Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?
-
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@scottalanmiller said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@scottalanmiller said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
CentOS is also the Dom0 of XenServer. So you get great overlap there for people using that.
yet the XO guys are using Ubuntu instead of CentOS
Ubuntu's kool-aid is hard to resist.
It's marketed to non-IT and/or non-Linux people heavily, which is part of what makes it bad for Linux people.... so much of how it is used and why people use it is bad.
It's marketed heavily to them but a lot of devs use it too.
They do a lot of interesting things. Juju, MaaS, LXD, Landscape, etc. Things that are really useful that no one else has.
I agree with you, LXD is a big big thing. There are valid alternatives to Juju. With LXD and Juju I can do an LXD-based full OpenStack deployment on my LAPTOP. 13 Containers and 16 Gb of ram… it works and is decently fast.
CentOS is the gold standard, but Ubuntu has gained really A LOT of traction in the last year. I was one of the anti-ubuntu guy before the 16.04.
-
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@scottalanmiller said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@scottalanmiller said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
CentOS is also the Dom0 of XenServer. So you get great overlap there for people using that.
yet the XO guys are using Ubuntu instead of CentOS
Ubuntu's kool-aid is hard to resist.
It's marketed to non-IT and/or non-Linux people heavily, which is part of what makes it bad for Linux people.... so much of how it is used and why people use it is bad.
It's marketed heavily to them but a lot of devs use it too.
They do a lot of interesting things. Juju, MaaS, LXD, Landscape, etc. Things that are really useful that no one else has.
Devs are non-IT and generally non-Linux people, too
-
@Francesco-Provino said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
CentOS is the gold standard, but Ubuntu has gained really A LOT of traction in the last year. I was one of the anti-ubuntu guy before the 16.04.
It has improved a lot but I still don't see a compelling value from it or reason to really consider it. It's far more adequate than it has been, but in a market of such good competition, what's really the reason for it?
-
@scottalanmiller CentOS, because of what SAM said.
-
@Tim_G said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@scottalanmiller CentOS, because of what SAM said.
You'd think that people would have learned that by now
-
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
-
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
-
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
-
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
-
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
-
This post is deleted! -
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
Like I said, I never had any instability issues with it. It always ran fine for me.
-
It's not a question of if it will work or not. <insert Linux flavor here> will run any service just fine. You can run a web server on Linux Mint without issue. Just like you could run a basic file server on Windows XP, that doesn't mean you should.
But when we are talking about what's best for Enterprise server stability, CentOS without question.
-
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
-
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
-
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Didn't know that. I only use CentOS currently.
