Is there a good place to compare the advantages/disadvantages of the different flavors of Unix for an enterprise level network? I'm having trouble understanding why some organizations go with Solaris, some with Linux, others AIX or HP-UX. Does it depend largely on the needs and usage of the network or is it more dependent on what the organization has used in the past and the easiest path of upgrade and migration?

Someone smart please enlighten me.

..

And if this turns into an argument over which flavor is better, that's cool too. Have at it.

6/25/2008 6:33:23 PM

Not only will it turn into a flame war over what is better.. But it will also turn into a flame war that Unix is not Linux/Solaris/AIX/etc.

This should be fun.


On topic. You can go to http://www.distrowatch.com and get some ideas on the different flavors.

6/25/2008 7:17:53 PM

There isn't a best Unix or Linux distro for each type of organization. It really depends on a lot of factors such as

1. Applications
2. Expertise in-house
3. Budget
4. Architecture and hardware support required
5. Insource vs Outsourced IT staff
6. Pre-existing vendor relationships
7. Integration requirements with other business systems
8. Stability/uptime requirements

6/25/2008 7:51:41 PM

enterprise unix, I'd go for freebsd if it must be unix or redhat if it can be whatever. enterprise is all about support and consistency and RHEL is about the best distro for it. aix and hpux are not supported by their manufacturers anymore fyi.

6/25/2008 9:03:42 PM

Ok, so I was under the impression that Unix was sorta an umbrella term that encapsulated different operating systems (Solaris, Linux(SuSe, RH, Fedora, etc), AIX, HP-UX).

Why is Unix not an applicable term?

Is it sorta like how Linux has branched off into different sub-versions itself?

And why is RHEL the hot shit currently? Why do so many large scale corporations run Solaris 10?

6/25/2008 9:16:18 PM

Quote :

"Ok, so I was under the impression that Unix was sorta an umbrella term that encapsulated different operating systems (Solaris, Linux(SuSe, RH, Fedora, etc), AIX, HP-UX)."

To some that is correct. To the hardcore, they will fight you to the death if you call anything but Unix, Unix.(same with the others) There are wine snobs and there are computer snobs. Same type of people basically. Technically there are core differences in a lot of areas that separate all the above and it would take days and days to get into the details that separate them. But for the generic conversation I accept the umbrella. But if you need to get into trouble shooting specific problems or software install/maintenance/etc then each of the above has it's own unique ways to go about things.

Quote :

" Why is Unix not an applicable term? "

why is beer not wine.. I mean they both have alcohol in them.

Quote :

" Is it sorta like how Linux has branched off into different sub-versions itself? And why is RHEL the hot shit currently? Why do so many large scale corporations run Solaris 10? "

They all basically branched off Unix or whatever you wanna call the first *nix from back in the 60s.


RHEL is basically name recognition. You get to pay for their support. Makes people feel good inside to know they can pick up the phone and call some one to fix their stuff. If you hire good Linux people you can use CenTOS and not pay Red Hat.

6/25/2008 9:36:26 PM

the only reason i am using red hat right now is because georgia tech already had a corporate unlimited license

6/25/2008 9:42:42 PM

This is the biggest difference of them all.

Quote :

"2. Expertise in-house"

Suggestion: Hire someone that can support CentOS or RHEL and go for it.

Alternately, just find someone that is familiar with running a Unix/Linux server that does what you expect it to do. But again it all comes down to experience. Or the willingness to pay someone smart to sit down for 6+ months and learn then implement.

6/25/2008 9:53:41 PM

Quote :

"aix and hpux are not supported by their manufacturers anymore fyi."

You wouldn't know that from http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/p/os/aix/index.html and http://h20338.www2.hp.com/hpux11i/cache/324545-0-0-0-121.html

6/25/2008 10:31:09 PM

yeah, really you just want to hire a competent sysadmin

you know, preferably one who communes with wizards on the regular.

6/25/2008 11:29:27 PM

I may be incorrect, but I believe my company has to contract support for both hp-ux 10.20 and aix from other support vendors

6/25/2008 11:47:07 PM

aix is supported by ibm

i would agree that it may not be the cheapest to go through ibm though

6/25/2008 11:58:52 PM

mmmmmm

6/26/2008 2:04:21 AM

Quote :

"Ok, so I was under the impression that Unix was sorta an umbrella term that encapsulated different operating systems (Solaris, Linux(SuSe, RH, Fedora, etc), AIX, HP-UX)."

The original Unixes, ATT and BSD, split off into lots of Unix operating systems like FreeBSD, AIX, Solaris, HPUX, BSDI, etc.

Linux was built from Minix but contained no source code from any of the Unix family. It was designed to be a free clone of Unix that runs on commodity PC hardware with free software license. When Linux started, there was not a free Unix operating system that ran on PC hardware.

Linux itself is just a kernel, the whole rest of the Linux operating systems are based on Unix clone utilities from GNU/Free Software Foundation.

6/26/2008 2:25:12 AM

So did Red Hat just build and release a version of Linux that is badass enough for a enterprise level environment and hire people to support it?

What about high-availability? Is one version better for a clustered, high-availability environment? I hear VCS is kinda a big deal.

6/26/2008 7:04:33 AM

my favorite flavor of unix: grape

6/26/2008 7:13:59 AM

Quote :

"So did Red Hat just build and release a version of Linux that is badass enough for a enterprise level environment and hire people to support it?"

Yes, you pay for support and things like security fixes, bug fixes, and QA.

Quote :

"What about high-availability? Is one version better for a clustered, high-availability environment? I hear VCS is kinda a big deal."

There seems to be a lot of high-availability solutions out there. We have Cluster Suite for high-availability and LVS for load-balancing. Honestly, both are not for the faint of heart, though.

6/26/2008 8:07:50 AM

chocolate

6/26/2008 9:02:02 AM

Quote :

"Honestly, both are not for the faint of heart, though."

how so?

6/26/2008 6:06:23 PM

I like j00nix and Eunix

6/26/2008 7:15:39 PM

^^ bitch and a half to set up

Fairly simple setups aren't too bad, but start doing something somewhat complicated or something breaks and you could be in a world of hurt. There's so many different components and some are very dependent on the other doing what it's supposed to. Most problems stem from the documentation not being quite up to snuf, though.

6/26/2008 8:20:19 PM

vax/vms for the win

6/26/2008 10:37:17 PM