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

HP is business Linux friendly

19 comments

TAGS:desktop, HP, Linux, Linux desktop, server
IT TOPICS:Desktops & Servers, Hardware, Linux, Operating Systems, Software

HP has long had a love/hate affair with Linux. On the one hand, HP has long supported Linux on servers. For example, they're the one major server company that supports Debian. On the other hand, it took HP forever to finally start shipping pre-installed desktop Linux. Recently, for business users anyway, HP has been making it a lot easier to get Linux on their desktops and servers.

On the server side, for example, HP and Canonical, the company that stands behind Ubuntu, just announced that the newest version of Ubuntu, Ubuntu 9.04 has been certified the new HP ProLiant G6 servers.

According to Canonical, "This extends Canonical's existing support of Ubuntu Server Edition on the HP ProLiant servers to 17 configurations, enabling Ubuntu users to run their business applications on the world's most energy-efficient servers. Additionally, HP will release the ProLiant Support Pack for Ubuntu, which includes agents, drivers, and utilities that can enhance the manageability of Ubuntu server on HP ProLiant servers."

In a statement, Steve George, Canonical's director of commercial services at Canonical, said, "We are committed to certifying Ubuntu Server Edition on the hardware platforms that our users choose to run. HP ProLiant servers are easily one of the most popular of those platforms so it is heartening to have HP's participation in this certification program along with its recognition and verification of our work. Users who are looking for an open platform or thinking about building a cloud-based infrastructure on Ubuntu need the reassurance of strong, compatibility-tested hardware. This certification offers peace of mind along with a great hardware base on which users can start to build their new data-centers."

Notice that word, 'data-center?' The ProLiant G6 family isn't for your SOHO (small office/home office); it's for serious Web or DBMS servers or even running a cloud. Ubuntu on this platform is a major step up for the Linux that's all too often seen as just the end-user popular Linux and not as a serious business Linux contender.

Ubuntu's not the only Linux distribution getting closer to HP's server lines. Novell's new SLES (SUSE Linux Enterprise Server) 11 has been certified on Integrity, ProLiant, and BladeSystem servers.

Small business users may also be interested in HP's dc5850, an AMD-powered low-end PC that comes with SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop). In addition, education users may be interested in the HP supported openSUSE Education project CD and repository. This gives teachers and student access to a wide variety of K-12 open-source education programs.

In short, while HP is no where close to being as Linux consumer end-user friendly as say Dell is, HP is continuing to become a good choice for Linux business administrators and end-users.

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

HP - whatever failings anyone can report..

Submitted by pmorton on July 8, 2009 - 4:32 P.M.

...is still the most Linux friendly of all the printer manufacturers. I had a pretty hard time with Minolta, but have had the devil's own job with Canon. It blithely puts out a sales blurb that not only claims its printers are linux compatible, but, with breathtaking cheek, gives a detailed list of all the distributions with which its drivers are purportedly tested. Fact: its drivers don't work with any distro, it doesn't maintain them and doesn't support them. Don't call Canon, and they won't call you.

Printing is not the best illuminated corner of the world of Linux computing, but HP is in the van, and I for one am buying.

pm
London

Reply | Report this comment

nonsense

Submitted by Bob Harvey on June 21, 2009 - 2:19 P.M.

If HP is linux friendly why is it not listed as an option for their workstations and laptops?

Reply | Report this comment

HP6730b laptop: If you

Submitted by ObiWanKenobi on June 23, 2009 - 4:10 P.M.

HP6730b laptop: If you Google, you will find on their web site that they do certify it for Suse.

Of course, it is well hidden under huge posts that they recommend Vista.

I myself have tried this laptop with 5 distros (live CDs) and they all worked.

Reply | Report this comment

HP is too late to the party.

Submitted by dca on June 19, 2009 - 1:25 P.M.

HP is too late to the party. Where were they when IBM read the writing on the wall (already successful on big iron w/ AIX) and dumped billions into Linux? Sun, the same thing.

Reply | Report this comment

maybe HP took a look at SUN

Submitted by Anonymous on June 19, 2009 - 3:56 P.M.

Maybe HP looked at the success SUN had with Linux and decided not to come to the party

Reply | Report this comment

HP support reflects market demand

Submitted by Anonymous on June 19, 2009 - 9:02 A.M.

HP is a business with a goal of making money. The levels of support simply reflect the amount of money HP is able to make from the market. If HP isn't Linux friendly, that means the market simply doesn't provide enough money to encourage HP or anyone else to be friendly.

Rmember, it's all about money for any business. They can't afford to carry anything that doesn't pay money back to the business. Linux is a tough sell to these guys. You can't sell it, so the only business model is support.

In the Server room the support model works well because other businesses are willing pay for support. In the home / small business model, not so many are willing to pay for support. In fact HP probably makes more money from initial Windows sales than it does in post sales support money.

No wonder Linux has a tough time in the end user market.

Reply | Report this comment

It's all about money

Submitted by ObiWanKenobi on June 23, 2009 - 4:14 P.M.

Yes, of course, it is all about money and the money is the main reason why M$ plays a huge role behind the scenes - making the vendors not to want to sell Linux.

Reply | Report this comment

Renew your medication

Submitted by Anonymous on June 19, 2009 - 11:14 A.M.

HP is a hardware vendor. They make the same amount of money even by selling a server with no OS at all. Their support for Windows does not necessarily mean they are selling Windows, just offer the drivers (which you are usually not being charged for) and certify that a certain version of Windows will run correctly on their product. The same thing works for Linux too so why do you thing they lose money with Linux ? As for market demand, usually companies do not order a Windows or Linux server, they just order a certain model and the rest happens on customer's premises. Whenever I purchased a server the vendor did not ask me what kind of OS I intend to put on it, it's none of his business anyway. You may ask HP to install Windows on your server for you if you're too lazy or to incompetent to do it yourself but your company must still take care of licensing.

Reply | Report this comment

You obviously work in a very small shop

Submitted by Anonymous on June 19, 2009 - 1:24 P.M.

Our server types use some of the largest HP Unix servers. None of which are Linux by the way, bigger.

Yes, the OS is the vendor's business if you have a service contract. If you make the choice not to tell your vendor what OS is running, they can never support the hardware. Just isn't possible.

It's up to the vendor and Systems Admin to work together to create a server that functions and meets the business demand. That's the point of the service contract, not just to ensure that the hardware is replaced quickly when a part fails.

If you are talking something for a small shop, say 20 or 30 users, you can afford, maybe, to cut out the vendor. If you have an IT department of over 500 alone serving a company of over 20,000, you have a very different picture.

HP is Linux friendly as far as the market demands, no more. It is Windows friendly as far as the market demands, no more.

HP's goal is to make money. Linux on the Desktop does not command much of a service model, so HP won't do much there.

Windows allows HP a profit margin on the sale of Vista, 7 and even XP. No service model necessary to make money.

Which would you sell, Linux where the only allowed model on the DT is service that doesn't work, or Windows where there's an initial profit margin and no service model required?

Reply | Report this comment

I appreciate the way

Submitted by Anonymous on June 19, 2009 - 11:14 P.M.

you manage to avoid confrontation by subtly swapping the issues.
First, you have a valid point (I don't know if it was intentional) when you mention Unix. HP clearly doesn't want to support Linux because it prefers you to buy its HP-Unix servers. Here you're right but this has nothing to do with Windows versus Linux.
Second, yes, I have the chance to work in large shops (about the size you mention) and they had support contracts from hardware vendors covering both hardware and software. However, those companies had not purchased their volume licenses from hardware vendors so there were no Windows licenses for them to sell. All x86 servers came with no OS and they were installed with the company standard OS image so I don't need to tell you where the licenses came from. For hundreds of servers, none of the Windows server licenses came from the hardware vendor.
Then you move the discussion to desktops which again, is not at all the same thing we're talking about. If we narrow this to the consumer market, maybe they make more money than if they would do by upsetting Microsoft. However for business desktops, again they are installed with standard corporate image once they are deployed. I always asked myself if the companies are paying twice for Windows client licenses.
My only problem with HP is that they should have the balls to come up and say they will not support Linux anymore. They risk nothing since as you say, they're not making any money out of it.

Reply | Report this comment