Re: [rhelv5-list] Itanium support ...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [rhelv5-list] Itanium support ...

shoom
The problem is they won't start dying, they were made not to - it was meant to support what (mission) critical business is ... but I am not here for that.

I would like to hear, people, what do you think the future of commercial linux distros on Itanium is one hand, and on the other - what is the future of Xen in commercial distros ?
Is Xen going to be supported on Suse on Itanium in future ?
What #$%&! is going on ?

Red Hat is the most respectable player having linux as business model, and so to say it is the leader in open source community. But it has given confusing signals about Xen, and now Itanium. I should've understood better what happened with cowboyhat linux and fedora ... nevertheless, what I have is a comitted software vendor like SAP who supports open source (as much a proprietary one can - SAP supports officially trend of moving from Unix to Linux), and Oracle does, too (with Sun and human power involved in Xen on ia64 additionally) - it is not a small thing to have official support for Xen or KVM virtualization by a big name such as SAP, and many commercial distros (they have to be like that because of the nature of the business) including Red Hat and Suse. Now I find that HP supports on their highly competitive BladeSystem matrix control software only VMWare, Hyper-V and XenServer - KVM and Xen not even announced, while Red Hat is involved in making Insight Orchestration Designer templates for RHEL, JBoss and stuff (something like virtual appliances, but story is bigger than that) but not with RHEV ?!?! Is that the price of abandoning Xen in RHEL6 (HP treats that as a clear signal), and leaving Itanium after that was a bit scary ... I've been browsing through SAP sd2tier, TPC-C and TPC-H benchmarks and now I am even more convinced that something wrong is going on. I can understand that market share is important, but different vendors (including SAP) obviously have different perspectives (Intel has more or less equal income from ia64 and non-ia64, so it is here to stay !!!), and I won't tell now how it actually looks like to me ... I think that HP lost good competitors, but above all, I am afraid that important part of open source community is in a bigger loss ... __"I feel blue"__ ...

ZP.

PS.

Just look what I have here, tell me what you think, and more is coming on very soon:

      http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/weblogs?blog=/pub/wlg/17592

2010/1/16 t35t0r <[hidden email]>
2010/1/15 Zoran Popović <[hidden email]>:
> I feel deceived :( ... Itanium is not going to be supported after March 2014
> and in RHEL 6 ?!!?!?!! I know this probably is a bit late reaction, I have
> also a SR open with this question and a business case officially  documented
> in my company (I can send it gladly to anyone interested) with proposal
> based on RHEL and HP Integrity blades (Itanium). I will open another SR if

Sure, I'm interested in looking at your business case. We have two SGI
itanium altix 350's (8 node/16p total) and another with 2 nodes/4p and
all I know is that replacement parts are expensive, the warranty
contracts are expensive, and the systems are expensive, and they have
a bigger rack and environmental footprint. The 1.5GHz 16p system has
lower performance than a single node 16p 2.93GHz Xeon nehalem system
(for our computational work loads). Let's just say we're not replacing
the itaniums as the nodes start dieing. Ours used to run RHEL3 but SGI
made us switch to SLES9 or 10, perhaps that's another option if you
really want itanium support (don't know about novell's plans).

In any case, even SGI's new "UV" large shared memory/many cores system
uses nehalem CPUs.

HTH

_______________________________________________
rhelv5-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Xen-users] Re: [rhelv5-list] Itanium support ...

shoom
But AFAIK SLES on Itanium doesn't have Xen (you can build it manually and unsupported) ...

2010/2/16 Pasi Kärkkäinen <[hidden email]>
...
Novell SLES11 ships with Xen, and they seem to be actively working with Xen,
so I expect Novell continues to ship Xen in future products.

-- Pasi


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [rhelv5-list] Itanium support ...

shoom
In reply to this post by shoom


2010/2/16 Tom Sightler <[hidden email]>
...

Still, comparisons based solely on "revenue" does fairly represent
market share from Redhat's perspective.  Even if revenue was somehow
equal, $300 million would be what, probably a few thousand EPIC servers,
but that same amount would equate to 10's of thousands of x86 servers

or 10's of thousands of blade systems (even bl870s which are high-end in that range at the moment only for shortly, while smaller HP Integrity blades cost not much more than Xeon-based Proliants - I don't know if people around this are aware of that, and that new Itaniums will use same motherboard chipsets as new Xeons) ...
... or a couple of unknown IBM mainframes, whatever.
 
because they cost so much less per unit.  Redhat has to make enough
profit of the sheer number of machines, not how much money those
machines costs.  It's quite likely that Redhat would be willing to keep
Itanium support around as long as customers were willing to pay 10x more
than x86 customers for support, but my guess is they are not, so Redhat
looks at it and says it's a market where they can't make money.  Markets
that don't make money are not good markets.


sorry, I didn't know that leaders still follow mainly and only that old fashioned rule to make as much as possible with the shortest time-to-value ... I also thought that we got past beyond tribal wars. Even if it's so, it all gives me the chills, the fact I've learned so far that M$ boosted AMD fire, that Oracle through glove into IBM's face with million dollar prize about database machine, that HP is indifferent toward open source and that Red Hat decided to abandon Xen as one of the moving spirits of the open source - why ? Other mature virtualization platforms don't have open source base, and business doesn't like often changes and bleeding edge ... I remember the ramblings on fedora forums, but I still think it all happened to fast ...
 
You might wonder why they still support IBM Power and System/z which
likely also have similar market share and that would be a valid
question, but my guess would be that IBM provides some financial
incentive to do so.


Incentives, incentives ... I have to use that word more often ... I know that even Linus Torvalds mentioned price and real life put as the knife in Itanium's (Intel's ?) back, but is it really all just about market shares and price ? Did really all good things come from that ? Maybe it wouldn't be 10x more, but yes - customer would be willing to pay more for Red Hats support, that is the point I was selling in my company, too (it really is a good service, sincerely, and you probably wouldn't even dream what are they all willing to pay for instead) - in time it could be corrected if that was all the problem, the support subscription price. I am truly sad if it is so, silly HP lost healthy competition, fat cats got fatter, some people lost good business and open source lost possible incentives ... if I ever become a manager ...
 
Later,
Tom


_______________________________________________
rhelv5-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel