Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spotify Switches From Debian To Ubuntu

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by Pajn View Post
    Based on?
    When, ever, have Canonical failed to provide the support they promise?
    it's not about breaking promises. it's about quality of delivering. all you need to look is how LTS is approached to.

    ubuntu is more or less mashup of the regular current version with longer life time. its basically regular version with slapped "LTS" and "5 year warranty" stickers on it. not to mention ubuntu is not really working on most projects at all beside rebranding

    centos/rhel on the other hand take fedora as base, where work just started with intent of having production and stability value which makes centos/rhel defacto best choice when you need LTS. and rh would be one of biggest contributors working actively in FOSS

    Comment


    • #12
      What Dumb Fucks CentOS has 7-10 years of support and is way better out of the box for Servers then Ubuntu any day of the week

      Comment


      • #13
        While I am frequently critical of Canonical, I cannot fault Spotify's decision. Given their limited use-case I think Ubuntu Server is a solid choice. The release schedule of Ubuntu has never faulted to my knowledge, and I can see why someone would want that over the whims of whatever the Debian board decide. In business, reduced uncertainty is good, and Ubuntu provides that.

        It's just a shame about the desktop version of Ubuntu...

        Comment


        • #14
          shame why?

          Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
          While I am frequently critical of Canonical, I cannot fault Spotify's decision. Given their limited use-case I think Ubuntu Server is a solid choice. The release schedule of Ubuntu has never faulted to my knowledge, and I can see why someone would want that over the whims of whatever the Debian board decide. In business, reduced uncertainty is good, and Ubuntu provides that.

          It's just a shame about the desktop version of Ubuntu...
          explain why... everything works what the shame?

          Comment


          • #15
            With five years of support for 14.04, I assume Spotify won't be in a rush to make the switch to systemd-migration-completed 16.04 (if 16.04 isn't skipped over altogether). I would be curious to know when Spotify's migration was decided upon.
            Last edited by eidolon; 16 July 2014, 02:54 PM.

            Comment


            • #16
              hm

              Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
              it's not about breaking promises. it's about quality of delivering. all you need to look is how LTS is approached to.

              ubuntu is more or less mashup of the regular current version with longer life time. its basically regular version with slapped "LTS" and "5 year warranty" stickers on it. not to mention ubuntu is not really working on most projects at all beside rebranding

              centos/rhel on the other hand take fedora as base, where work just started with intent of having production and stability value which makes centos/rhel defacto best choice when you need LTS. and rh would be one of biggest contributors working actively in FOSS
              and spotify cares about FOSS why? they change for another similar distro with a good price, is very likely something like rhel costs much more

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by rikkinho View Post
                and spotify cares about FOSS why? they change for another similar distro with a good price, is very likely something like rhel costs much more
                maybe because rh actually fixes bugs since it is involved in most of the projects development. canonical more or less just upstreams them and waits for solution. last time i checked quality and speed of support is indispensable to services like spotify.

                centos is free and identical to rhel. you can make price/support really easy with rh if you make combination of both.

                Comment


                • #18
                  you forget something important, that after 5 years if you're still running an old lts on old hardware you're wasting your performance/watt and system potential, both from a software and hardware standpoint. We are not anymore in a world where you can buy a server farm and not upgrade that for 5 years, or your services are going to suck and be expensive as hell. And ubuntu lets you plan when and how to upgrade. Do any of you remember the call for unified release ubuntu's guys made? The one that said "hey, we need to get our shtaco together and start releasing the software all at the same time so that we can have better support for the enterprise" and everyone said "no tank you"?
                  Last edited by sireangelus; 16 July 2014, 03:39 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by sireangelus View Post
                    you forget something important, that after 5 years if you're still running an old lts on old hardware you're wasting your performance/watt and system potential, both from a software and hardware standpoint. We are not anymore in a world where you can buy a server farm and not upgrade that for 5 years, or your services are going to suck and be expensive as hell. And ubuntu lets you plan when and how to upgrade. Do any of you remember the call for unified release ubuntu's guys made? The one that said "hey, we need to get our shtaco together and start releasing the software all at the same time so that we can have better support for the enterprise" and everyone said "no tank you"?
                    and point of that would be? real LTS will keep same version by backporting support. try installing rhel 5 or 6 on new hw and tell me how something doesn't work. one of the reasons why qmail-toaster never upgraded to requirement for 6 was exactly fact that 5 was not imposing any problems on new hw

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Virtualisation abstracts most of this though. The deployment inside a guest could remain the same for the entire life of an LTS. If hardware changes, maybe only the dom0/host OS needs to be upgraded, if needed at all. You could get the best of both worlds.

                      It confuses me why Spotify weighed in on the Debian systemd debate though, if they were already decided on switching to Ubuntu (with upstart?!) for a long term.

                      Also seems silly they did not decide to fund or at least voice support for a Debian LTS. I'd think it could be cheaper than switching to Ubuntu. Especially if they now pay Canonical for a support contract. A wild guess is that they're trying to outsource this sort of OS maintenance work, thinking they can't afford to do it in-house any more, don't have enough people on-staff who are clued up about what goes on in Debian, or are looking to fire most of them soon and down-size their operations.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X