One area of interest has recently been peaked for me as I’ve watched other companies migrate from expensive platforms such as IBM’s Z-Series or P-Series systems to Linux (generally RedHat or SUSE) running on commodity Intel x86 (x64) hardware.  Verizon for example, recently migrated their SAP and PeopleSoft systems to Dell servers and RedHat Linux from IBM P-Series running AIX.

For example, a new IBM Power 6 system will cost you somewhere between $230,000 to a cool million bucks depending on the configuration you order (also depending on whether you pick refurbished or new – but a refurbished Power 6 may be hard to find right now).  A Dell R900/R910 will run you somewhere in the $15,000 to $35,000 range.  To top that off, from a pure horsepower perspective, the Dell R900/R910 platform with 32 cores and 512GB of RAM (at six to twenty times less money) will outperform a P570 system (I can hear the groans of AIX fanboys already).  I must clarify, there is more to horsepower in this equation.  IOPS, bus bandwidth, etc matter too – but my point remains the same.

Pros and Cons (AIX vs. Linux)

By now, you’re either a Linux fan, and you’re singing my praises, or you’re an AIX fan and you are cursing my existence!  Not so fast my friends.  Read on as we break these categories down.

COST – LINUX VS. AIX
I doubt anyone can argue with me on this point of contention.  Linux (as in the OS) is basically free.  Intel and AMD x86(x64) hardware is a commodity server that is both inexpensive and easy to find.  This is a clear WIN for Linux.

SUPPORT – LINUX VS. AIX
While it would be fairly easy to argue that Linux community support (especially when combined with a paid support contract from RedHat or other) could be considered better than AIX or other proprietary UNIX OSes, I think this will be a pretty simple concept to agree on.   Let’s first look at Apple Computer.  Apple runs OS X.  Although Apple originally derived OS X from NextSTEP, NeXT is based on the Mach Core, and BSD.  Over the many years, Apple in-house engineers have poured over and almost completely rewritten the entire source.  In the process OS X was born.   It would be pretty naive to think that anyone knows or could know the in-depths of an OS that they did not write themselves.  While the community can support Linux quite well, only the original coding team knows it the best.  I believe this confirms a WIN for AIX.

HARDWARE INTEGRATION – LINUX VS. AIX
Again, I like to use the Apple comparison.  Apple only has to support one hardware platform (or a small number in any case) – hardware platforms they designed, or designed to their specifications.   OS X does not need 2500 chipset drivers, 400 sound card drivers, 3000 DVD player drivers, etc, etc.   Linux faces the challenge (as does Microsoft Windows) of providing support for many different hardware platforms, with many different drivers written by different companies.  This is why OSes such as Windows have such low ratings in the stability arena (well, one big reason anyway) and companies like Apple can make rock solid reliable machines and software.   They can dedicate all of their resources to a smaller footprint of drivers and hardware platforms.  This is a clear WIN for AIX.

FLEXIBILITY – LINUX VS. AIX
Have you ever called your favorite vendor and asked for a new feature or option to be implemented in an application or operating system?  If you have, then you know they have a list a mile long from other customers.  The chances of your enhancement being picked or at least being implemented in the short term is next to zero.

With Linux, not only is there a huge community of developers eager to add new features, you have the source code at your disposal – lending your in-house development staff to make those modifications or feature enhancements.  After which, you can release those enhancements to the community for inclusion in future releases of Linux.  This in my mind is a WIN for Linux.

MARKET SHARE – LINUX VS. AIX
Although market share may not be important to you, it is to many IT shops.  This revolves around the rise of Linux and the fall of UNIX variants.  The lifespan of Linux is likely to be decades longer than AIX or others.  This must be considered in any IT long term strategy.  This is a WIN for LINUX.

VENDOR DIVORCE – LINUX VS. AIX
If you’ve spent any time in the IT industry you know that a divorce from a vendor or two along the path is inevitable.  What happens when you need to change hardware platforms because of issues with a vendor?  If you’re running AIX, you’re stuck with IBM.  When running Linux, your hardware platform is your choice.  This also gives you a great deal of flexibility when negotiating hardware prices.  This is clear WIN for Linux.

STAFF SALARIES – LINUX VS. AIX
Proprietary operating systems historically command higher salaries for support staff (Administrators, Programmers and the like).  Linux administrators are generally more plentiful and easier to find.  This has to be considered when choosing your OS.  This is a WIN for Linux.

SECURITY FIXES – LINUX VS. AIX
As you’re probably familiar, it’s not unheard of to wait weeks or months for your OS vendor to release a security fix.  With Linux, your likely to see a patch within hours, or at worst days.  WIN for Linux.

PERCEPTION – LINUX VS. AIX
Have you considered trying to convince executive management that Linux or any other Open Source solution is right for your business?  Linux in many circles is still considered a risky move.  Many CIOs and other executive IT Management are dead set on their idea that Linux is not enterprise ready.  Lucky, that school of thought is becoming more and more old school as giant corporations and web sites are turning to Linux.  Facebook, Google, Amazon.com and other massive web presences are all running on Linux successfully.  However, convincing your management to bet the farm on Linux can still be difficult.  Remember the old saying “No one ever got fired for hiring IBM.”  While that certainly is not true, it is still the perception in many shops.  This is a WIN for AIX.