Shark Bait

Knowledge Centers

Operating Systems

Networking & Internet

Mobile & Wireless

Security

Storage

Business Intelligence

Servers & Data Center

Computerworld Reports

Industry

See your link here

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

Cyber Cynic

Ubuntu 9.10: Linux for business

90 comments

TAGS:Amazon EC2, Cloud, desktop linux, enterprise, Linux, Ubuntu
IT TOPICS:Desktop Applications, Enterprise Software & Services, Linux, Open Source, Operating Systems, SaaS & Cloud Computing, Servers & Data Center, Software, Virtualization

When you think "Ubuntu", you almost certainly think of it as a desktop distribution. Make no mistake, Ubuntu 9.10 is a great desktop distribution — but that's not what Canonical, Ubuntu's parent company, is focusing on with this release and the next, long-term support version, which will follow this one. No, Canonical has its eyes on the prize, and that's the server market.

The sad truth is that, except for Novell with SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop), the big-name Linux distributors tend to focus on servers. After all, as Red Hat has shown, that's where the real money is.

This focus isn't new. Canonical has been serious about servers for a long time now. This release underlines that point.

Even before Ubuntu 9.10 was in beta, Canonical introduced PSE (Premium Service Engineer), a new level of support for large enterprises. This gives corporate customers the option of a single point of contact along with access to all the way up to Canonical's platform engineers.

In addition, Steve George, Canonical's director of support and services, recently told me that Canonical saw its Amazon EC2 (Elastic Compute Cloud)-compatible UEC (Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud) as being perhaps Ubuntu 9.10's most important feature.

George emphasized that this wasn't just another — yawn — cloud release. He told me "People who have been exploring cloud computing have really only be able to use public clouds. UEC allows companies to build a cloud internally first, and then think about how to make use of public clouds like EC2."

Good point. It takes a lot of guts, or perhaps stupidity, to move even a minor enterprise application to the cloud. With UEC, which is built atop the open-source Eucalyptus Project, you can have an EC2-compatible cloud running Ubuntu Linux servers on just a few servers with dual-core 2.2 GHz processors with virtualization extension (Intel-VT or AMD-V), 4GB RAM and 100 GB hard drive in the back room.

Virtualization-savvy pros may wonder how Ubuntu will put off being compatible with EC2. While Ubuntu uses KVM for virtualization, EC2 uses Xen. Canonical CEO Mark Shuttleworth explained that Canonical has managed to make an Ubuntu 9.10 VM (virtual machine) image that will work with both KVM and EC2's Xen. It wasn't easy, said Shuttleworth, but, in the end, they were able to make a "single machine image which works in both places."

Before you move there, though, Canonical lets you find out if cloud-based computing meets your needs. Then you have the option of moving your applications to Ubuntu on the Amazon cloud. Or, for that matter, just run it yourself in your own data center.

No matter where you run your Ubuntu servers though, another nice feature is you can manage all of them with Canonical Landscape. This systems management and monitoring programs lets you use a Web-based interface to manage all your Ubuntu machines no matter whether they're located down the hall, in the data-center across town or somewhere out on the cloud.

Canonical isn't ignoring the desktop though with these new developments. On Monday, October 26th, Canonical CEO Mark Shuttleworth revealed that one of the first Ubuntu cloud offerings, Ubuntu One, will be for desktop users. This service enables people who run Ubuntu 9.04 or newer to copy files to a cloud storage space. Ubuntu users can store up to 2GBs for free, and up to 50GB for $10 per month. In addition, Canonical recently partnered with IBM to deliver a thin-client style business desktop to users with the IBM Client for Smart Work.

Ubuntu One and the IBM office software suite are both nice desktop additions. But, if Canonical has its way, the real news that comes out of this latest release is more companies moving to Ubuntu on servers and in the cloud. Beating Windows 7 on the desktop may make the heart of Linux fans beat faster, but what Shuttleworth wants most for Ubuntu is for it to become a server power. Based on what I've seen of this release, Ubuntu is taking a giant step in that direction.

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

After being disappointed by

Submitted by Anonymous on November 5, 2009 - 11:51 P.M.

After being disappointed by Ubuntu 9.04 because of the intel graphic problems (which, in a way, were solved latter) and because it offered nothing worth of the upgrade from Ubuntu 8.10, I must say that I am very happy with Ubuntu 9.10. The only problem I had was the kernel error reported after waking up from suspend. Which might have been a false alarm. I am sorry to hear that some of the readers had huge stability problems with this release, but I must say that my experience is very positive. I also like the theme of the login screen which isn't customizable any more (this is pure Gnome's fault, not Ubuntu's). I expected it to be much much worse because of the very ugly theme (it might be my taste) used in 9.04, but actually I find it aesthetically very pleasing. Although the default theme is not bad at all, I think that the brown colour is dead end. I am not graphical expert but it seams that the blue tones used in Windows And OS X are there for a reason. Maybe Canonical should step back a little from the whole Africa film and offer something completely new, at least if they want to accomplish the WOW effect they strive for. Or hire the biggest designers minds in the world that can still make something visually stunning out of brown colour :). I really hope that Canonical will became a huge success in the server market. A steady financial income would guarantee the future of this mainstream desktop linux distribution

Reply | Report this comment

Ubuntu 9.10: A Failed Bugfest

Submitted by Anonymous on November 3, 2009 - 10:29 A.M.

"Ubuntu 9.10 is causing outrage and frustration, with early adopters wishing they'd stuck with previous versions of the Linux distro.

Blank and flickering screens, failure to recognize hard drives, defaulting to the old 2.6.28 Linux kernel, and failure to get encryption running are taking their toll, as early adopters turn to the web for answers and log fresh bug reports in Ubuntu forums."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/karmic_koala_frustration/

Just what business is looking for in an operating system. (grin)

Reply | Report this comment

Long time linux user

Submitted by Anonymous on October 30, 2009 - 9:31 A.M.

I've been using Linux since the days of the 0.94 kernel. If memory serves me correctly, that'd be the early 1990s.

Software has bugs, oh my. It's true of M$ and it's true of Linux.

I'm no OS bigot, I'll use Windows or Mac or Linux depending on what makes sense.

I switched to using Ubuntu as my desktop about the time when Vista came out. Vista constantly blue screened, windows turned grey, etc. Sorry to say it, but virtually everything Microsoft turned out at that time, Server 2008, their IDE, IIS, all were so bug ridden, I wouldn't recommend using them to anyone. To this day, enterprises run Server 2003 because the new stuff can't be trusted.

The downside of Linux has been a few hardware incompatibilities. All with workarounds except for really fringe stuff (tablet PC/laptops, handwriting recognition, etc.).

The upside is that for the past few years, I've been running a real 64 bit OS with real 64 bit applications. Microsoft has 64 bit OS, but the lack of 64 bit apps is rather stunning.

I've been running WWW sites with millions of page views and no data corruption or crashes. And that's going back years.

I won't say Ubuntu is perfect. Far from it. They do push new generations of software on people a little before the software's ready, but that's been cosmetic things to me (like KDE4.0).

If you don't want to run Ext4, don't. I read about it and never used it all along. I look forward to, some day, and I might install it on a volume I don't care about losing.

I like the progress Ubuntu represents and achieves over the long haul.

I also look forward to dual booting into Windows 7 to play games.

Peace, out.

Reply | Report this comment

Karmic STINKS ON ICE!!!

Submitted by Jen Cato on October 30, 2009 - 1:14 A.M.

Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic is LOUSY compared to prior releases!
I've run Ubuntu for years and 9.10 Karmic is the worst release yet!
Firefox has serious issues rendering web pages. Missing features and GNOME has been having serious issues too.
I have had so many crashes with 9.10 Karmic Windows 7 is starting to look good!
I run Ubuntu 9.04 and Debian Testing (Squeeze) on separate partitions and they run fine.
BTW. I built my puter specifically to run Linux so I know my hardware is Linux compatible so it isn't a hardware issue.

Reply | Report this comment

Karmic Stinks

Submitted by Anonymous on November 29, 2009 - 11:54 P.M.

Agreed! Being a Linux noob, I wandered into the early adoption cycle Ubuntu uses and BAM! Nothing worked, and full of bugs!

I quickly went back to 9.04 which I have to say is incredibly awesome and stable!

Reply | Report this comment

Can't agree more

Submitted by Frank on November 3, 2009 - 1:00 P.M.

Ditto. 9.04 installed like a breeze and wired and wireless connections came up automatically. No crashes ever. 9.10 installed fine with no errors but then no internet connections whatsoever, so obviously I couldn't do any updates or patches. So back to 9.04 for now until something gets fixed. No insults from me, I wouldn't pretend to have the expertise to orchestrate a software release and have it tested thorougly. But I submit that you can't do much if the basic internet connectivity is at issue.

Reply | Report this comment

Agreed

Submitted by Anonymous on November 3, 2009 - 7:35 A.M.

I,too, have been running Ubuntu for many years. Karmic is the first release to give me problems. Crashes, crashes, crashes. This is enough to drive me back to Windoze!

Canonical must be getting sloppy. How dare they release 9.10 with so many bugs! It's an insult to the Linux Community.

Reply | Report this comment

Well...

Submitted by Anonymous on October 30, 2009 - 11:50 A.M.

Did you submit bug reports? It's not a problem if you don't report it.

Also, Ubuntu is not the only distro out there. Try Fedora, OpenSuse, Sabayon, Arch, or Mepis just to name a few.

Reply | Report this comment

Cut/Pasting your post around I see...

Submitted by a_happy_penguin.tar.gz on October 30, 2009 - 9:13 A.M.

Why is your comment posted over here too?

http://www.internetnews.com/software/article.php/3846141

A little astroturfing for Mr. Ballmer maybe?

Reply | Report this comment

Astro Turfing: Long time hooby?

Submitted by M on October 30, 2009 - 3:52 P.M.

Seems Jen has been into astroturfing for some time alredy. Is this a hobby or job? :->
http://www.insidesocal.com/click/2008/05/disappointed-in-ubuntu-804.html

Reply | Report this comment