Archive for the 'IBM' Category
Thursday, April 3rd, 2008
Who really writes “Linux”? A special report from the Linux Foundation
Steven posted a good eWeek article summarizing the recent Linux Foundation report on who writes and contributes to the Linux kernel development. Too many have written blogs with titles like “who writes Linux” that I had to put “Linux” in quotes in my title. The reason is that this document/report is about the Linux kernel and there are many things that people commonly associate with “Linux” that are outside the kernel. Think of Gnome which is written by the Gnome community, KDE which is sponsored by Trolltech, package management tools from Red Hat, Debian or Novell (e.g. YaST, Apt Yum), a multitude of libraries, and even OpenOffice which is still controlled by Sun, but now with contributions from IBM.
So I would agree this report is fantastic – it provides a view into what’s going on beyond what we “think” happens. The Linux kernel community is a great success story in what Amanda calls “mass community collaboration” – even more ironic because there are many competitors, vendors, academics, hobbyists, customers and other random experts collaborating in one place.
Read the report (it’s “free as in beer”) and find out everything you wanted to know about Linux kernel development (including perhaps that IBM is the #3 contributor to the kernel). The story this report tells is a truly unique feature of the Linux community. You won’t see it anywhere in the communities or practices of other OSs, no matter how “open” they proclaim to have become.
The report is interesting in how it also debunks some myths that somehow get spread around. For instance, some have said “kernel development will slow down as the features catch up to UNIX/Windows”. Not true.
Some have said “Linux is just IBM” or “Linux is just Red Hat” trying to position Linux as dominated or caused by one entity that they’re not fond of. Again, not true (see the section of the report on Contributors).
Finally, take a look at how some end user companies are participating and reaping the benefits of a true collaborative development community. Did you know your next VW will be powered by Linux? Did you ever think the same features that make an auto’s systems “crash-proof” could also help on a server or mobile phone? The VW bullet is a pure example of innovation being applied to adjacent spaces – it would never happen in Windows, AIX or Solaris.
- Companies like Sony, Nokia, and Samsung ship Linux as a component of products like video cameras, television sets, and mobile telephones. Working with the development process helps these companies ensure that Linux will continue to be a solid base for their products in the future.
- Companies which are not in the information technology business can still find working with Linux beneficial. The 2.6.25 kernel will include an implementation of the PF_CAN network protocol which was contributed by Volkswagen. PF_CAN allows for reliable communications between components in an interference-prone environment – such as that found in an automobile. Linux gave Volkswagen a platform upon which it could build its networking code; the company then found it worthwhile to contribute the code back so that it could be maintained with the rest of the kernel. http://lwn.net/Articles/253425/ for more information on this work.
So with that I will end my praises and simply point you to the source over at the LF website here.
Monday, March 31st, 2008
Adobe joins the Linux Foundation!
Awesome news from Jim and David! Hey, better late than never ;-)
“Adobe’s decision to join the LF is a natural extension of its commitment to open standards and open source, which demonstrates its leadership and foresight in the software industry,” said Jim Zemlin, executive director at The Linux Foundation. “Adobe’s membership will contribute to our goal of increasing even more application development on Linux with a specific emphasis on Web 2.0 applications.”
“Adobe delivers key RIA technologies for Linux users, such as Adobe® Flash® Player and now Adobe AIR™, to deploy RIAs in the browser and on the desktop,” said David McAllister, director of standards and open source at Adobe. “The Linux Foundation is a valuable resource, providing a forum where we can work with the community to ensure Adobe RIA technologies are compatible across the Linux software platform.”
This makes perfect strategic sense for Adobe. I can’t wait to see more Adobe desktop apps running on Linux. Adobe will be at the LF Summit and I believe are participating in DAM.
Press release here: http://linux-foundation.org/weblogs/press/2008/03/30/adobe-joins-linux-foundation-with-focus-on-linux-for-web-20-applications/
Friday, March 7th, 2008
The Linux Foundation is looking for a Community Manager: it could be you!
If you read my blog, you’re a potentially interested party for a new Community Manager position at the Linux Foundation. One perk they didn’t list is that someone in this position will also get great visibility and interaction with the Linux leads and team members at the various member organizations (e.g. IBM, HP, Intel, AMD, Oracle, etc. etc.). If you’re interested in the Linux community, this is a great position to be in.
http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/Jobs#Linux_Foundation_Community_Manager
Linux Foundation Community Manager
Linux Foundation Community Manager
We’re looking for world class talent to join the non-profit organization that is accelerating Linux. If you’re passionate about Linux, there is no better place to work. We have a unique opportunity for the right individual to make a huge difference in Linux.
The Community Manager must have both a technical and business view of key issues facing Linux and can do the following:
- Organize workgroups by galvanizing member leaders and participants. Push agendas on calls and in Collaboration Summit meetings. Recruit the right people and enable them to lead the workgroups. This person will be the LF liaison between us and our members.
- Build community in these workgroups and in the general LF online presence by writing content, recruiting volunteers to write content and managing new web properties and strategies. This is a chance for you to be creative and be a thought leader.
- Be a technical source for Linux issues for LF management and prepare them for press and speaking opps in specific areas of expertise.
- Handle details around LF workgroups and advisory councils. You will own these groups so you are responsible for everytihng, down to the details. If you’re used to a large staff to handle details for you, this is probably not the right job for you.
- Assist LF staff with conference and events. This could be writing and leading workgroup sessions, recruiting the right people, speaking at conferences, etc.
- Assist engineering in LSB content and community. (Moderating forums, recruiting participants, etc. for a new Web property.)
- You must understand the Linux ecosystem, especially server-related Linux issues, and be technical. (You don’t have to be a kernel programmer but you need to know who they are individually. If someone says GCC you know what that means.)
- You need to be able to express yourself in writing but just as importantly you need to be able to organize and run a meeting. You need to be able to do details and get things done but also have a big picture view.
- You have to be politically savvy and understand motivations and sensitivities of divergent people and groups.
- Web programming or at least a high proficiency in new web strategies is preferred.
If you’d like to apply for this job, please send your resume to angela (at) linux-foundation (dot) org.
Wednesday, February 27th, 2008
SELinux really does work as intended (and mitigates casualties)
Just saw this interesting update on some of the real world successes of SELinux.
Linux security experts are reporting a growing list of real-world security situations in which the US National Security Agency’s SELinux security framework contains the damage resulting from a flaw in other software. These so-called “mitigations” are showing that a Linux feature that began as an esoteric security measure is starting to prove its worth.
The article also references Dan Walsh’s LiveJournal entry here.
Friday, February 22nd, 2008
NYLUG’s Jim Gleason Presents on KVM
It’s great to see Jim hitting the streets in his new gig at Qumranet. Hopefully my schedule will allow me to travel between IBM sites and make it out next Wed. Note that you will need to rsvp at the NYLUG site.
Wednesday, February 27th, 2008
6:30pm-8:00 PM
IBM
590 Madison Ave, 12th Floor
corner of 57th Street
** RSVP Closes at 4:30pm the day of the meeting (sharp!) ***
Please RSVP for EVERY meeting at this time.
Register at http://rsvp.nylug.org/
PLEASE NOTE: This meeting is at IBM, not Google!
Jim Gleason – on – The Next Wave of Virtualization
Kernel-based Virtual Machine and its impact on the desktop Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) is a Linux kernel virtualization infrastructure and open source hypervisor that provides both full and para-virtualization capabilities for Linux on commodity x86 hardware that contain the virtualization extensions from Intel and AMD. KVM is currently implemented as a loadable Linux kernel module. In late 2006, it was first included in Linux kernel 2.6.20 and and first shipped with OpenSuse 10.1 and Fedora 6.
Since KVM is part of Linux, KVM leverages the scheduler, memory management and other key resources in the Linux kernel, unlike VMware and Xen which must create their own custom mechanisms. Thus, KVM development focuses exclusively on the next-wave virtualization, while Xen and VMWare must also maintain these ‘forked’ non-Linux resources.
All of the core KVM developers, including Avi Kavity, work at the firm, Qumranet, which launched a desktop virtualization solution called Solid ICE that leverages KVM. Qumranet is the creator, maintainer and global sponsor of the KVM Open Source Hypervisor Project. Other high-ranking Linux kernel developers such as Rusty Russell and Anthony Liguori of IBM, Ingo Molnar of Red Hat, and Andrea Archangeli formerly of Novell, devote most of their time to KVM development.
What is the Next Wave of Virtualization?
Qumranet has gone beyond conventional server virtualization and application streaming by completely virtualizing end users’ desktop machines. From a browser on a thin client or PC, users access their desktop work environment over the network via a virtual machine running on a centralized server. The end result is a seamless end user work experience, just like a physical PC on a LAN. This is a high-level talk which will focus on the breakthrough Linux technology KVM, and its impact on the virtualization market.
About Jim Gleason:
Jim has been providing emerging technology to early adopters in the Financial Serivces Sector for the past ten years. Widely regarded as the person who brought Linux to Wall Street, Jim sold the first production Linux cluster to Goldman Sachs in 1998. Jim was also an early Internet pioneer having closed deals for the first official web sites of Charles Schwab, VISA, and all of Hewlett-Packard’s original web sites in 1993. Jim is also the Founder of the NY Linux Users Group and currently works at Qumranet in the capacity of Vice President of Sales.
Meeting Location:
Please note that this meeting will be held at IBM, 590 Madison Ave, 12th floor, corner of 57th Street, and not at Google. This is the building with the IBM logo on the front of the building.
Books!!!
Our friends at Prentice-Hall kindly provide us with review copies of various new titles. One of these could be yours, all you have to do is agree to review the book within a reasonable period of time.
Friday, February 15th, 2008
IBM’s System p 570 server wins prestigious Nikkei Award for Superiority and Datamation Enterprise Server of the Year
Here’s a shameless plug for the IBM team that designs POWER processors and servers. It looks like the Nikkei found the new POWER6 based p570 servers quite compelling. (Unfortunately, they forgot to mention the 570 is a screaming system for Linux – not just UNIX). Nonetheless, this is a great award for the IBM Power team and as you can see the “green” and energy savings efficiencies that the team built into the server contributed to IBM’s leadership and success. Having the fastest system “twice as other companies” while keeping the same power envelope seems to have been a successful strategy ;-)
“Nikkei Business Daily Awards for Superiority – Server “IBM System p 570” by IBM Japan” – IBM Japan released the first UNIX high-performance server after an interval of 3 years. The processing ability has been improved twice as other companies, compatible with keeping power consumption to be equivalent to their existing servers. Core part of CPU (central processing unit) is equipped with the latest version, “POWER6” released by IBM. Operating frequency, which shows processing ability, is 4.7GHz – giga is 1 billion- , and this is the first time to reach 4 GHz. Both Japan and U.S. engineers of IBM jointly developed this server to resolve the serious problem of increasing the power consumption.”
In news closer to home, Datamation just announced the same p570 server “easily won” the Enterprise Server of the year.
Enterprise Server
Whether a server is the “best” server is, in truth, based on your company’s individual needs and budgets. In the server world, with its myriad options and add-ons, one size definitely does not fit all. That said, IBM p 570 Server must fit plenty of needs; the box easily won the Enterprise Server category. IBM claims this workhorse doubles the speed of its predecessor without requiring a larger energy footprint.
The other nominees were all well-regarded boxes: the IBM System x3950 M2 Server, the HP MediaSmart Server, and the Dell PowerEdge 2970.
Wednesday, February 13th, 2008
Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit Speakers are Lining Up
Speakers for 2nd Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit Announced!
We are pleased to announce the speaker line up for the upcoming Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit at the Austin Supercomputing Center. The speakers, like the attendees of the summit, represent leaders from the developer, industry and end user communities surrounding Linux. Don’t miss the opportunity to collaborate with these individuals on April 8-10, 2008 at the UT Austin Supercomputing Center.
Speakers for the Panel and Keynote Showcase on April 8 already include:
- Kernel maintainers and developers James Bottomley, Jon Corbet, Dave Jones, Christoph Lameter, Ted Ts’o, Chris Wright and others will discuss the state of the Linux kernel community
- Dan Frye, head of IBM’s Linux Technology Center, Christine Martino, vice president of the Open Source & Linux Organization at HP and Wim Coekaerts, vice president of Linux Engineering for Oracle will share their perspective on what Linux means to their companies and where it’s headed
- Senior representatives from LiMO, Open Handset Alliance, Moblin, OpenMoko, LiPS and others will discuss Linux and mobile: why it’s so strong and where it’s going
- Linux is now shipping on multiple hardware offerings. Hear from John Hull of Dell, Bdale Garbee of HP and representatives of ASUS, Acer, Everex and Lenovo on why they chose Linux and what they need from the Linux community to make it succeed
- IDC Analyst Al Gillen will share important new data on Linux deployment worldwide
- MySQL CEO Marten Mikos will discuss his company’s recent billion dollar acquisition by Sun Microsystems and MySQL’s continued commitment to the Linux platform.
This is truly an unbelievable assortment of people. The Collaboration Summit will have representatives from all the big names in Linux from Intel, AMD, HP, Texas Instruments, Google, NTT, Fujitsu, Hitachi, Dell, Red Hat, Novell, NEC, Sony, Motorola, Mozilla, GNOME Foundation, Nokia, Bull and dozens more. Additionally, the first day is an opportunity to meet press and analysts from eWeek, InformationWeek, BusinessWeek, Gartner Group, IDC and more.
Last year’s event filled up quickly. Please apply to attend this event if you feel you should be there:
ttps://www.linux-foundation.org/events/collaboration
This unique, invitation-only event bring together the brightest minds in the Linux ecosystem from the kernel, end user, desktop, legal and vendor communities to collaborate on the advancement of the Linux platform. Attendees can expect purposive discussion, examination and debate through engaging plenary session content and workgroup meetings. Breakout sessions contain all the domain expertise and key
players necessary to make immediate contributions to the platform.
You can see more detailed agenda information here:
https://www.linux-foundation.org/events/collaboration/program/agenda
This is a *free* event for LF members or key individuals needed to advance the Linux platform.
Additional benefits include:
• Special networking evening reception “Shark vs. Penguin” on Tuesday night in downtown Austin. Food, drinks and transportation provided.
• IBM Reception and Solutions Experience Lab Tour on Wednesday evening, including food and drinks.
Monday, February 4th, 2008
IBM’s Bob Sutor responds to Microsoft’s… nonsense and whining
Saw this article over at Ars today:
We spoke to Bob Sutor, vice president of standards and open source for IBM, who responded to Microsoft’s recent claims regarding IBM’s involvement in the OOXML dispute. “IBM believes that there is a revolution occurring in the IT industry, and that smart people around the world are demanding truly open standards developed in a collaborative, democratic way for the betterment of all,” Sutor told Ars. “If ‘business as usual’ means trying to foist a rushed, technically inferior and product-specific piece of work like OOXML on the IT industry, we’re proud to stand with the tens of countries and thousands of individuals who are willing to fight against such bad behavior.
Monday, February 4th, 2008
A processor market “I told you so”
It’s always interesting to see predictions like this one on processor innovations, volumes and success/failures actually coming true.
Saturday, January 26th, 2008
Coverage on IBM’s Open Collaboration Client Solution with Ubuntu
Saw a few articles today on IBM’s OCCS announcement with Ubuntu.
Satyadas said IBM thinks that this year, it will happen. “All the stars are lining up,” he said. “Everybody has been saying that since 2001 except IBM. We never said that, but we are saying that now.”
It’s easy to overlook IBM’s announcement that its Lotus Notes and Lotus Symphony suites will run on Ubuntu. I think this would be a mistake. IBM is not a dumb company. It’s not in the habit of wasting resources. For IBM to be partnering up with Ubuntu says something about the enterprise mindset on Ubuntu.
By porting key software to Linux, IBM is looking to give businesses one less reason to buy products from rival Microsoft — which IBM said offers “a proprietary desktop model.” IBM’s Linux efforts will “further address customer demands around choice,” said Inna Kuznetsova, an IBM executive with responsibility for Linux, in a statement.
Monday, January 21st, 2008
Ubuntu and IBM bring enterprise collaboration to a user friendly Linux desktop
I read this news release with great excitement and will take a shameless opportunity to plug what I think is a fantastic partnership. The news? IBM’s Lotus group has announced support of its Open Collaboration Client Solution (OCCS) for Ubuntu Linux. OCCS is a layer of rich client communications apps including IBM Lotus Notes 8.5 (Calendaring, Email), Sametime 7.x (Instant Messaging), and Symphony (OpenOffice in an Eclipse RCP form). I’ve switched to Ubuntu for my primary system at home for well over a year now and while I took a very short break to dabble in Fedora 8, I’m back on Ubuntu again. I’ve been using a RHEL5 base at work for over a year as well but now that we have Ubuntu support coming, I’ll probably switch to Ubuntu once the OCCS solution is released (yes, I work in a strategy group in IBM and I don’t use Windows or MS Office – and most people can’t tell). The thing about working in IBM is that everyone uses Notes, Sametime, and ODF is even becoming more popular so there’s very little that prevents anyone from using Linux (or a Mac). Heck, many users can probably get away with an iPhone.
IBM also expanded the OCCS platform support with Red Hat EL Desktop and announced more partners around OCCS on Novell’s Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop (SLED).
What makes all this even better? Enterprise applications delivered in a rich client environment. Take for instance SAP, who today announced a joint product set with IBM that will be delivered through Lotus Notes (which we now know runs well on Linux)
The product, codenamed Atlantic, will allow users to access SAP’s Business Suite applications for workflows, reporting and analytics through IBM’s Lotus Notes desktop software.
So the ecosystem and vision is starting to come together. It’s early, but I would be remiss if I didn’t mention again that 2008 will be the year of the enterprise Linux client ;-) How many users will we be saying this for? :-) (Note, I didn’t say ‘desktop’ specifically, and I said ‘enterprise’). As we’ve been saying all along, there are certain segments of users that can easily do their work on a Linux client (many won’t even know it’s not Windows). Those companies who take advantage of user segmentation have a lot to benefit from both on pure cost alone, but also in the next round of negotiations on your non-Linux client systems ;-)
Friday, January 18th, 2008
Mike Strosaker Takes on Sun’s Predictive Self Healing Claims
Mike Strosaker has a couple points to make about Sun’s claims of predictive self healing relative to Linux. One thing I’ve noticed is that Sun (and Microsoft) always compare one of their features to Linux on Intel/AMD and ignore the capabilities of Linux on Power, Itanium or Mainframe platforms (which, btw are growing faster than Linux on x86). It’s time to wakeup and realize that Linux runs anywhere and takes on the capabilities of the hardware platform.
Check it out Mike’s comparison here for the details: http://zombieprocess.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/predictive-self-healing-on-linux-on-power/
Sun frequently touts their “predictive self-healing” implementation in Solaris 10. I wonder if that bullet point would be further down the list if they were familiar with the error detection, prediction, and correction capabilities of Linux on POWER platforms. In fact, the Linux on POWER implementation precedes the Solaris 10 implementation by at least a year (Solaris 10 was released in January 2005; SLES 8 had this solution for POWER in 2003, and RHEL 3 had it in 2004 at the latest).
Monday, January 14th, 2008
Toshiba Spurs Engine: Cell processors in laptops and TVs … could it be an x86 and Power/Cell race in the datacenter?
There’s always a flood of news coming out of CES, but one that I find interesting that also impacts the server and technology market is a bit of news from Toshiba. As this video shows, Toshiba has embedded a Cell BE processor (yes, the same ones in PS3s) into a laptop and a television. The reason is that the Cell processor is far more capable of handling video rendering and stream computing than a typical general processor such as you find from Intel or AMD.
Now you may watch the video and then wonder ‘what the heck does this imply for the server market?’ and you’d be right to ask. Interestingly, Scott Handy from IBM recently did an interview with The Register and gave everyone the answer. The processor marketplace for desktops, laptops, mobile devices and servers requires huge volumes to provide economic returns to manufacturers. There is a huge capital investment that goes into every generation of processor not to mention all the IP that must be created to advance from one generation to the next. Similar to software sold on CD, producing the first chip may cost $1B and the second chip $500M, and it only gets cheaper as your volumes increase. In order to maintain a processor business profitably, chip makers live off volumes (hence the huge battles between Intel and AMD). Now the problem facing Intel for Itanium and Sun for SPARC is that these server technologies have no consumer application that will drive additional volumes. In terms of volume, the server market is a spec in chip consumption.
Yet the processor market is a rat race – vendors need enormous chip volumes to provide funding for future chip designs and whoever has the most funding, tends to produce the winning chips (see Intel for years despite competition from AMD). In fact one might point to Itanium as Intel’s decline – a chip that never saw the volumes needed to make it a competitive chip. Then as Intel was divesting profits from its x86 chips into Itanium chips, it suddenly found itself behind AMD. For a good grin, take a look at IDC’s forecasts for Itanium and the ‘revisions’ to those estimates. Heck, probably the only person to have worked around Itanium and advanced their career was Ashlee Vance.
Now look at Sun and SPARC and you see what used to be a high volume SPARC or UltraSPARC platform with many 1-4 way SPARC servers going into every datacenter giving Sun ‘good enough’ volumes to invest in future generations of processors. Then comes along Intel and Linux and Windows wiping out low end SPARC volume servers and cornering SPARC processors into a lower volume mid-high end server market. Without the funds for future generations of chips, Sun has to resort to stopgap measures craftily using old SPARC core designs in a Niagara multicore processor configuration. Regardless, that still doesn’t create high volume – the non-x86 server market is actually relatively low volume.
When you look at Power processors in everything from Mars rovers to cars, servers, printers and today it’s used in all 3 gaming systems (Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii). The gaming market alone consumes tens of millions of processors (far more than the server market). The Cell BE processor in the PS3 and IBM or Mercury Cell blades actually have 1 power core (PE) and 8 synergistic processing units (SPEs). The PE acts as a ‘router’ for instructions and data sent to the SPEs. So an application developer write much of the code similar to a power architecture when targeting a Cell based system. (Now I’m oversimplifying processor architectures a ton here, I’ll admit – but the point is not to debate the differences between PowerPC/POWER and Cell PE/SPE units… look at the big picture).
Now, going back to servers you can understand that winning in servers requires a high volume chip that funds future chip development and generates economic profits for the manufacturer. Without funds to invest in future chips, you lose the race. Once you view it all in this light, it becomes easier to see why the Power, ARM and Intel/AMD x86/x64 architectures are far ahead of other RISC or other architectures – they have volume. POWER6 was no small ‘speed bump’ – POWER6 is a fierce chip with raw compute power and system throughput that leapfrogged its competitors. It took economic profits reinvested into chip design over years to create it. Cell is no different. And with Cell and Power having volumes in non-server markets including now potentially Toshiba laptops and TVs, I’ll leave you to place your bets on which architectures will be around in the server market for years to come.
Oh, and I should also note that Linux is the only OS that runs on both the Cell BE and POWER processors ;-) Guess which OS is likely to be around in your next generation server, television, printer and … well if only we could ‘fix’ the desktop/laptop market reliance on a different OS…
Wednesday, January 9th, 2008
Two items to check out today: ODF-XSLT project and IBM developerWorks
First a website: I came across the ODF-XSLT project and I will say this is just the tip of the iceberg for where the world could head if documents are moved into an ODF format. Nonetheless this is very cool (I didn’t see a demo code project to download, but it looks extremely easy to setup). Anyway, check it out here.
The second is an article over at IBM’s developerWorks on “Multiprocessing with the Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS)”. If you have been paying attention to LKML over the last year you’ve seen plenty on this. CFS is a great new addition to the Linux kernel and Avinesh did a great job covering the new CFS features, rationale, data structures and finally how to actually use it. I also noticed a fair (pun intended) credit to Con Kolivas for being the one to prove fair scheduling could be done without wreaking havoc. Con’s frustration with getting his patches accepted has been well publicized, but it looks like his contribution will live on in the CFS code.
Some of these changes were made for these reasons:
- To enable better scheduling for servers as well as for desktops.
- To provide new features that were requested.
- To improve the heuristics. Those used in the vanilla scheduler made some attacks easy to implement. Also, if the heuristics gauged a scenario incorrectly, unwanted behaviors could result.
Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008
New Open Season Episode 8
I think Open Season is probably the only podcast session I listen to regularly. What can I say, I’m a sucker for Ashlee Vance’s humor/critique… although I haven’t purchased his book yet…
This episode includes some (dare I say unsupported) speculation on Ubuntu and IBM from Mr. Asay. I guess there’s some evil plot to take over the world in there, but given my job at IBM… I’d probably know :-) I also found it odd that the 1.5 minute speculation bit also became the title (what do you expect from El Reg?). Anyway, listen if for no other reason than Open Season offers Ogg downloads (thanks!).
Anyway, you can listen for yourself here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/28/open_season_8/
Friday, December 21st, 2007
Daryl Stokes from IBM on open source virtualization
This looks like a great webinar (just landed in my inbox so I haven’t looked at it yet). I work with Daryl on a regular basis and am always impressed. Daryl also brought in Tony Iams from Ideas International who has a good knack for delving into the OS and platform details in a meaningful way. Hopefully my schedule will open up this afternoon to give me time to check it out before I head out on vacation!
|
||
 |
|
|
The benefits of virtualization in the datacenter are becoming well-known: Server consolidation, capabilities to deploy more applications and virtual machines on a single server, cost savings, power savings. Do these benefits encompass open source virtualization as well? Are there additional benefits of open source virtualization that would justify a serious evaluation against current solutions on the market today? Join Ziff Davis Enterprises for this panel on pairing server virtualization and open source technologies to learn more about how datacenter IT managers can achieve lower TCO, gain flexibility in a mixed-source environment, and increase data center efficiencies. The panel includes an analyst’s overview on open source alternatives for virtualization, a case study by an integrator on implementation, and explores:
Featured Speakers: |
Tuesday, December 18th, 2007
Resizing a KVM Windows virtual disk image
Just noticed the incoming link from Bryan Murdock on how he went through the process of resizing a Windows virtual image in a qcow2 file format to add more disk space on the virtual image. I haven’t actually done this myself, but it looks like there are issues resizing an image that has an NTFS filesystem. If you need to resize your image, check out Bryan’s post on how he did it here. (I like his method better than others)
I also found a good wiki page (I think it’s new) showing the guest OS’s that work (or don’t work) with KVM.
http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Guest_Support_Status
Tuesday, December 11th, 2007
Insanely scalable filesystem service: SOFS
I just learned that in a Scale Out File Services (SOFS) solution a customer can implement a global filesystem (with clustering/replication) that has a maximum filesystem capacity of 33,554,432 Yobibytes. I actually had to look up Yobibyte. The maximum size for a single file is 16 Exibytes. That’s insanely scalable. Oh, and it’s all based on RHEL5 ;-)
The IBM website that has more info is available here.
Monday, December 10th, 2007
Alan Robertson on Load Balancing with Linux
Alan Robertson has a great post up providing an overview of load balancing techniques with Linux using LVS (Linux Virtual Server) and Linux-HA.
Friday, December 7th, 2007
Comparing “open source” projects? Start by asking why does the project exist.
I’ve thus far made no mention of OpenDS and the wildfire reporting that has ensued, but there was one aspect of this situation I commented on to Stephen O’Grady and others on #redmonk when it came out that bugged me. It was a question: “how did it ever get to this point?”. How does a company – a profit seeking company, not a wild tongued developer – even get into an OpenDS situation? I believe the answer is that many people have wrongly assumed that the label “open source” indicates a project is disentangled from corporate affairs. Let me explain.
It’s not my place to determine whether any of the current buzz words today that mingle corporate led open code projects under various licensing and governance constructs are “right” or “wrong”, but I do have a strong opinion that the independent open source projects often have a leg up in building communities, participation, and multi-vendor investment (and often that’s their goal). I also think it’s foolish to expect any single company, commercially led project should behave in any manner other than a commercial business driven by stockholders would. I’m not defending or accusing Sun or any of the OpenDS developers; I’m focusing instead on what fundamental misunderstandings of “open source” may have led to all the hype that’s ensued.
I’ll start by saying I believe the “open” in “open source” projects is not well defined consistently and so confusion abounds when people compare “open source” X project to “open source” Y project. The compare is flawed in that each project may have a completely different reason for existence. Commercially run open source projects are inherently different from non-corporate, multi-vendor, open collaboration projects. That does not mean one is more “evil”, “good” or “bad” but rather that they’re apples and oranges. However, for whatever reason, the ability to view code has led to people lumping them together in the same classification called “open source”.
Linux and OpenSolaris are so different, I cringe whenever I hear people compare them (and yet I get dragged into doing comparisons myself to prove it’s not proper). It’s not that any one approach is by definition right or wrong – they have different reasons for existence. I do believe strongly that “Linux” is a great approach for its community’s goals – but Linux starts with a community, not a vendor’s goals. And so it becomes an issue when you compare a commercially driven project to a community led project – the reason for their existence is entirely different. There are different situations and goals that warrant a different project governance, control, license, and decision making construct for these projects.
Look at Eclipse. For full disclosure, I work at IBM. I’ve also only been at IBM since 2005 so Eclipse “happened” before my time. While Eclipse’ roots trace back to IBM, I don’t believe IBM had a single product that used Eclipse when it was “open sourced”. Some intelligent visionaries at IBM saw that the world needed an extensible IDE and platform for building out the next generation of desktop applications. Eventually Eclipse added Eclipse RCP and today IBM has Lotus Notes, Symphony, Rational, WebSphere and probably other Tivoli and IM tools and products built on Eclipse. Adobe, BEA, Borland, Oracle, SAP (competitors) are all “Strategic Members” of Eclipse and all have products that use Eclipse code (as do many other commercial software vendors). Did IBM intend to make money on Eclipse itself or intend to help its software competitors with code?
What was IBM’s goal then? Could it have been to disrupt the status quo, to change the landscape, foster open standards, build an ecosystem of investors, and ultimately move the industry forward? (something even a vendor as large as IBM could not do alone) I think we all know the answer to that. Just look at the results: a huge membership of Eclipse.org – look at how many of these for profit companies are using Eclipse in their own products. Could Eclipse’ structure be anything other that what it is to have the same impact? I don’t believe so.
Very few Eclipse “members” actually make money on selling the Eclipse code itself – they generate revenue using Eclipse in their products and extensions of the code. These members also reduce cost through collaborative, community based shared development. There are economic drivers and business value moving Eclipse forward. The revenue has moved from selling the IDE or RCP code to selling ancillary products/services leveraging and extending the code. What part of Eclipse Foundation does IBM own and control at Eclipse.org? Answer: None. How many times does “IBM” appear in the Eclipse Foundation Governance Bylaws? Answer: 0. With this independence, the Eclipse community has chosen Eclipse’ future, moving towards the needs of member users, towards innovative new developments, and ultimately has created a very malleable, extensible codebase upon with hundreds (maybe thousands) of products rely – whether IBM liked it or not.
It amuses me to see the OpenSolaris community now in a riff over Sun naming the Project Indiana OpenSolaris distro… well… OpenSolaris (second time’s a charm?). As a corporate company can decide, Sun has chosen to own and control all of the copyright and trademark IP, the Solaris architecture decisions, governance appears to “report” to Sun, Even the OpenSolaris community’s “Constitution” mentions Sun Microsystems, Inc. and is marked with a Sun copyright at the bottom. Sun employees hold 6 out of the 7 Governance Board seats, and all of the opensolaris.org infrastructure is owned and managed by Sun. Anyone who does contribute code must first sign over copyright to Sun, the company. This is not “like Linux” at all and it irks me when people compare them as if they’re similar products that should be compared.
So what standing does any “community member” have to tell Sun not to name Project Indiana what Sun wants to name it? This is not a “Foundation” or independent not for profit project. Sun is ultimately in this to make money on the productization of Solaris (why… after two years are there no competing commercial *Solaris distros as we see with Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Ubuntu, etc?). The only group with standing to tell Sun what to do is Sun’s stockholders. It could only have been delusion or sheer blindness that led some community members to overlook that OpenSolaris has a different reason for existence and hence differing goals and mission as something like Linux. You cannot and should not compare them and you absolutely should not assume one “should be” like the other.
Look at the results. Start with how many people have contributed code to OpenSolaris (and look at what they’re contributing if you have time). OpenSolaris is Sun’s own project – I can confidently state there is no outside development of any significant substance directing the architecture of Solaris / OpenSolaris different from what Sun the company would have done anyway. Two “community developers” (Juergen Keil and Richard Lowe) account for nearly 40% of all accepted contributions – just two developers. Only 84 developers have contributed anything at all – ever (including small typos fixes, accepted or not). Outside contributors must have a Sun employee review, approve and integrate their code. And after two years, it seems some are starting to just realize, this Sun controlled model may not be the best approach. Those who do suddenly “wake up” have been relying on a false assumption. They assume OpenSolaris exists for them or should be like Linux or some other “open source” project they know about – and the reality is, it never was. It’s all about Sun’s stockholders.
What about Linux? There are approximately 2,000 Linux kernel contributors to each release alone (this does not include the massive work going on above the kernel). Looking at the commercial contributors to Linux, you will find a “who’s who” of IT and electronics vendors (also take a look at the LF membership). With Linux, copyright of the Linux kernel code is retained solely by the authors, there are many non-profit foundations supporting the components of a Linux distribution, and because decision making is merit based by community members, no one company controls (or stops) what goes in. Step back to the start of Linux and it’s obvious the intent for this project’s existence was very different than Sun had for OpenSolaris.
So returning to the subject of the post, I have come to the conclusion that much of the “open source” hype and “hurt feelings” are rooted in fundamental confusion about what “open source” means especially in single-vendor led and controlled projects. The only reason anyone should be surprised by anything Sun does with OpenSolaris, OpenDS, or any of the other Sun open source projects it controls, is because that person has fundamentally created an expectation that access to source code meant more than just that – and that is a flawed assumption.
Commercially led projects are created for commercial reasons. “Community members” should not force their own expectations on these projects or they’re likely to see disappointment, frustrations, and unnecessary hype when the company does something counter to what is expected. The same holds true for other companies as well, including IBM. Consider this Q&A about commercial project expectations from Stephen O’Grady back in June:
Q: Do you think that this Open Commercial Development represents an ideal hybrid of open source and commercial development philosophies?
A: It all depends on your expectations. If the idea is that some of the benefits of open source – be they community QA and bug reporting, feature suggestions, and so on – will be realized via this model, then yes. If the intent, however, is to build a vibrant, open source style community, a la Eclipse, then the answer is no, it isn’t.
It all starts with having the right expectation. Is Sun at fault on anything with OpenDS or OpenSolaris? Hey, no one’s perfect, but who can know for sure? Some may point to poor communication of its intent and goals for the projects (and improper comparisons to Linux). Too often I see Sun executives trying to position OpenSolaris as “like Linux”, but those who do research and homework, will likely understand the reality the hype-driving-community often ignores. Is this the “holy grail”, “silver bullet” answer to squash the hype? Absolutely not; communities will speculate forever. However, it’s easier to stay out of the hype if your message is consistent and clear.
You might be wondering what kicked off this massive post today? The answer is odd, but it was a quote from Bruce Perens in an El Reg article. In case any of the above post left my position to question, I agree with Bruce and this quote seems a great place to end.
“In general open source is only going to work if you let it be a community led project. Sun has had a hard time learning this, and some of their open source projects have had a hard time getting outside contributors, because Sun has insisted on owning the whole thing,” Perens said.
Subscribe to RSS/Atom Feed
