“As most Encompass members know, HP has promised — at some point in the future — to integrate Tru64 RAS components, DLM support and TruCluster software into HP-UX. As for HP’s “Consolidated Enterprise UNIX,” the effort will be infinitely more difficult, and HP’s progress in this regard bears close attention. SKHPC advises current Alpha/Tru64 users to “stay the course” with Tru64 UNIX V5.1B.” Read the analysis at EnompasUS site, an HP User Group.
The Future of UNIX– A View from HP
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
… if Linux will eat up HP-UX too… Then they’ll be pissed…
I don’t think so. If Linux eats up HP-UX they gonna use Linux. Does HP-LX sounds bad to you? 🙂 They add their own features in their very own distro (Clustering, etc.).
“Analysis” indeed… more like a piece of HP marketing.
Anyway, I am pretty confident that HP acknowledges that the HP-UX will be dead any day now. Obviously they are still milking those who are ready to pay the premium for HP-UX (on their slow, expensive PA-RISC hardware) but understand that Linux is the strategic Unix-migration route for their Itanium machines. Savvy IT people know better than to invest heavily on proprietary Unix architecture these days.
Quite simply, 2.6 kernel will eat proprietary Unix’s lunch, or what has been left of it after 2.4 has finished.
Well i doubt they would have put the effort into porting both HP-UX and OpenVMS to Itanium if Linux is their strategy for Itanium machines. I think your getting confused with SGI my friend.
Of course they are putting in the effort.. they have to convince everyone that HP-UX is not dead, so that people will not start migrating away to Solaris and AIX. It’s the same with IBM, which convinces the customers how committed they are to AIX. Strategic goals are often quite different from short term revenue plans.
HP has bet on all 3 horses (W, L, HPU) in their Itanium initiative, and it’s a smart move. HP-UX is for those who are willing to pay the premium, Windows for those with incompetent/windows oriented IT staff and Linux for the rest of us. I expect Linux to dominate the server area in the 1-16 CPU space, HP-UX in 16+ space and Windows in windows-only shops.
The more I read about the thinss that people from Digital created, the more I wonder how could them have so good technicians and so horrible ones working in marketing.
The more I read about the things that people from Digital created, the more I wonder how could them have so good technicians and so horrible ones working in marketing.
Stupidity from what camp again? LoL, Linux zeals who don’t have a clue about how important stability is.
Why would someone go from a fully functional HP-UX which cost a very smallish amount of money to a Linux solution which is just plain riscy???
I can see that you Replica probably never worked in a company to get the chance to take the decision of stability….
2.6 Kernel *will be* stable, obviously it’s far from it right now, as it is in -test2 at the moment.
Why would someone go from a fully functional HP-UX which cost a very smallish amount of money to a Linux solution which is just plain riscy???
Hmm… price, performance, skillsets of available workforce. Even if you can get a low-end PA-RISC server for a lowish price, its performance is on par with a 800MHz p3. PA-RISC is a dog, and everyone should know it by now. HP does. It makes sense if you have > 32 of them in one machine, but it’s not going to be cheap.
Son, you have ALOT to learn about IT. Price isn’t the only consideration taken into account when aquiring equipment.
There are a whole heap of other variables on has to take into account before screaming, “wow! I can build a Lintel server for $foobah”.
Hewlett Packard is just appeasing their customers at this point. I am fairly certain that the engineers they have acquired from DEC (ala Compaq) are more than willing to put forth the work. HP executives are just betting on them not being successful in gaining market-share (not enough buzz words in magazines and HP execs aren’t trying to market it). After speaking with HPs sales reps they already discount HP-UX, the Alpha and any DEC or COMPAQ technology as being “phased out” or as “niche” customer areas. They are “all-aboard” on the EPIC Itanium for the high end and cheap X86 XEONs on the low. Further they are pushing Windows very hard and Linux as their evolutionary choice for a “UNIX-like” operating system (when they can’t sell Windows).
Furthermore, I don’t understand the HP strategy. I would rather have the same OS throughout my organization, say Solaris that runs on PowerPC, SPARC, Itanium, i386, and AMD64. I think it is silly to have proprietary OSs tied to proprietary hardware, I understand the advantages… but I feel the disadvantages outweigh any perceived benefit.
> Price isn’t the only consideration taken into account when aquiring equipment.
It just so happens that in this day and age it really doesn’t matter any more. It takes innovation to get ahead of your competition, and with your attitude, it sounds like the company you work for is ripe for getting creamed by some.
> There are a whole heap of other variables on has to take into account before screaming, “wow! I can build a Lintel server for $foobah”.
Well, a $3k for a dual athlon with 2GB ram with 750GB raid 5 storage results in exceptionally stable, extremely high performance system built with parts available anywhere. Commodity high performance processing has been here for a while. Dinosaurs started dying out with the bust in 2000.
Linux will have all the enterprise features needed and hardware companies that deploy Unix servers will either move over to Linux or be eaten by their higher costs in process.
For having used HP-UX, what comes too my mind is “crap”.
This pseudo analysis is a joke and should not have been
presented as such, and its author clearly lacks independance
as he is “judge and witness” as we say.
From a technical point of view, HP-UX sucks. There are bugs
all admins know that have been reported for YEARS and they’re
still there. Linux doesn’t offer some capabilities, but I will thanks to IBM
work and a few others. HP-UX is like Solaris and SCO Unix: they are on the same list of
“Soon to be dead” Unices as Linux propagates. I’m not the biggest fan of Linux around (I use BSD) but to keep its head in a hole is stupid.
What do those people believe ? That marketing will work ? It does only if you spent massive amounts of cash into it and use some means, as required and not always legal (cf Microsoft).
I got a small paper at home. There is one box for every OS Linux will turn to pieces and this list contains only proprietary Unices. I wrote it 4 years ago.
I guess soon I’ll add another one next to the HP-UX one, in a few years.
I think it is silly to have proprietary OSs tied to proprietary hardware, I understand the advantages… but I feel the disadvantages outweigh any perceived benefit.
I think the main idea is to tie one in house proprietary OS, HP-UX, and two outsourced OSes, Linux and Windows, to commodity hardware, namely Itanium.
As for people who think Linux should be used everywhere; It’s nice to think Linux is the best OS out there, and I like running it on my boxes, but it doesn’t scale to the 1000 CPU proprietary “solutions” market.
the guyes upstairs are gonna kill me for not giving a shout out to VMS on IPF
Why don’t they just outsource it?
HP is a joke. We’ll see how serious they are about this technology..
I’ll just say I have my doubts.
Son, you have ALOT to learn about IT. Price isn’t the only consideration taken into account when aquiring equipment.
There are a whole heap of other variables on has to take into account before screaming, “wow! I can build a Lintel server for $foobah”.
Actually, for as cheap as Linux is you usually can just go out and build the replacement server, then hook it up in parallel to see if it fits. Since it runs on such a wide range of hardware you probably have a spare system lying around somewhere that you could use for the task.
I’ve always wondered why companies risk so much on untested technology without performing their own evaluation test runs of the equipment before putting it in place. Outsources seems to go to some people’s heads. I don’t know.
Geee, I wonder why….
Maybe it has something to do about stability…
Wall street is running Linux.