#comment-394295

Debian and ubuntu are clearly two substantially different distributions with different packages, policies and goals. As are RHEL and Fedora. The only difference between Centos and RHEL is some branding and whether you paid a license fee.

I'd like to toss Amazon Linux into the ring as well.

I know we're moving our various cloud boxes from Ubuntu 10.04 LTS to Amazon Linux 2011.09 whenever we have time to spare.

Access to the Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) repository is pre-configured as well.

Re: Ubuntu vs RHEL in enterprise computing

#24

Post by Terretta »

illumin8 wrote: post #12
trotsky wrote: post #2

Check out the source: http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-linux/all/all Specifically, Mark fails to mention that Centos is listed separately from RHEL in the survey, and when added together they come to 41%, more than twice that of Ubuntu. I'm a Canonical fan, I'm typing this on 12.04 right now, but that seems a bit misleading.

It's also misleading because he talks about "large scale enterprise workloads," when he really should mention that their marketshare is almost entirely Linux desktop workstations. Most server workloads are entirely RHEL and CentOS.

Don't forget the increasing Amazon Linux 2011.09 usage as well.
Post reply on HN