Why Linux is a Viable Option

© 2006, W. John Hobbs

It has been said that “Linux is not the most common name in the world (vs. Windows from Microsoft)”. While currently this may be true for desktop computers, it is a far different story for servers. What such a statement is usually expressing is a level of discomfort with a solution that does not have the brand recognition that comes from a multi-billion dollar marketing budget. This discomfort tends to revolve around concerns about reliability, security and support resource availability.

The purpose of the following material is to help people understand why Linux is not only a viable server operating system option but is, in fact, the preferable option for many situations.

A Brief History

Mainframes and Mini-computers

Long before personal computers and Microsoft came into existence there were mainframe and mini-computers. The predominant operating system for IBM mainframes was called MVS. The dominant operating system for a variety of other computer brands was called Unix. Unix Version 1 was made available in late 1971. Although an over-simplification, it can generally be said that IBM’s MVS was targeted at business and Unix was targeted at research and military uses.

Universities tended to use Unix to support their research activities and consequently the evolving computer science courses taught Unix as one of the fundamental areas of study. Over the years, both MVS and Unix improved. Computers were so expensive at the time that they had to be shared to be economical. Both of these systems were designed as multi-user environments. As a result, security and reliability were key design considerations.

Micro-computers

In 1976 Apple introduced its first micro-computer. Over the next few years, new models came out with programming capability that started to attract business attention. In 1981, IBM introduced a new device called a personal computer to counter Apple’s advances in this area. They made an arrangement with Bill Gates, who had been developing a BASIC computer language but had no operating system, to provide a rudimentary operating system for this micro-computer. Ensuing models came with disk drives and Gates’ micro-computer software company, Microsoft, supplied an enhanced operating system called the Disk Operating System (DOS).

Windowing Systems

In 1983 Apple came out with the Lisa and the Macintosh. These had a revolutionary graphical user interface (GUI) that featured visual windows and buttons controlled by a pointing device called a mouse. It was based on research done years earlier at Xerox. The GUI made computers fairly easy to use for non-geeks.

IBM contracted with Microsoft to create a new multi-tasking operating system for its newer computer models. The new system was designated OS/2 and was the first IBM microcomputer system that could work on several different tasks concurrently. The first version of OS/2 was announced in 1984 and would come with a windowing user interface.

In 1985, Microsoft came out with their first release of a GUI they called Windows. It was a DOS add-on. Windows 1.0 was very unreliable and exhibited extremely poor performance. The first truly successful version of MS Windows (Version 3.1) did not become available until 1992. DOS and its Windows extension ran on a personal computer used by a single individual. Making the computer easy to use was paramount. Since there was only one user, security was given virtually no consideration.

At the same time, Microsoft was working on OS/2 for IBM. OS/2 Releases 1 and 2 were personal workstation systems; but OS/2 Release 3 was intended to be a server system. However, Microsoft allocated more resources to their own Windows development than to the contracted development for IBM. Finally in frustration IBM terminated the arrangement in late 1990 and completed OS/2 development itself. Shortly after the split, Microsoft took the OS/2 Release 3 system they had been working on and renamed it Windows NT, which it first released in 1993.

Microsoft has subsequently produced several versions of Windows. Windows 95, 98 and ME were all based on the original DOS add-on. Windows 2000, 2003 and XP are all based on Windows NT (from the IBM OS/2 Release 3 foundation). The NT server line of Windows systems was intended to be Microsoft’s product that would provide a lower cost alternative to the dominant Unix-based systems. The plan to displace Unix, however, has encountered some difficulty.

While all of this was going on, Apple Computer Corporation was busy further developing different versions of its computers and their operating systems. What has become the standard Apple GUI is the Macintosh (or simply Mac) interface, with successive operating system release numbers (e.g., OS7, OS8). The Mac is believed by many to be the primary example of an easy to use computing system. The underlying technology for Apple computers evolved over time, including different models having different Unix-like components. In March of 2001 Apple released OS-X (aka OS-10) which was a Unix-based core integrated with the famous Mac GUI for the user.

Linux

In 1991, a computer science student in Scandinavia was frustrated that he could not afford a commercial version of Unix to support his studies. He decided to try to create a Unix version that would run on a personal computer. He invited other interested people from around the world (initially computer science students predominantly) to help with the effort. His name was Linus Torvalds and the system was Linux. Version 1 of Linux was released in March of 1994.

In the ensuing years, Linux evolved rapidly to become a very robust Unix variant. It has become so good, in fact, that many Unix data centres are switching to the Linux alternative. This has had an impact on the fortunes of all commercial Unix vendors. Particularly hard hit has been the predominant (and hitherto most expensive) commercial Unix system, Solaris, from Sun Microsystems. Furthermore, this success has severely damaged Microsoft’s plans to compete against Unix, since the preferred lower cost alternative is not a modestly priced Windows machine but a very low cost Unix variant.

Linux Distributions

Unlike proprietary software like Windows, there is not a single “Linux”. New releases of the Linux core or “kernel” are published from time to time. Others take the kernel and add different pieces to make a complete system to distribute to those who want it. Each of these is called a “distribution.”

Some Linux distributions are developed by groups of individuals while others are prepared by commercial firms. The largest commercial distributions are those from Red Hat (e.g., Red Hat Enterprise Linux), Novell (e.g., Suse Linux) and Mandriva (Mandriva Linux). There are several others. These are all multi-purpose distributions.

In addition, there are many specialised distributions that are tailored for a particular purpose. There are some versions that are geared for use in cell phones (e.g., Nokia). There are versions designed to boot from a CD (e.g., Knoppix). [As an aside, most competent Windows system administrators keep one of these around for when they need to access the data on a broken Windows machine.] There are versions designed for real-time operations (like controlling chemical processes in a refinery). There are versions designed to act as internet appliances (e.g., Linksys routers, gateways and firewalls are in fact small Linux-powered computers).

Most of the specialised distributions use one of the general multi-purpose distributions as a base. They then remove components not needed for the special purpose and add customizations to suit their particular objective.

Security and Reliability

Unix design principles are at the heart of Linux. It is robust and secure. You can think of it being designed like a submarine, with interconnected water-tight compartments. If one compartment should happen to get breached, the damage is contained to that small area. But like a navy submarine, getting past the defenses in the first place is a challenge.

A few examples might best make the point:

• In 2001 Linux was already recognized as a stable secure platform for running a billion dollar company. In October of that year Amazon.com reported a reduction of 25% in its information technology costs that it attributed primarily to a shift to Linux:

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the e-commerce giant said it was able to cut technology expenses by about 25 percent, from $71 million to $54 million.

The reduction was attributed primarily to Amazon's "migration to a Linux-based technology platform that utilizes a less-costly technology infrastructure…” according to the filing.

"We've recently...found that Linux--if you look at the overall cost of ownership including the hardware, software, staffing, and purchasing and retirement costs--ends up being significantly less expensive than Unix over a three-year period for things like Web serving," said IDC analyst Dan Kusnetzky.

Linux has enjoyed strong penetration into the server market, accounting for 24 percent of server operating-system shipments in 1999 and 27 percent in 2000, Kusnetzky said.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-275155.html

• In February of 2003, a Red Hat Linux server operating system was certified by the United States Department of Defense:

  The U.S. Department of Defense Information Systems Agency has certified Linux distributor Red Hat's Advanced Server operating system as a “Common Operating Environment,” meaning the server product meets the agency's software security and interoperability specification.
  Defense Department certification is “broadly recognized” within the U.S.   government as a rigorous standard. The certification puts the server software on the Defense Department's approved list for mission-critical operating systems.

  The COE certification is mandated by the Defense Department Joint Technical Architecture for operating systems to be considered for deployment on command-and-control, computer, communications, and intelligence systems.

  http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/02/12/HNrhat_1.html

  It is interesting to note that three of the other four certified systems mentioned at the time were all Unix variants.

• A Business Week article from January of 2005 includes the following:

  These [development efforts] are turning Linux into an all-purpose operating system. It's secure enough that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory loads it not only on desktop and server computers but also on supercomputers it uses to simulate the aging of nuclear materials. “Linux is definitely more secure than Windows,” says Mark Seager, the lab's assistant department head for advanced technology. “There aren't as many ways to break the system.” With the latest improvements, Linux now works on servers with more than 128 processors and can run the largest databases. The newest versions also have features, such as power management, that make them more suitable for laptop PCs.

  Linux is so solid that staid corporate purchasers are adopting it aggressively for run-the-company applications. Holcim Ltd. (HCMLY ), the Swiss cement giant, just switched from Unix to Linux for some of its accounting, manufacturing, and human-resource applications. The attraction: 50% savings on hardware and 20% on software. “It was a no-brainer to go with Linux,” says Carl Wilson, chief operations manager for the company's North American data center.

  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_05/b3918001_mz001.htm

• More recently, on February 14, 2006 Lockheed Martin announced that it had selected a Linux operating system for the U.S. Navy’s Aegis Weapon System modernization program. Aegis-equipped ships comprise 75 percent of the Navy's surface combatant force. Aegis is a computer-based weapon system capable of real-time, simultaneous operations against multi-mission threats: anti-air, anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare. The selected RedHawk Linux is a specialized distribution based on RedHat Linux.

  http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060214/20060214005441.html?.v=1

The U.S. Department of Defense is not known for scrimping when it comes to money. These Linux systems were not selected because they were inexpensive. They were selected because they were secure and reliable.

Google runs its entire search operation on Linux and has done since 2000. As noted above, Amazon.com switched its online operations to Linux in 2001. IBM has committed to shifting from its own proprietary Unix (AIX) to Linux and will soon no longer offer AIX to its clients. These large business ventures do not risk their entire viability on anything other than proven, reliable and secure systems.

Virus Exposure

What has become one of the dominant threats in the computer area is the computer virus. But what is interesting to note is that viruses do not attack all systems equally. It has been estimated that there are tens of thousands of Windows viruses and only a handful of Linux viruses (with most of these being only theoretical). In fact, an entire sub-industry has grown around protecting Windows computers (e.g., Symantec/Norton, McAfee).

But many of these viruses are no longer active. What is perhaps more important is the number of viruses “in the wild”. If you go to www.wildlist.org you can see lists of active computer viruses. Looking at the list for December 2005, we see over 720 active Windows viruses. There are none on the list for Linux.

Some would have us believe that the reason for this discrepancy in that there are many more Windows machines than Linux. In reality, a virus writer wants his virus to succeed, propagate and infect as many machines as possible. Because of the secure design of Unix machines generally (including Linux and Mac variants) and the variety of different Linux distributions, viruses targeting these platforms do not get very far. From the virus writer’s perspective, it is much better to launch an attack that has some prospect of success.

From the perspective of risk management, it is better to avoid a risk than to have to defend against it and mitigate its effects. Following that train of logic, avoiding such risks means avoiding Windows machines as a start point for a computer security strategy.

Support Resources

There have been assertions made that Unix and the Linux variant are difficult to manage. These claims have been made so often that there is a tendency to believe them. One of the implications of such a claim is that skilled support resources would be difficult to find and they would be inordinately expensive. Both the original assertion and the presumed implication are incorrect.

Skills Availability

Most university computer science programs use Unix as the foundation operating system for their studies. As Linux has become more popular two things have changed. First, the universities are shifting to Linux in their data centres. And second, students are getting their own copies of Linux so they don’t have to be dependent on their university accounts for completing assignments.

The net result of this is that there is a large pool of computer program graduates that are quite knowledgeable in Linux. While it is true that the technician in your local computer shop may not yet be competent in a Lunix environment, that is probably not the kind of person that should be playing with your server configuration, regardless of operating system.

Support Complexity

Conventional wisdom has it that “Linux was far more expensive to provision and maintain than Windows.” However, a recent study published in February 2006 has shown just the opposite to be true.

The survey of over 200 responses, from mostly SMBs (small-to-medium businesses) with from less than 20 servers to over a 1000 servers, found that “Over half of the respondents can provision a new Linux server in less than 1 hour, and 20% can do so in less than 20 minutes. For sites with sophisticated tools, over 75% spent less than 1 hour to provision a new Linux system and one third could provision the OS in less then 20 minutes. None took longer than 5 hours.”

Patching? “Half of all respondents spend less than 5 minutes per server per week on Linux patch management; 85% spend less than 30 minutes.”

Security? “Half of all respondents spend less than 5 minutes per server per week, and 75% spend less than 10 minutes.”

But what about the costs? Microsoft has always claimed that Linux management tools and administrators are more expensive than their Windows counterparts.

While this study found that “Linux administrator salaries are very close to Windows administrator salaries,” but marginally higher, it also found that in SMBs, “Linux administrators managed on average 15 servers, and each Windows administrator only 12.” In addition, Linux administrators tended to run more users per system than their Windows brethren. In short, Linux system managers gave better value per dollar of compensation.

Last, but never least, the study includes a breakdown of the upfront costs of a Windows 2003 server with business-class Web services, DBMS, development tools, and 45 client access licenses vs. the Red Hat Enterprise Linux equivalent. The results? $60,185 for the Microsoft setup, $6,494 for the Red Hat rig.

These quotes were selected from an article about the study report and can be found here: http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS9173276172.html

The people behind the study do a good job of explaining their methodology. They make their motivation clear and do not attempt to hide the study’s weak points. What this means is that, if you wish, you can get the report and decide for yourself whether the facts presented make sense. http://www.levanta.com/linuxstudy/EMA_Levanta-Linux_RR.pdf

Summary

Linux is one of several varieties of Unix. As such it has a long heritage of security and reliability. Linux is being adopted as a server for a broad range of uses, from commercial web servers (e.g., Amazon, Google) to military applications (e.g., U.S. Department of Defense certified) to scientific uses (e.g., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) to small businesses (e.g., simple file, print, and web server functions) to networking appliances (e.g., Linksys routers) and much more.

Chryxus is so convinced of the robust nature of Linux that it forms the core of our technology products for small business.

The Chryxus Small Business Server employs a specialised Linux distribution called SME Server. It is based on a distribution from Red Hat Linux. The SME Server distribution is actively supported by Mitel, the communications equipment manufacturer. Mitel's commercial SME Server offering is known as the Mitel Managed Application Server. This distribution has as its objective the creation of an internet gateway and server appliance for small business. The term “appliance” is very deliberate in that it implies that the device just works and can be administered by a non-technical person.

Despite the fact that the Chryxus SBS is designed to be an “appliance” it may need some level of technical support from time to time. Beyond Chryxus, there is a large pool of resources with Linux skills that can be called upon should the need arise.

Overall, in our view, Linux is the preferred operating system for most business computer uses.