[Info-vax] OT(?): Linux: developed by corporates. *NOT* developed by unpaid volunteers.

[David Froble]

johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 March 2015 18:45:49 UTC, David Froble  wrote:
>> Jess Goodman wrote:
>>
>>> "...bottlenecks and performance problems that were introduced when
>>> the data had to be replicated..."  The obvious but unanswered
>>> question is:  Why did this data have to be replicated in the first
>>> place?  The answer: because there was no webserver for VMS that could
>>> scale to anywhere near the performance capacity that AccuWeather
>>> required.
>> I see this as a problem resulting from the absurd idea of "free 
>> software".  Once someone gets the idea of such, then the next step is 
>> "the price is right, make it work", and now you're limited to whatever 
>> someone will choose to implement, without pay, on their own time.
>>
>> Needless to say, that "free application" just might not be available in 
>> every environment.  Or when ported to another environment, might not 
>> work so well.
>>
>> I'd also wonder at just what "performance capacity" is required, or 
>> currently in use at for instance AccuWeather?  Why would the WASD web 
>> server not satisfy that demand?  Not saying it should, just asking where 
>> it might not.
>>
>> I don't use a web server.  One of my shortcomings, perhaps, perhaps not. 
>>   To me a web server is just a listener socket, accepting connection 
>> requests, with some capability to do something with some of the data 
>> sent by a client.  Perhaps over-simplified, but, that's what it does.
>>
>> With sufficient specifications, I cannot see why a web server could not 
>> be implemented on VMS to satisfy any requirements.  Even a large cluster 
>> running multiple copies of the web server to meet the volume of 
>> connection requests.  (No, I haven't volunteered to write such.)
>>
>> Also, you cannot solve a problem, unless you know what the problem is. 
>> I'd be curious as to where and why VMS based web servers do not satisfy 
>> the requirements?
>>
>> The subject interests me because a cousin of the web server, a web 
>> service, has greatly influenced the applications he's working with.
>>
>> In the old days, people would sit at terminals, with phones, and takes 
>> customer orders over the phone.  (Dave shows his extreme age.)  We have 
>> implemented "web services" and a protocol to enable customers to submit 
>> orders computer-to-computer.  Again, basically a listener socket, with 
>> code to process specific requests from clients.  We provide inventory 
>> inquiry, process sales orders, and such.  The providers of software on 
>> the other end are loving it, and have taken steps to use this 
>> capability.  It actually seems to be a bit astounding, how much this has 
>> changed the Codis customer's business.
>>
>> Slightly off topic story.
>>
>> We've been discussing how to set up things with more disaster tolerance. 
>>   There have been few problems in the past, but, things can always be 
>> made better.  Now, I was a bit confused with the "sudden" interest in 
>> disaster tolerance.  The question was, "what happens if we lose a day's 
>> work (orders)?"  I wondered what the problem was.  After all, we're 
>> selling a few lawn mower parts, how much could be lost?  A couple 
>> thousand dollars worth of orders?
>>
>> Yesterday I brought up that very question.  The answer.  "Oh, no, the 
>> customers have been expanding, a million dollar day is possible ...."
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> (Dave hits floor ....)
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> While laying on floor, stunned, Dave considers his (possibly out of 
>> date) labor rates ....
>>
>> Further discussion discloses that financial reporting from the GL system 
>> has had to be modified to handle the greatly increased figures ....
>>
>> (More thoughts on out of date labor rates ....)
>>
>> Ok, enough on the story ..
>>
>> But one thing is clear.  The customers have increased business greatly, 
>> and part of that is because of the new web services that we've 
>> developed.  It has been a real "changer" of the business.
>>
>> As a simple example.  The dealers now have small systems, and usually 
>> have software that provides a "parts explosion" of the products they are 
>> working on.  If they select a particular product, the dealer system can 
>> obtain a real time inventory availability on every distributor running 
>> Codis, and let the dealer know what's available.  The dealer system can 
>> then take the selected part(s) and immediately send an order to the 
>> distributor, who can fill the order from inventory, or, another 
>> distributor using Codis.  Do that on the phone ....
>>
>> So, now, I can say that I understand just how important it is to embrace 
>>   and develop some new ways of doing business.  We, and I assume others, 
>> have been able to do it on VMS.  The question then becomes, why are 
>> others having problems doing so, and what needs to happen to rectify 
>> that situation?
>>
>> I can specify one thing, the disgusting TCP/IP from HP.  I'm glad VSI is 
>> going to look at this.
> 
> Dave said "whatever someone will choose to implement, without pay, on
> their own time. "
> 
> Dave, with the greatest respect, you may need to get out more :)

Well, we all know I don't get out much, right?  :-)

Hey, I got my own airport, got my own shop to build airplanes, spring is 
coming, why should I bother to get out at all?

> Various Linuxes may be free to download but there are lots of people
> being paid by their big-name employers to do Linux development. The 
> proportion of input from unpaid volunteers isn't quite negligible but
> it seems it's a lot smaller than you've been thinking (how does 13%
> sound?).

Linux started as something that was free, and if anyone wants to play in 
that sandbox, it's my impression that they cannot charge for the OS. 
Right?  So, from that perspective, it's free.

But, the discussion was about web servers, I thought, and Apache seems 
to be the normal choice of many.  Now, who originally wrote Apache?  I'm 
too lazy to look that up.  But if it also was something developed for a 
specific platform, and the developer(s) didn't care about other 
platforms, then there is a problem needing Apache on one of those other 
platforms.  This is where VMS is today.  On the outside looking in.

I'll admit that a "for profit" developer might also limit the platform 
selections, but, a for profit company might be more interested in 
expanding their opportunities for profit.  Someone who wrote some 
software for their own use, on their platform of choice, might be much 
less interested in supporting other platforms, nor interested in making 
it possible for others to support other platforms.  Thus my (perhaps 
flawed) insight into "free software".


> The Linux Foundation does a survey of where the Linux changes come
> from, and sometimes it gets reported. Apparently you'd be surprised by
> the numbers. Perhaps others would too. So here's a recent sample.
> 
> E.g. in 2013 [1], top corporate contributor was Red Hat at 10% of
> all changes. Next big names, in order, were Intel (9%), TI (4%),
> [Linaro (4%) aren't famous], Suse (3%), IBM (3%), Samsung (2%),
> and Google (2%). There are plenty more corporate names on the list,
> not all of them widely known in the land of VMS and Basic, but in
> their fields they are big names: e.g. Oracle, Broadcom, Qualcomm,
> Cisco, etc.

Back to Linux.  IBM started to develop for Linux in order to sell HW and 
to retain customers.  Red Hat does so in order to sell services.  I'd 
bet just about all corporate developers of Linux do so in order to sell 
something.  From that perspective, stretching a bit, one might consider 
Linux other than totally free.

> In 2013 the proportion of changes submitted by sole
> developers working on their own was only 13%.
> 
> One well known name not showing on that list: HP. There is a category
> for "unknown", at 3%.
> 
> I realise statistics are a wonderful thing, and are more often used
> for support than for illumination. But have a think about this. Linux
> isn't $$$ free, it's paid for by the customers of the companies whose
> employees are paid to contribute.

Ayep!

> Does this change anything in your picture? Not sure. But it might.

 From the perspective of Apache not seeming to be a good fit on VMS, no, 
it doesn't.

I'll ask, if Apache wasn't free, do you think there might be more 
competitors for that market?  I do.  It's the "free" that stifles 
competition.  Who is going to spend money to develop a product to 
compete with a free product?  Would you?