Linux Adds to Super Computing Dominance

[celldweller1591]

Linux Adds to Super Computing Dominance: Good News for Linux Users

While it may not equal the hysteria of the iPad or the latest Android release, the news last week ranking the top 500 Super Computers in the world is significant, especially if you’re a Linux user. Why? Because Linux continues to dominant super computing. This year it’s added to its domination and occupies 470 of the top 500 spots. (The rest: 25 with Unix, mainly AIX, and Windows with only 5.) A detailed look at the OS breakdown can be found here. Jay Lyman also does a great breakdown of community vs paid Linux here.

We all rely on super computers ever day, even if we’re not aware of it. Super computers model our atmosphere so weathermen can make predictions accurately. (OK, maybe not the best example.) They are used in our nation’s defense. They are used for space travel and to model a virus’ spread through a population and to sequence the human genome.

So why do Linux users care? Because the work accomplished by the Super Computer manufacturers (IBM, HP, Fujitsu, Cray and so on) is poured back into the kernel and ends up helping all users. Just remember that today’s desktop PC was considered a super computer not that long ago. Advances in multi-core technology driven by super computing requirements of a few years ago are now used by financial services companies in trading applications to power their business.

One reason this is on my mind is we’re working on content for this year Linux End User Summit, happening in New York on October 10 - 12. There we gather the largest Linux end users in the world, including super computer customers and many financial services firms to collaborate with the developers and maintainers of Linux. Topics will include the real time kernel, low latency systems and how to monitor a kernel at sub 10 mili-second granularity. If you’re an end user pushing the capabilities of Linux, please join us here. We also have been closely working with the high performance computing industry at our CollaborationSummits, with last year’s HPC track especially well done.

And the super computer business is growing. Last week Fujitsu announced they are aiming for $1billion in super computer sales and are building what they expect to be the world’s fastest super computer. According to this BusinessWeek article, their computer “will string together 80,000 processers and be able to perform 10 quadrillion calculations in a second, more than four times as many as the current record holder.” Obviously, super computing and other high performance users push Linux in ways that mobile, desktop and enterprise users do not. While we all benefit from the scientific advances of super computing, we are working hard so Linux users and the Linux ecosystem will continue to benefit.

Source

[manu somasekhar]

yup linux roxxxx

[celldweller1591]

yup linux roxxxx

Ofcourse it does

[Sam]

only if most of the PC users (simple home users, except gamers) knows its better to go with Linux than those pirated Windows.

[The Unknown]

Originally Posted by Sam.Shab

only if most of the PC users (simple home users, except gamers) knows its better to go with Linux than those pirated Windows.

+1
I recently convinced two friends to start using Linux. One of them has already started with Arch Linux (of course, I'd installed it at this house), the other one will do when he gets his laptop because the desktop has no disk space left.
Another one, who's trying Ubuntu latest (got the cd from shipit.ubuntu.com) is facing a lot of problems. The latest ubuntu seems to be toooooo buggy

This can put down newbies IMO even after they realize that Linux is better than Windows for non-gamers.

[gopi_vbboy]

good............

[manu somasekhar]

@The Unknown You are correct.

[celldweller1591]

The latest ubuntu seems to be toooooo buggy

Not that much but ya i has got some probs but they are not hard to solve. New users when get even a small problem, say "its full of bugs" . They are used to getting 0 bugs and even if the get 1, they are not used to troubleshooting and you know that windows uses always go for reinstall. Trust me on that one. Probably Maverick will be buggy coz it will be total tranformation of ubuntu so for the first time, it will be buggy but after devs,community and user efforts it will be improved.

[The Unknown]

Originally Posted by celldweller1591

Not that much but ya i has got some probs but they are not hard to solve. New users when get even a small problem, say "its full of bugs" . They are used to getting 0 bugs and even if the get 1, they are not used to troubleshooting and you know that windows uses always go for reinstall. Trust me on that one. Probably Maverick will be buggy coz it will be total tranformation of ubuntu so for the first time, it will be buggy but after devs,community and user efforts it will be improved.

Well, I know one person Narendra Sisodiya who has been using Linux for quite a long time and has been the major factor in starting many FOSS projects across India. If you know about the recent inclusion of Linux in NCERT's syllabus, it was done by him. He too tweeted that Ubuntu latest was too buggy right on the release day of ubuntu. (@nsisodiya).

[celldweller1591]

He too tweeted that Ubuntu latest was too buggy right on the release day of ubuntu.

Hmm..me and my friends didnt got that much bugs so that i would say its too buggy but ya its marked a change in ubuntu looks and performance. So may be buggy for some hardware or other like mine. And ya Wubi was real buggy when it came with first stable release. I am running it with acpi=off else it freezes out everytime. I had to manually mount some partitions but now i work fine with it. W8ing for Maverick now !

[The Unknown]

Originally Posted by celldweller1591

Hmm..me and my friends didnt got that much bugs so that i would say its too buggy but ya its marked a change in ubuntu looks and performance. So may be buggy for some hardware or other like mine. And ya Wubi was real buggy when it came with first stable release. I am running it with acpi=off else it freezes out everytime. I had to manually mount some partitions but now i work fine with it. W8ing for Maverick now !

Fedora and Arch is the best IMO. I was a fedora user some six months ago, then moved to Arch to get the real Linux feel.

[celldweller1591]

Arch to get the real Linux feel.

Arch and Slackware are awesome

[Goten]

I m a Fedora 13 user....Works like a charm and I can even install windows based programs.....It rox and equivalent to my windows fetched needs.

[The Unknown]

Enough. Don't turn this thread into a distro war.

[Ecko]

@The Unknown
Ubuntu is still a Kid in front of Redhat n Suse
IMO its doing much much better than both and them in simplifying Linux
Rest assured bugs are easily removable...Cause I myself handle them all d day

[abhijangda]

really Linux roxxxxx!!!!!!!
but Fedora i think is best of them.
and Ubuntu isn't a kid in front of Redhat n Suse. Redhat n Suse are designed to fulfill requirements of companies, but ubuntu is a linux used on desktop computers. so u cant compare Ubuntu against Redhat n Suse. also Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSuse are equally good, every linux having its pros and cons.

[The Unknown]

Originally Posted by abhijangda

really Linux roxxxxx!!!!!!!
but Fedora i think is best of them.
and Ubuntu isn't a kid in front of Redhat n Suse. Redhat n Suse are designed to fulfill requirements of companies, but ubuntu is a linux used on desktop computers. so u cant compare Ubuntu against Redhat n Suse. also Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSuse are equally good, every linux having its pros and cons.

There's a problem with Redhat/CentOS on server. It contains highly outdated software which contains security holes like hell. A hacker (as a facebook comment) told me that exploiting CentOS/RHEL was much easier than doing the same with any others like Arch Linux, Fedora.

I consider Arch Linux best for server because in Arch, you know what stuff is installed and if some hacking occurs, the application which exposed the hole can be found out. Also Arch offers latest software, the software update arrives almost the next day its released officially on the project's website. But this has a disadvantage too - as newer versions come up, chances of bugs come up because features are added.

So its a big dilemma for server admins about what to do
I still prefer arch

[Liverpool_fan]

Originally Posted by The Unknown

There's a problem with Redhat/CentOS on server. It contains highly outdated software which contains security holes like hell. A hacker (as a facebook comment) told me that exploiting CentOS/RHEL was much easier than doing the same with any others like Arch Linux, Fedora.

I consider Arch Linux best for server because in Arch, you know what stuff is installed and if some hacking occurs, the application which exposed the hole can be found out. Also Arch offers latest software, the software update arrives almost the next day its released officially on the project's website. But this has a disadvantage too - as newer versions come up, chances of bugs come up because features are added.

So its a big dilemma for server admins about what to do
I still prefer arch

As far as I know, CentOS/RHEL actually receives regular security updates particularly RHEL via Red Hat Network (CentOS also gets updates for me), even though packages are somewhat outdated. Also in CentOS/RHEL packages are intensely tested before being deployed and actually enhancing the security in the process. CentOS/RHEL also has SELinux configured which greatly enhances the security of a server/workstation. I doubt you can trust a Facebook Comment regarding the "lack of security" in CentOS/RHEL. It is not like the Red Hat team just releases RHEL and just leaves it in the wild.
Fedora is more like less tested code, which Red Hat deploys for developers and providing base for RHEL, and I rather doubt it offers enhanced security over CentOS/RHEL.
In fact I would believe it is more insecure to have Arch as a server as most of the code is not adequately tested and there's even more possibility of loopholes for hackers to exploit, just a thought.
As for choosing which packages are installed you can do the same for CentOS at least even though it is not really the Arch's style.

---------- Post added at 02:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Garbage

/me can sense the postings are going offtopic...

/me feels the need to tell there's a function of Reporting Posts available in the forum and can be freely used.
/me also feels it is not wise to increase post count like this
/me also says take no offense, just a thought

[Garbage]

Originally Posted by Liverpool_fan

/me feels the need to tell there's a function of Reporting Posts available in the forum and can be freely used.
/me also feels it is not wise to increase post count like this
/me also says take no offense, just a thought

Feel free to add your valuable offtopic comments to the thread. I ain't gonna report. I don't give a sh!t about that.
I'm out of this. I've deleted my post and will delete this as well as soon as you quote/reply this.
Happy posting!
And I don't care about my post count. Who the hell care about that? Do you, kid?

[The Unknown]

*ahem*, this is Opensource my friend; where security updates are released ASAP. And about SELinux, it can be configured irrespective of the system; You need to recompile the kernel that's all. Arch developers leave the choice of maintaining the system however the admin wants, it doesn't force anything by default. (Arch supports SeLinux: SELinux - ArchWiki).

Well this distro war has gone quite far. Lets stop it, ultimately the finger will be upon me because I was favoring Arch; but the war was started by someone else.

.

[duh]

my view on linux?
its for misers, cheap A-Holes, conscious and thoughtful, who cares a flying whatever to whoever says. i will say he, i am not sexist, but mostly FOSS is 98% male dominated.
my question here?
well, any OS is good and nice, if the user knows what he is doing. if the user doesnt know jack squat of what to do with it? then OS's like openbsd and hardened gentoo is utter useless, so this applies to M$'s OS's too.
windows can also be hardened, but the issue is the price involved, man power, documentation, software hours, et al, various conditions, a joe user will never care to click on even auto fetch the necessary security updates in windows.
now coming to FOSS (like bsds, linuxes, solaris, et al), the user must know WTF to do, if the user guesses like one post "how to be a hacker" then the sexiest OS knitted with almost all features related to security and stability is void.
so when it comes to BSD, Linux, Unix et al? i will say YMMV, and certainly; BSD, Linux, Unix are more superior than M$ and Apple products.
a joe linux user, who doesnt know how to compile his custom kernel and patch up the security holes? then what good admin is he?
i am a debianphile, because of their auditing system and strict policy, and when its stable? i hardly see any update, damn good. debian rules. adore LFS->/BLFS->/HLFS, still too lazy to automate everything in LFS. my choice debian. and seriously with the so much hype about ubuntu, wtf is ubuntu?
glusterfs was ranked number 2 unofficially in super computer market in 2005-2006 and 3 rd officially, we got clustering via beowulf clusters and clusterfs and many more redundancy and fault tolerant clustering file system. so still linux and BSD and other FOSS unix are wayyyyyy ahead.
MAC and Windows, see ya.