Eps. 18 - Managing large number of Linux Systems with Automation

Running Time: 42:21

1) Introduction

2) News

Free Linux Training at the Linux Foundation:

http://linuxinstall.net/linux_news/2010/1/26/free-linux-training-webinars.html

Is the addition of Proprietary software in Ubuntu gonig to help or hurt?

http://linuxinstall .net/linux_news /2010/1/21/will-the-addition-of-proprietary-software-in-distros-hurt-fr.html

If Linux just did Blank it would be ready for Prime Time?

http://linuxinstall.net/linux_news/2010/1/25/if-linux-just-did-blank-it-would-be-ready-for-prime-time.html

3) Managing Large Numbers of Linux Systems

4) Conclusion

E-Mail us at podcast@linuxinstall.net

Go to the WebSite to call us via Google Voice

Follow us on Twitter @linuxinstall

Follow us on Indenti.ca as linuxinstall or http://identi.ca/linuxinstall

Look for us and comment on iTunes, odeo

Update on Tuesday, February 2, 2010 at 12:46AM by Brian "Wags" Wagner

Here is a cool how to for setting up a PXE configuration using Ubuntu.  Thought everyone might find it useful.

http://www.howtoforge.com/setting-up-a-pxe-install-server-on-ubuntu-9.10-p2

If Linux just did <blank> it would be ready for Prime Time

While surfing around looking for stories I came across this article on The ERACC Web Log.  The story is talking about how to many authors are writing articles about how Linux needs to just solve <insert thing that doesn't work to their expectation> and it will be ready for prime time.  He makes a lot of good points in the article about how very often these "issues" preventing Linux from taking over has little to do with the topics in most articles.

One of the next links I clicked on happen to be a great example of the problem he points out in a recent article found here on the Tom's Hardware Website.  The article is written by an ex-Microsfot Employee and converted closed source programmer by the name of Keith Curtis.  He thinks the reason Linux isn't ready for Prime Time becuase Linux is missing hardware drivers.  His real gripe is with the hardware makers not the linux community for most of the article.  What's obvious from the article is that he rarely, if ever, builds a system from scratch and then try to install Windows of any version on that machine.  If he did he would realize that the reality is that just because a driver is available doesn't mean it works as advertised.   

I recently purchased a new Dell computer for my wife.  When I went to add her new computer to our LAN the older Linksys Wireless G network card that I had in her previous computer was not recognized by Windows 7.  I had to login to a different computer and grab the Windows Vista driver, because there were no Windows 7 drivers.  This got the machine connected to the internet.  I solved the problem but had it been most of my non-technical friends and family they would have been unable to use the wireless network.  So since Cisco doesn't offer drivers for Windows 7 then why are we amazed when they don't offer them for Linux?  

No OS is perfect and the Linux is no exception.  People seem to be forgetting that companies like IBM, Sun and HP have spent more of their lives as companies running on proprietary hardware with almost no support for third party hardware.  They built successful and profitable Unix based products without good driver support from vendors.

Will the addition of proprietary software in distros hurt free software?

I found an interesting article today on the Linux Magazine site.  Christopher Smart talks about proprietary software being offered by Canonical, and utilizing it within Ubuntu.  This article point brings to light some very good questions and I am sure can be seen by both sides.  Those who are die hard, free software evangelists will not care for what Canonical is trying to accomplish.  While those who feel that proprietary software does have a place in Linux, will be opening their wallets to install software like Photoshop right into their distros.

Give the article a read and let us know how you feel.  Are you on the side of keeping all software within your distro open and free, or will you be installing some proprietary applications into your distro?

How do you argue with the no one to sue argument against Open Source?

In this weeks CTO-Brief we talk about how to counter the "No One to Sue Argument" against Open Source and Linux.  While less common every year the conversation keeps coming up.  Check it out and let us know how you defend against it.

Microsoft Exec Bach believes Mobile Linux is not stable enough...

In this Article at the Registers Hardware site the author talks about how Richard Bach, the Executive at Microsoft responsible for the Smart/Cell Phone Market,  believes that Linux will prove to be too unstable on cell phones.  Everyone I know with a Windows Mobile phone has to reboot it at least once a day.  I have rebooted my Droid four times since I got it back in Novemember.  One of those times was an Android Update.  So which one is more stable?  Really Windows on cell phones is about at Windows 95 stability levels.  In other words it works most of the time but always runs better after a good reboot.

Every OS and App will need to be rebooted perodically so that they can update the cell tower information, software, and just general good house cleaning.  So expecting the same stability out of your cell phone as say an old physical phone or even a wireless home phone is pretty unrealistic.  As long as the phone isn't rebooting while I am talking on it then you should be fine.

The reality is that none of the Cell Phone companies are giong to allow buggy phones on their network.  They want the happiest phone users and can't get that without stable phones.  So the only people that believe this is a real issue are sitting in Redmond drinking coffee with Mr. Bach.