Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2007 19:00 UTC, submitted by diegocg
SuSE, openSUSE Novell today announced the availability of SUSE Linux Enterprise Real Time 10, "the only open source, enterprise-class real-time operating system available in the market today". Novell says: "Enhancements to SUSE Linux Enterprise Real Time 10 include the latest enterprise-hardened open source technologies that reduce system latency or delay and improve predictability, such as CPU shielding, priority inheritance, sleeping spinlocks, interrupt threads, high-resolution timers and the latest OpenFabrics Enterprise Distribution for commodity high-speed interconnects, OFED 1.2.5. As a result, customers gain time advantage over competitors"
Order by: Score:
RH vs Novell
by sgibofh on Wed 28th Nov 2007 20:40 UTC
sgibofh
Member since:
2007-03-31

another reason to definitely look into Novell. They are heading fast an doing a good job.

(at least Novell wants your business, RH seems to be less interested these days)

Reply Score: 4

RE: RH vs Novell
by maceto on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:00 UTC in reply to "RH vs Novell"
maceto Member since:
2005-07-06

You do know RH has a similar product not out yet, as they want everything to be open source before launching, no I do not work for them. There is a slight difference here.

Novell for the immediate future, as there are some money to save on Real Time,if a need for a RT system. Issue is the Concurrent partnership- where,what will happen?

Boils down to: Novell better tools, better RT system now, RedHat might be a better long term option. IBM Websphere Java will be available for RH, not Novell one example. Also look into Concurrent's patches not all open-source by some claims.

A lot of ppl do tend to forget another player here: SUN has some serious benchmarks and clients to show for in the RT space.

But as always as for client that wants this, ask for test cases that would be similar to what you will be using it for and if you are a large client, well then let them use you in their marketing as this is an emerging market for both of the Linux Players ( don't forget SUN here as well) and that can save you a lot of money.

Happy hunting :-)

Reply Score: 5

RE: RH vs Novell
by gilboa on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:35 UTC in reply to "RH vs Novell"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

"(at least Novell wants your business, RH seems to be less interested these days)"

HUH?!?!?

- Gilboa "Very satisfied RHEL customer" Davara.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: RH vs Novell
by sgibofh on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 11:01 UTC in reply to "RE: RH vs Novell"
sgibofh Member since:
2007-03-31

we were reviewing Novell vs RH these days. It took one cal to get novell here. It took 4 calls (!), lnuxworld _and another two calls before RH came over to us.

And then, the only thing they could tell us that they were so much better than the competitors. They are open source only etc. So where is the satellite code? Stuff like that. They said xen was too fast intgrated i te competitor's product etc.

The products SLES vs RH is basically the same. Novell is with SLES 10 S1 more mature compared to RHAS 5, cheaper as well with the offering.

The only reason people seem to stay with RH is because they use v3 and v4 so easier to administer.

Real administrators know that even those differences are next to none.

I don't get warm feelings with RH. They *know* people will chose RH so why do your stinking best?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: RH vs Novell
by gilboa on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 12:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: RH vs Novell"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

"we were reviewing Novell vs RH these days. It took one cal to get novell here. It took 4 calls (!), lnuxworld _and another two calls before RH came over to us."

My own experience with RH support was/is far better. But YMMV I guess.

"And then, the only thing they could tell us that they were so much better than the competitors. They are open source only etc. So where is the satellite code? Stuff like that."

No idea. Have you asked them?

"They said xen was too fast intgrated i te competitor's product etc."

And they were right. RHEL5 is the first distribution to get Xen integrated like it should... and even now Xen is semi-mature.

"The products SLES vs RH is basically the same."

I have insufficient experience with SLES to make this judgment.
But again, in my experience RedHat's support thus far is/was AA.

"Novell is with SLES 10 S1 more mature compared to RHAS 5,"

Can you back this claim with numbers?

P.S. it's SLES 10/S1 vs RHEL 5.1.

"cheaper as well with the offering."

Huh?!?!? [1], [2]
At least in my case (Israel) SLES is -far- more expensive.

"The only reason people seem to stay with RH is because they use v3 and v4 so easier to administer."

I wasn't an RHEL user.
I used a very limited number of RHEL4 machines.
Most of my machines are RHEL5. (I'm not an sysadmin; We use RHEL as part of our software package)

"Real administrators know that even those differences are next to none."

Again, unless you have solid numbers to back that "real administrations" one can only assume that you're just making this up.

"I don't get warm feelings with RH."

Nobody is forcing your hand...

"They *know* people will chose RH so why do your stinking best?"

A. There's no need to start trolling. ("stinking")
B. Because they are trying to get Windows administrators to convert to Linux/RHEL?

... I really don't understand why you (obviously) hate RedHat so much. What have they done to offend you so much?

- Gilboa

[1] http://www.novell.com/products/server/pricing_euro.html
[2] https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html;jsessionid=ZZwzOAcMc...

Reply Score: 2

RE: RH vs Novell
by diegocg on Wed 28th Nov 2007 23:08 UTC in reply to "RH vs Novell"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

Red Hat already has a Real Time product which is about to be released in the early 2008: http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2007/fis.html

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: RH vs Novell
by grat on Wed 28th Nov 2007 23:33 UTC in reply to "RE: RH vs Novell"
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

Red Hat already has a Real Time product which is about to be released in the early 2008:

... And Novell just released theirs. I thought using unreleased products to compete against actual released products was a Microsoft trademark?

Am I the only one who thinks that this sort of FUD against a "Real Time" product is funny? ;)

Reply Score: 7

RE[3]: RH vs Novell
by Nossie on Thu 29th Nov 2007 00:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: RH vs Novell"
Nossie Member since:
2007-07-31

is it 'Real Time' certified?

Real time to me usually implies critical.... did Novell just ship this as v. low latency or does it actually have some real backing other than the usual GPL disclaimers?

not a flame, kudos to Novell for getting it out first. You redhat guys dont want to start the mantra of 'but we have THIS coming out' that was a tactic Microsoft played and won for years. I'm not comparing MS to RH, just that its a rather bent road to follow down ;)

Reply Score: 3

RE: RH vs Novell
by kaiwai on Thu 29th Nov 2007 17:34 UTC in reply to "RH vs Novell"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

How do you quantify such a statement - personally I think all the Linux companies right now are doing a pretty piss poor effort at addressing the desktop. The lack of actually teaming up with big companies and getting them to develop on the platform. The lack of movement forward in regards to bringing harmony between the various desktops, the lack of support by these companies to developing GTKMM so that developers aren't for ever crippled with needing to write in C or a slew of immature languages.

Getting back ontopic, its good to see that Novell is pushing their products forward in the enterprise market, even with the screaming from wall street for a slash 'n burn approach to cost management - someone needs to remind wall street that you can't build a damn thing without men on the production floor, or in the case of programming, bums on seats. You can't just magically click ones fingers and voila, productivity appears out of no where. One can't just click fingers and voila, a product appears out of no where.

Hopefully we'll see in the long term a company which is focused on delivering what the customer needs rather than this over the top fixation on 'the community' - as if a fortune 500 company actually gave a toss over whether a given software supplier is 'nice to the opensource community'.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: RH vs Novell (ont eh desktop)
by sgibofh on Sun 2nd Dec 2007 11:04 UTC in reply to "RE: RH vs Novell"
sgibofh Member since:
2007-03-31

SLED is the Novell effort that's being deployed at peugeot rance IIRC.

How about that? Nvell does a pretty good job here too.

Reply Score: 1

$2,500 for ...
by rockwell on Wed 28th Nov 2007 20:59 UTC
rockwell
Member since:
2005-09-13

Wondering what you'd get for $2,500 that you couldn't get elsewhere for free using Fedora ... I guess a technician to talk to when something goes bad?

Reply Score: 1

RE: $2,500 for ...
by Mellin on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:08 UTC in reply to "$2,500 for ..."
Mellin Member since:
2005-07-06

pay to not get sued by microsoft ?

Reply Score: 3

v RE[2]: $2,500 for ...
by cyclops on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:53 UTC in reply to "RE: $2,500 for ..."
RE: $2,500 for ...
by whittmadden on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:36 UTC in reply to "$2,500 for ..."
whittmadden Member since:
2007-10-08

You'd be getting a green schemed system, instead of a blue one?

Reply Score: 1

RE: $2,500 for ...
by Soulbender on Thu 29th Nov 2007 03:02 UTC in reply to "$2,500 for ..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I guess a technician to talk to when something goes bad?


Yes, it's called technical support and is how OSS companies is supposed to make money.
When the sh1t hits the fan (and it will, sooner or later) and the company tech cant solve it quickly you want someone to fix it NOW.
I doubt CD sales bring in enough dough to keep SUSE afloat and the devs employed.

Reply Score: 1

RE: $2,500 for ...
by elsewhere on Thu 29th Nov 2007 04:59 UTC in reply to "$2,500 for ..."
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Wondering what you'd get for $2,500 that you couldn't get elsewhere for free using Fedora ... I guess a technician to talk to when something goes bad?


You could ask the same thing about CentOS versus RHEL, or Solaris versus openSolaris. Why do people pay when they can have it for free? Because the customers they are targetting generally base their decisions on value rather than price, and in business free doesn't always equate to lower cost.

Never underestimate the value of an SLA and having a technician to call when something goes wrong. Many organizations consider that a mandatory requirement.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: $2,500 for ...
by jwwf on Thu 29th Nov 2007 06:19 UTC in reply to "RE: $2,500 for ..."
jwwf Member since:
2006-01-19

You could ask the same thing about CentOS versus RHEL, or Solaris versus openSolaris. Why do people pay when they can have it for free?

Just a little nit-pick: no one has to pay for Solaris anymore if he does not want to. OpenSolaris is better thought of as a beta version of a future Solaris. Solaris itself is available cost-free.

Reply Score: 1

Solaris & Patches.
by shotsman on Thu 29th Nov 2007 07:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: $2,500 for ..."
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Yeah, Solaris itself is free. But when you try to navigate the SUN web site to get the patches, all you get in taken to the subscription services.
I'm sure they are there somewhere for free download but last time I tried I failed (Jan 2007) so I gave up on Solaris 10 and went back to 9.

That reminded me of an experience I had with Sun(uk) back in 2000. I wanted to buy a 'C' compiler. It was in the US price list but not in the UK one so Sun(uk) could not sell me one.
In the end we gave up went to the nightmare that was (at the time) GNU 'C' on Solaris.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: $2,500 for ...
by IanSVT on Thu 29th Nov 2007 13:16 UTC in reply to "RE: $2,500 for ..."
IanSVT Member since:
2005-07-06

Never underestimate the value of an SLA and having a technician to call when something goes wrong. Many organizations consider that a mandatory requirement.


Beyond that, it insulates the company from losing whatever employee(s) actually know how the thing works. Just because you have someone on board who knows a product in and out, doesn't mean that person will be around forever....or even next week!

Edited 2007-11-29 13:16

Reply Score: 2

RE: $2,500 for ... - is Fedora real time?
by jabbotts on Thu 29th Nov 2007 19:46 UTC in reply to "$2,500 for ..."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I mean it's a good distribution but is it Real Time certified? I think Suse Real Time is actually certified to provide responses within a set time limit so that it can be used in critical systems for medial, financial and other areas. When your trading millions or relying on software to maintain a person's life you really want to know that the time between input and response will be within a set limit.

Reply Score: 1

RH customers not happy?
by uproot on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:18 UTC
uproot
Member since:
2006-10-05

CIO insight has a poll they've been running for 5 years on best IT vendors including google, hp, cisco, etc and this year in customer satisfaction Red Hat was rated #1 with a remarkable 97% loyalty rating. meaning 97% of exec's plan on renewing contracts.
If they dont care about their customers the customers sure dont know it according to CIO insight you can read about this on the net or check the linux watch article http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS9090899508.html here
Im knew the service was good but 97% is a high.

Reply Score: 6

RE: RH customers not happy?
by jakesdad on Wed 28th Nov 2007 23:53 UTC in reply to "RH customers not happy?"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

They obviously never had to call for support on a redhat product. Their support stinks. End of story. They're only answer for anything is upgrade to the latest version, if they respond to you before you quit or get fired. And their support for their friggin Cluster suite is even worse. The techs you get with enterprise support route you back to some offshore place where they dont know what a quorum is.
In the real world it doesnt work like that. In large datacenters you cant just upgrade to the latest version.
Case in point IBM drivers for san infrastructure. If you upgrade your kernel those drivers will no longer work as the kernel version is built into the drivers and you cant get a source package (ala Nvidia) and recomplile against the latest version.
Redhat sucks.They're to busy rolling out "new" tech to fix something.

Reply Score: 1

Is it just me...?
by cozby on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:21 UTC
cozby
Member since:
2006-03-08

Is it just me or does Novell seem ridiculous now?
I had to take multiple breaths just to get through that marketing blurb.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Is it just me...?
by superman on Thu 29th Nov 2007 15:26 UTC in reply to "Is it just me...?"
superman Member since:
2006-08-01

> that marketing blurb.

MS touch.

Reply Score: 2

As needed?
by jefro on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:43 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

Not sure it is as needed as much as it was when machines were way slower. I can still see this on embedded stuff or mission critical but who would spend that much for Suse? Don't get me wrong, I like suse.

We used QNX for years (and still do) on the older machines. Sadly we somehow got stuck with MS. I miss the good old days. QNX was the only system at that time that could control machines, any cheap system would spank those speeds now.

Reply Score: 1

v Redhat Support Site
by hyperdaz on Wed 28th Nov 2007 21:43 UTC
RE: Redhat Support Site
by gilboa on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:36 UTC in reply to "Redhat Support Site"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

... And what does you comment has to do with SUSE SLES RT?

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 4

RE: Redhat Support Site
by re_re on Thu 29th Nov 2007 04:13 UTC in reply to "Redhat Support Site"
re_re Member since:
2005-07-06

>Why is the Redhat.com (Redhat support site) so poor as in SLOW poorly organized and laid out and the SPEED is horrendous.... I wont go into the fact that it was down for part of today.

They need to learn how to put out a strong site its been as it is for a long time, I think they need to do something major to improve this aspect to their customer experience. <

I never have speed problems (except when it is my ISP) and I find it to be quite well organized, I am guessing most users would agree with me.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Redhat Support Site
by Jimbo on Sat 1st Dec 2007 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Redhat Support Site"
Jimbo Member since:
2005-07-22

I never have speed problems (except when it is my ISP) and I find it to be quite well organized, I am guessing most users would agree with me.


RHN was down all morning Wednesday of this week. I couldn't use up2date because of the problems.

Reply Score: 1

v Re: Support calls
by mind!dagger on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:17 UTC
RE: Re: Support calls
by milles21 on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:33 UTC in reply to "Re: Support calls"
milles21 Member since:
2006-11-08

Let it go how many time are people going to beat that same dead horse.

Microsoft/novell, novell/microsoft can anyone just comment on the technology. Some people actually want to have a technological discussion not the same political discussion every day!

Why don't we try addressing the technical merit of this release! Seriously the microsoft/novell topics/jokes have been the same for like a year now!

Reply Score: 6

v RE[2]: Re: Support calls
by cyclops on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Re: Support calls"
RE[2]: Re: Support calls
by ssa2204 on Thu 29th Nov 2007 01:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Re: Support calls"
ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

There can NOT be a discussion as long as there is a sizable number of Linux trolls that exist. These morons do not give a damn about Linux, they only care about being anti-Microsoft because it is "cool". The next "cool" OS that comes along, they will dump Linux in a heartbeat. Frankly I hope the day comes soon that these kiddies just grow up and move along. If Linux's only merit is to be the anti-Windows, then it should die as an OS. But if it is an OS that has merits worth using, then it is completely irrelevant whether Microsoft exists in this world.

But Microsoft does exist, and Novell has wisely positioned themselves to the reality of this world that co-existence is a necessity. I can say first hand that Novell could care less about the anti-Microsoft zealots. They will neither use or pay for their products anyways. Businesses on the other hand will, and they will do what is necessary to please their customers.

While this specific product is beyond the scope and requirements of most of our clients, I still support anything Novell can do to strengthen their business as in the end it will benefit our clients and ourselves as well.

Reply Score: 9

Real Time operating systems hyped
by Sodki on Wed 28th Nov 2007 22:50 UTC
Sodki
Member since:
2005-11-10

So, how many RT systems is Novell going to sell to people that don't know what a RT operating system is?

Reply Score: 2

diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

Financial service companies, ie, people who actually knows what real time is?

RT versions of Linux are breaking latency records in Wall Street and friends. This is more important than it looks. High latencies can mean a missed trade. And apparently, SEC regulations force financial services to complete transactions in a finite amount of time.

There's a reason they're charging 3.000$ per license: they know they're going to sell it.

Edited 2007-11-28 23:15

Reply Score: 7

Novell
by Arkansas_Rebel on Thu 29th Nov 2007 00:22 UTC
Arkansas_Rebel
Member since:
2007-11-03

I read up on Real Time it sounds pretty solid, in transactional processing a second to respond is too slow. Plus, with a product like this in a mission critical scenario it would make sense to purchase the highest service level package on at least ONE server so you can have support if/when needed.

With the acquisition of SuSE Linux I think Novell is on the right track, they need to really market these products for the entire Enterprise to the desktop workstation.

Reply Score: 2

I just read whole article wondering ...
by autumnlover on Thu 29th Nov 2007 00:53 UTC
autumnlover
Member since:
2007-04-12

... about that $2500-priced distro itself.

It is just a new and beefed-up version of SLED, OpenSUSE or something else ?

Anyone already downloaded a trial and saw it it action?

It is really "Open Source", so we can expect something similar to CentOS ?

Reply Score: 1

The *only* one on the market?
by jmcp on Thu 29th Nov 2007 02:17 UTC
jmcp
Member since:
2006-08-06

"the only open source, enterprise-class real-time operating system available in the market today"

Uh ... perhaps they forgot to check out what Solaris (and hence OpenSolaris) has been doing since, oh ... about 1988!

http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/c...

Reply Score: 3

RE: The *only* one on the market?
by NxStY on Thu 29th Nov 2007 11:47 UTC in reply to "The *only* one on the market?"
NxStY Member since:
2005-11-12

Are there any enterprise RT OpenSolaris distributions out there? I haven't seen any for sure.

Reply Score: 2

davidl Member since:
2006-01-04

Sure you have - it's called "Solaris" and it's distributed by Sun Microsystems.

Reply Score: 1

NxStY Member since:
2005-11-12

Sure you have - it's called "Solaris" and it's distributed by Sun Microsystems.

It seems like you didn't read the initial post.

the only open source, enterprise-class real-time operating system available in the market today

While Sun released most of the Solaris sources as OpenSolaris they still aren't the same. Neither is Solaris based on OpenSolaris (yet). AFAIK there is no enterprise distributions of OpenSolaris at all, most seems to be hobbyist projects. This version of Suse might very well be the first open source and real time entreprise operating system.

Reply Score: 2

redhats work
by simo on Thu 29th Nov 2007 08:27 UTC
simo
Member since:
2006-01-09

didn't the redhat kernel guys develop all the tickless kernel etc; stuff, novell are just making yet another suse fork using it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: redhats work
by SEJeff on Thu 29th Nov 2007 09:34 UTC in reply to "redhats work"
SEJeff Member since:
2005-11-05

Ingo Molnar (Redhat Employee) is #1 writer of the -rt kernel series and all of the RealTime kernel patches. He also happens to be the guy who wrote the latest Linux scheduler, CFS. Because of that, Redhat's realtime product will likely blow the pants of of Novell's.

http://people.redhat.com/mingo/realtime-preempt/

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: redhats work
by NxStY on Thu 29th Nov 2007 11:53 UTC in reply to "RE: redhats work"
NxStY Member since:
2005-11-12

Because of that, Redhat's realtime product will likely blow the pants of of Novell's.

?

Stuff will get merged upstream and is then available to all distributions. If Red Hat decides to ship a RT distributions it will be the same technology as in Suse.

Edited 2007-11-29 11:56

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: redhats work
by SEJeff on Thu 29th Nov 2007 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: redhats work"
SEJeff Member since:
2005-11-05

You don't know much about the -rt kernel series do you? Ingo has had patches for years that aren't upstream yet.

To put it eloquently... "Ingo Molnar has had more code rejected than Con Kolivas has had accepted (or even written) for the Linux kernel".

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: redhats work
by NxStY on Fri 30th Nov 2007 11:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: redhats work"
NxStY Member since:
2005-11-12

You don't know much about the -rt kernel series do you? Ingo has had patches for years that aren't upstream yet.

Yes I do. I have used several of them. What makes you think Suse would use a different set of patches?

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: redhats work
by SEJeff on Sat 1st Dec 2007 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: redhats work"
SEJeff Member since:
2005-11-05

Experience. Novell likes to reinvent things instead of finish things that mostly work. Can we say Xgl vs Aiglx anyone? It certainly is not a lone case with Novell even though they employ some great software engineers like Robert Love.

Reply Score: 2

QNX Anyone?
by CodeMonkey on Thu 29th Nov 2007 10:56 UTC
CodeMonkey
Member since:
2005-09-22

the only open source, enterprise-class real-time operating system available in the market today

QNX went open source several months ago and I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would say that QNX is less mature or less "enterprise-class" than RT Linux. If anything it'd be the other way around.

Edit: added the italics.

Edited 2007-11-29 10:57 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Resource Intensive
by CodeMonkey on Thu 29th Nov 2007 13:21 UTC
CodeMonkey
Member since:
2005-09-22

Minimum System Requirements
* 512 MB physical RAM
* 5 GB available disk space

Recommended System Requirements
* Multicore / Multiprocessor system
* 1 GB physical RAM
* 10 GB available disk space

Id's say that definitely shuts out the vast majority of real-time OS applications and users. Not all but definitely almost all of the environments where a real-time OS is needed are limited resource and embedded environments.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Resource Intensive
by renox on Thu 29th Nov 2007 19:20 UTC in reply to "Resource Intensive"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

>> Not all but definitely almost all of the environments where a real-time OS is needed are limited resource and embedded environments. <<

Uh? You forget the telecom domains where gigabytes and SMP are common.

That said I find those requirement strange, what's using so much memory/resources?

Reply Score: 2