Red Hat Summit: Overview and Reflections
The keynote talks were all good, but the breakout sessions were much better. Most of them were practical talks on how to get more out Linux and related software. For instance, one session by Bret McMillan focused on how to use Red Hat Network (RHN) to keep servers up-to-date. There was another session on tracking server performance with RHN, given by Nick Hansen. One can use RHN to monitor system usage and to improve server performance, including not only hardware and network related services but also application performance--Apache, MySQL and so on. RHN also includes an interface for setting up regular expressions for log file monitoring. RHN either provides status information in a Web interface or sends an e-mail to the systems administrator for services that exceed certain levels set by the sysadmin. A session on the various features of the FireFox Web browser was given by Chris Aillon of Mozilla. This included not only giving us some tips on its use but also a discussion of the implementation of CSS3 Selectors; the latest version supports 85% of them. Another session was conducted by Dan Williams on getting cool stuff from OpenOffice.org and how to integrate it with other applications. For instance, with the beta 2.0 version of OpenOffice.org a document can interface with a MySQL database.
The sessions mentioned above were only a few from the Desktop track and the Application Development track. Five other tracks were on the schedule for the Summit: OS Technologies, Clustering & Virtualization, Systems Management, Business and Security & Identity Management. The OS Technologies sessions, such as the one given by Larry Woodman and Douglas Shakshober on "System Performance Tuning", along with some of the Security track sessions were packed and quite informative.
While attending Red Hat Summit as well as LinuxWorld Expo in Boston a few months ago and a couple of other open-source conferences this year, I couldn't help but notice how the face of Linux is changing. When I started with Linux over eight years ago, talks about Linux were given by guys who looked geeky, nerdy or whatever label you want to put on them. It seems that Linux has grown to become the concern of big corporations, and the keynote speakers aren't guys in need of a haircut and some time in the sun. Instead, the keynote speakers are top executives wearing expensive suits or business casual clothing, all speaking in a very professional manner. I don't know if this change is good or bad, but I'm wondering if Linux belongs to us any more.
It's wonderful that Linux is well received and has been growing in success. However, I'm see huge companies, such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Novell and others, trying to take control of Linux and open-source software for their benefit. Of course, whether that's actually possible if debatable. The community created Linux out of simple ideas and intellectual passion. The big software companies tried to ignore it for years until it could no longer be ignored. Now, they're trying to direct it. For instance, frustrated with the haphazard progress of the various GUI desktops, Red Hat scooped up some of the volunteer developers of the GNOME desktop and gave them full-time jobs developing GNOME based on the needs of Red Hat's target markets and on its schedule. Admittedly, this has produced some great results. However, one has to wonder how much the herding and corralling of open-source developers helps and hurts the future of open source. Red Hat seems to be second-guessing themselves on this strategy by setting up Fedora in the hopes that the enthusiasm from the community from years past will take hold again--to their benefit, of course.
When I sit through the keynote speeches at these conferences, it amazes me how these top executives can come up with the most bizarre looking graphs and charts to explain the open-source development trend thus far, thereby attempting to predict accurately where it's heading. These executives seem to be trying to take data they've accumulated on the open-source industry and squeeze it into traditional business models so they can explain it in ways they as business managers can understand. From that, they hope to be able to control or at least to predict future trends. Of course, they're forgetting that the trend didn't occur as the result of careful corporate planning. Instead, it happened over usenets and e-mails and from computer hackers diligently working each night after midnight, obsessed with squashing bugs or adding new features based on their perception of what's cool, not what's profitable.
Linux purists have long been aware of this developing pattern. They regularly guffaw at Red Hat, GNOME and other such commercializations of Linux and GNU software. They stick with Slackware for their Linux distribution, Enlightenment for window management and Emacs for text editing and even word processing. Maybe I'm a little slow, but I'm starting to see their point of view and the validity of it. If the big software companies are to take over the revolution--as implied in Szulik's keynote comments--what will be the results? Will they be what Linus Torvalds set out to achieve 14 years ago? We seem to be long past that point. More importantly, will the many thousands of volunteers that donated their time over the last decade or so have done so in the end to make big corporations richer? Also, if we concede to the overpowering marketing strategies and business savvy of the technology giants, what will become of us? Are we simply to become their employees? Are our opinions in the future to be written on cards to be dropped in company suggestion boxes and thereby ignored? Or, maybe we will merely grumble for a few decades until another Linus Torvalds comes forward and starts a new revolution? I don't know what the answers are, and I don't really know what should or can be done--or if anything needs to be done. I do think, however, that we need to pay attention to what's happening to our revolution, and these are the kinds of questions that should be discussed at a "summit" on Linux--and the answers shouldn't be told to us by corporate executives.
Fast/Flexible Linux OS Recovery
On Demand Now
In this live one-hour webinar, learn how to enhance your existing backup strategies for complete disaster recovery preparedness using Storix System Backup Administrator (SBAdmin), a highly flexible full-system recovery solution for UNIX and Linux systems.
Join Linux Journal's Shawn Powers and David Huffman, President/CEO, Storix, Inc.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
- Download "Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI"
- Back to Backups
- A New Version of Rust Hits the Streets
- Google's Abacus Project: It's All about Trust
- Secure Desktops with Qubes: Introduction
- Seeing Red and Getting Sleep
- Fancy Tricks for Changing Numeric Base
- Secure Desktops with Qubes: Installation
- Working with Command Arguments
- CentOS 6.8 Released
Until recently, IBM’s Power Platform was looked upon as being the system that hosted IBM’s flavor of UNIX and proprietary operating system called IBM i. These servers often are found in medium-size businesses running ERP, CRM and financials for on-premise customers. By enabling the Power platform to run the Linux OS, IBM now has positioned Power to be the platform of choice for those already running Linux that are facing scalability issues, especially customers looking at analytics, big data or cloud computing.
￼Running Linux on IBM’s Power hardware offers some obvious benefits, including improved processing speed and memory bandwidth, inherent security, and simpler deployment and management. But if you look beyond the impressive architecture, you’ll also find an open ecosystem that has given rise to a strong, innovative community, as well as an inventory of system and network management applications that really help leverage the benefits offered by running Linux on Power.Get the Guide