Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Jun 2009 17:50 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris The team at Sun behind OpenSolaris has unleashed OpenSolaris 2009.06 upon the world. This new release comes packed with new features, changes, improvements, and fixes, and is the first release of OpenSolaris for SPARC, adding support for UltraSPARC T1, T2 (Sun4v), and UltraSPARC II, III and IV (Sun4u). Read on for some of the improvements that stand out.
Order by: Score:
v Pay or run unstable
by Formel1Hund on Mon 1st Jun 2009 18:46 UTC
RE: Pay or run unstable
by kaiwai on Mon 1st Jun 2009 19:41 UTC in reply to "Pay or run unstable"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

If I understand it correctly, one can only get security updates by either buy A subscription, or shift to the dev channel.
That's pay, or run unstable, no thanks.


There is a reason why someone marked your post down (I didn't do it btw) - there is no need to resort to blatant lying as to the support policy of the free version of OpenSolaris. OpenSolaris receives free security updates and on occasions free feature updates (if the security updates also bring features as well).

So you don't like OpenSolaris - good for you, but lying doesn't exactly bolster your case given that any credibility you might have had is now shot to pieces.

Edited 2009-06-01 19:44 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Pay or run unstable
by Formel1Hund on Mon 1st Jun 2009 20:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Pay or run unstable"
Formel1Hund Member since:
2005-10-23

Why do you think i don't like Opensolaris, it's the missing updates I don't like, have a look at the last reply :

http://forums.opensolaris.com/thread.jspa?messageID=2872ସ

Why is Firefox not updated ?

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Pay or run unstable
by kaiwai on Mon 1st Jun 2009 20:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pay or run unstable"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Why do you think i don't like Opensolaris, it's the missing updates I don't like, have a look at the last reply :

http://forums.opensolaris.com/thread.jspa?messageID=2872ସ

Why is Firefox not updated ?


Because a large and complex project just can't spin on a 1 cent piece.

They are meant to receive security updates - so maybe you should do something constructive and ask on the OpenSolaris mailing lists as to why it hasn't been updated; simply posting on here achieves nothing at all.

Reply Score: 2

v RE[4]: Pay or run unstable
by Formel1Hund on Mon 1st Jun 2009 21:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pay or run unstable"
RE[5]: Pay or run unstable
by kaiwai on Mon 1st Jun 2009 21:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Pay or run unstable"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

"They are meant to receive security updates


Do you think thats good enough when dealing with security ?
"

Do you think it is good enough posting prattery on this website? ask them - for all you know the issue might have been mitigated and thus does not require an update. I am not 'in the know' so I can't say one way or another, but I don't jump to a conclusion when there could be a very reasonable explanation as to the decision they made.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Pay or run unstable
by gjoahnn on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 16:27 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Pay or run unstable"
gjoahnn Member since:
2009-06-02

He is NOT lying, your information is inaccurate, please have a look at the Opensolaris Subscription Service FAQ, it has just been changed from

Q: If you download OpenSolaris, but do not purchase an OpenSolaris Subscription, what can you receive?
A: You can download OpenSolaris to obtain security and Device Driver fixes, but you are not entitled to any support.

( http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:Hg4LFWbFwXkJ:www.sun.com/servi... )

to now

Q: If you download OpenSolaris, but do not purchase an OpenSolaris Subscription, what can you receive?
A: You can download OpenSolaris and receive package updates via the community but you are not entitled to any support from Sun nor will you have access to the package updates from the Support Repository.

( http://www.sun.com/service/opensolaris/faq.xml#q4 )

Then take a look at http://blogs.sun.com/security/category/alerts , Opensolaris is not magically more stable than Linux. The /release branch of 2008.11 has a lot of serious security vulnerabilities (e.g. in ipfilter, OpenSSL or Firefox) which have been fixed in Solaris 10, /dev and subsequently 2009.06 but NOT in 2008.11 or 2008.05. At http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/feed , you can easily see for yourself that neither 2008.05 nor 2008.11 have received security fixes.

For me that precludes any serious use without shelling out $300 for a support contract which many developers probably won't need.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Pay or run unstable
by akrosdbay on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 17:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Pay or run unstable"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09


Then take a look at http://blogs.sun.com/security/category/alerts , Opensolaris is not magically more stable than Linux. The /release branch of 2008.11 has a lot of serious security vulnerabilities (e.g. in ipfilter, OpenSSL or Firefox) which have been fixed in Solaris 10, /dev and subsequently 2009.06 but NOT in 2008.11 or 2008.05. At http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/feed , you can easily see for yourself that neither 2008.05 nor 2008.11 have received security fixes.


Those are snapshots of the OpenSolaris development. You upgrade to the newest if you need the security fixes or just install the latest versions of the packages that need updating. Those are free. Upgrading an Opensolaris release is painless and with the automatic snapshot image-update does it is relatively easy to fall back.


For me that precludes any serious use without shelling out $300 for a support contract which many developers probably won't need.


You don't need it. You can install latest version of the packages or just upgrade.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Pay or run unstable
by Jondice on Mon 1st Jun 2009 20:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pay or run unstable"
Jondice Member since:
2006-09-20

Your link

It is broken

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Pay or run unstable
by Formel1Hund on Mon 1st Jun 2009 21:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pay or run unstable"
Formel1Hund Member since:
2005-10-23
RE[2]: Pay or run unstable
by Jondice on Mon 1st Jun 2009 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Pay or run unstable"
Jondice Member since:
2006-09-20

I can verify that OpenSolaris does receive security updates in the release repository. It isn't a lot compared to linux, but this could be a combination of 5 reasons:

1) There aren't as many security wholes in core solaris packages

2) Solaris doesn't use as many bleeding edge packages like Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.

3) Solaris probably doesn't have as many packagers as these more popular linux distributions.

4) And every now and then of course, maybe there is some ignorance or slacking going on, as in the (possible) case of Firefox not being updated to the latest stable release.

5) There just aren't as many packages available for Solaris as there are for linux. This is changing though, but out of all the unix distros linux is still the most friendly for building out of the box stuff - simply because more people use it (devs and end-users alike). Ideally apps would compile without too much difficulty on any UNIX, but there are so many reasons why this may not be the case in reality.

In any case, I would not be too upset over the current state of opensolaris updates.

Edited 2009-06-01 23:49 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pay or run unstable
by chekr on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 01:21 UTC in reply to "Pay or run unstable"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

If I understand it correctly, one can only get security updates by either buy A subscription, or shift to the dev channel.
That's pay, or run unstable, no thanks.


Mod down for inaccurate information. Both the release and dev branches receive security fixes.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Pay or run unstable
by Formel1Hund on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 06:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Pay or run unstable"
Formel1Hund Member since:
2005-10-23

Please have a look at the information provided by gjoahnn,
and tell me what's inaccurate.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Pay or run unstable
by cade on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 01:17 UTC in reply to "Pay or run unstable"
cade Member since:
2009-02-28

It was mentioned ...

"If I understand it correctly, one can only get security updates by either buy A subscription, or shift to the dev channel.
That's pay, or run unstable, no thanks."

I have been using OpenSolaris on my HP xw9300 as a C++ development environment since the 2008.11 release with the "dev" package repository. Believe me, user sessions are stable. The only "issue" I have found was boot-ability (not user session usability) for some "dev" releases and this was solved using the option
-B pci-reprog=off
for the kernel$ line of the grub menu and I am happy for having this option. This is not surprising as Sun did not make my hardware (HP did) but it's good that GRUB accepts options to try and deal with different hardware.


I deal with a very detailed C++/scripting code base (my own code dealing primarily with object database and 3D engine technologies) and OpenSolaris behaves admirably during library/executable builds (debug as well as release builds using the SunStudio tools). My coding work is my "bread and butter" and my computer environment has to work for me. I first investigated OpenSolaris as a potential development environment back in late November 2008. After a period of testing I realised OpenSolaris was the go !

It appears the "unstable" word has scared you.
Rather than trying to only understand the OpenSolaris technology, how about you try it out. I have OpenSolaris on multiple AMD64 (Opteron, AthlonX2) boxes (GeForce and Radeon video cards) and am fine with it.

Sure, hardware is hardware and support can vary.
But this does not change the fact that OpenSolaris, intrinsically, has alot to offer.

It would be a simpler world if many more hardware companies would release their technical documents for their hardware but we do not live in this world.

Reply Score: 1

v time slider
by FunkyELF on Mon 1st Jun 2009 18:49 UTC
RE: time slider
by puenktchen on Mon 1st Jun 2009 19:27 UTC in reply to "time slider"
puenktchen Member since:
2007-07-27

1. zfs isn't a backup system
2. osx does offer automatic backups

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: time slider
by milles21 on Mon 1st Jun 2009 20:10 UTC in reply to "RE: time slider"
milles21 Member since:
2006-11-08

depends on what you call automatic

You can schedule cron jobs to backup your files like you would on linux.

OS-X may not offer them via the GUI but it definitely is capable of automatic backups.

Reply Score: 1

RE: time slider
by oxygene on Mon 1st Jun 2009 20:09 UTC in reply to "time slider"
oxygene Member since:
2005-07-07

BTRFS actually has writable snapshots which would be cool to implement in a GUI.

They called "clones" in ZFS, and can be created out of read-only snapshots.

Reply Score: 5

RE: time slider
by toomany on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 06:58 UTC in reply to "time slider"
toomany Member since:
2005-11-09

mmmmm... I think we are talking about "production ready" filesystems.

Reply Score: 1

Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11
by jonathane on Mon 1st Jun 2009 22:48 UTC
jonathane
Member since:
2009-05-31

I bought a Toshiba R600 with OpenSolaris preinstalled but the wireless didn't work without major tweaking. I've switched back over to Vista temporarily, but I'll give the new version a shot.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11
by Jondice on Mon 1st Jun 2009 23:39 UTC in reply to "Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11"
Jondice Member since:
2006-09-20

I've been running opensolaris on a dell e1505 quite happily, including wireless working out of the box (as well as nvidia drivers, audio, disk burner).

I have to say, though, that is an epic fail - nothing I hate worse than getting an OS prepackaged on a computer and the basic drivers not working.

EDIT: come to think of it, when I got the Dell e1505 two summers ago (how time flies..) it was packaged with Ubuntu, and wireless didn't work out of the box on it either... =)

Edited 2009-06-01 23:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11
by joekiser on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 03:06 UTC in reply to "Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11"
joekiser Member since:
2005-06-30

How disappointed you must have been, to purchase a pre-installed OS that didn't even work. Wireless support, and laptop support in general has greatly improved since the last release. On 2008.11, my 4965 wireless could scan networks, but couldn't connect to any of them. I tried Nevada build 112 and everything worked perfectly, sound, suspend/resume, etc, but I decided to wait until 2009.06 came out to actually install. I've been sporadically tracking the progress of this release, and what do you know, OSNews beats me to the punch AND puts it on the front page! Now if only there were more people seeding...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11
by jonathane on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 04:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Tried OpenSolaris 2008.11"
jonathane Member since:
2009-05-31

That sounds like exactly what I was dealing with with 2008.11. It was an issue with the WPA and was a disappointment. I know lots of people have issues with linux and wireless, but compared to OpenSolaris, linux distros have always been a breeze for me. This laptop has a 5100.

I know that some media codecs were supposed to be prepaid with the installation... I wonder if I can still take advantage of that.

I've downloaded the new release. I guess I should start seeding it!

Reply Score: 1

just loaded a live image
by jonathane on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 05:07 UTC
jonathane
Member since:
2009-05-31

just loaded a live image on an older laptop i've got... not sure which wireless card, probably an older intel g. wireless scans, prompts for password, but still won't connect.

almost exactly the same problem as before...

and get this: when i closed the lid to put it to sleep, i got a feedback loop between the laptop speakers and the built-in microphone.

i might try it on a desktop, but it doesn't seem ready for prime-time on a laptop. just my $.02 anyways.

Edited 2009-06-02 05:12 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: just loaded a live image
by jonathane on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 23:28 UTC in reply to "just loaded a live image"
jonathane Member since:
2009-05-31

don't want to slander OSOL. The wireless didn't work off the live CD, but works on my intel 3945 after installing. don't know why the discrepancy.

still have the feedback problem.

but I'm excited finally to have this OS working!

Reply Score: 1

Great news
by strcpy on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 05:51 UTC
strcpy
Member since:
2009-05-20

Great news.

Not much to say (yet). Downloading as we speak. Keep up the good work.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Great news
by fithisux on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 06:00 UTC in reply to "Great news"
fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

I am also downloading, in order to try it. For the moment, the only missing thing for me is BlueTooth and Java integration with it. There is a preliminary stack but I think I should participate to make it happen. 2008.05/2008.11 worked fine on my HW.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Great news
by kaiwai on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 09:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Great news"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I am also downloading, in order to try it. For the moment, the only missing thing for me is BlueTooth and Java integration with it. There is a preliminary stack but I think I should participate to make it happen. 2008.05/2008.11 worked fine on my HW.


I had a look and they have bluetooth support for a Microsoft mouse, however, there is no word as to any framework actually being set. There is discussion as to porting the NetBSD Bluetooth framework over but I am unsure as to the status of the project. I remember that they put a freeze on it for a period of time when there were some big cuts and things were uncertain at Sun, however, I am unsure now as to the status.

Reply Score: 2

Last version?
by bolomkxxviii on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 11:06 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

Now that Solaris has been bought out, will there still be development of opensolaris?

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Last version?
by Jondice on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 03:11 UTC in reply to "Last version?"
Open Solaris is not bad
by Windows Sucks on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 16:24 UTC
Windows Sucks
Member since:
2005-11-10

They have a LONG way to go to catch up to Fedora and Ubuntu though.

For one Open Solaris is SLOWWWWW (Solaris has always been called Slow Laris by most admins I know anyway)

It doesn't support as much hardware on the desktop as Linux and what it does support is not as good as linux yet.

Owned by Sun but does not come with office suite?? Doesn't Sun own an Office Suite?

A lot of out of date packages.

And the worst text crap for setting the keyboard etc during the live CD boot up.

No option to add NTP by default.

I did like their Gnome layout and the config options.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by fretinator on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 17:01 UTC in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree that Solaris has a ways to go - but not a long way. It has come a very long way since just a few years ago. Solaris on laptops was just a distant dream for most (unless you paid a few grand at Tadpole). Now, it is a reality for some, just not me ;{

I tried the 2008.11 (is that the right number??) on a Compaq NC610 I used to have. It was ALMOST awesome. The video was perfect - 1400x1050. I thought for sure it would stumble on that. The wireless worked out of the box - even with encryption on. But the funny thing was - no mouse! The compaq had a touchpad AND a pointing stick. Neither worked. I tried enabling both in the bios, and also just enabling one or the other - it didn't matter, no mouse. It's kind of hard to use a graphical desktop without a mouse, so I gave up.

I currently have an Asus 1000HE netbook (shame on you Asus for your Linux abandonment - it'll bite you). I tried a beta of 2009.06 on it and everything worked but the wireless (ath9k driver in Linux). I googled myself silly on it, but never got anywhere.

As you can see, they are getting close! One of these days I'll be able to have that Solaris laptop. If I was rich, I would buy a pre-loaded one - I think Toshiba has one. Good luck, Soloracles!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by Jondice on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 03:16 UTC in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
Jondice Member since:
2006-09-20

I started using linux around 2000 in highschool, and can remember when it was much worse off than Solaris was now w.r.t. desktop/laptop support. Solaris is improving just as quickly if not more so in these regards, though certainly it is true that linux development eased some of the stepping stones (such as Nvidia drivers and certain driver models).

But if Solaris doesn't work or you don't need it or care about its additional features, why not go linux? That's fine, too. Same could be said for Linux vs Windows or anything really.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by strcpy on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 03:40 UTC in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20

Interestingly: while hardware support is limited compared to Linux, the kernel that supports more devices -- with a big variance in the quality of device drivers -- than any other operating system kernel, OpenSolaris has shown that hardware support can be greatly improved in very short time when you got the talent, right people and some money. For any observer who has been involved in kernel development, the progress with OpenSolaris has been actually quite amazing in this area. All in all, this is a good example that the "superior" hardware support in Linux is not written in the wall and similar results can be achieved with proper engineering practices.

For the performance-related comment: I can not seriously think what you were after here. Our experiences at work have been exactly the opposite.

Edited 2009-06-03 03:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Open Solaris is not bad
by jonathane on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 09:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Open Solaris is not bad"
jonathane Member since:
2009-05-31

I think his experience might be similar to mine. OpenSolaris is slower right now for some desktop, personal computing tasks but perhaps more robust for some enterprise level features.

You make a good point about hardware support. Every time I've interacted with OpenSolaris developers, they seem enthusiastic and responsive, unlike some linux communities with which I've interacted. I'm not sure which direction OpenSolaris will go aside from development around Oracle's assets, but I hope it continues as a desktop platform, if for no other reason than to offer variety and competition.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Open Solaris is not bad
by Windows Sucks on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 12:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Open Solaris is not bad"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Interestingly: while hardware support is limited compared to Linux, the kernel that supports more devices -- with a big variance in the quality of device drivers -- than any other operating system kernel, OpenSolaris has shown that hardware support can be greatly improved in very short time when you got the talent, right people and some money. For any observer who has been involved in kernel development, the progress with OpenSolaris has been actually quite amazing in this area. All in all, this is a good example that the "superior" hardware support in Linux is not written in the wall and similar results can be achieved with proper engineering practices.

For the performance-related comment: I can not seriously think what you were after here. Our experiences at work have been exactly the opposite.


All my observations were made comparing the current version of Open Solaris to the current version of Ubuntu and the final beta (Since they keep pushing the date up) of Fedora Core 11.

I have all 3 installed on separate hard drives in my Dell 755 and I tested the same things on all three.

1. Boot times
2. Hardware drivers and ability to use the hardware
3. Included software
4. Ability to use the machine for day to day work
5. Machine speed after boot

The conclusions are what I saw from these simple tests.

I mean as you see my screen name is Windows sucks but I am man enough to say that even though I would trust my machines to Fedora or Ubuntu over Windows. Windows 7 runs better then Fedora 11, Ubuntu 9.04 and Open Solaris combined. That is just facts from running the current beta of Windows 7 on the same machine.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Open Solaris is not bad
by cade on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 15:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Open Solaris is not bad"
cade Member since:
2009-02-28

------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...

"Owned by Sun but does not come with office suite?? Doesn't Sun own an Office Suite?"

OpenOffice descends from Sun's StarOffice.
By using OpenSolaris' package management system you can download OpenOffice (for free, as with all other packages and system/security updates).
------------------------------------------
It was mentioend ...

"It doesn't support as much hardware on the desktop as Linux and what it does support is not as good as linux yet."


If it came down to hardware support, we would all be using Microsoft's operating systems. Hardware support for many free operating systems would be much better if many more hardware manufacturers released relevant technical documentation. For me, I am generally happy with the hardware support.
------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...

"For one Open Solaris is SLOWWWWW."


When is OpenSolaris slow ?
Or is it that your computer system is not optimal
for running OpenSolaris. My experience is with AMD64 systems (Athlonx2, Opteron) and these direct-connect architecture type systems cause OpenSolaris to rip into the tasks at hand.


It appears the Dell 755 uses front-side-bus CPU/mobo architecture; Intel recently went the way of AMD, cloning AMD's direct-connect architecture.

Any serious performance comparison should be done using a direct-connect architecture. I have a dual-CPU (single-core per CPU) HP xw9300 box (4GB RAM, NVidia Quadro FX1400) and the system rips on OpenSolaris, as well as all other operating systems I had tried in the past (Windows, Linux, *BSDs). OpenSolaris is my operating system of choice and performance is great. This includes tasks like building detailed C++ software (using SunStudio tools) to serious image editing in Gimp and to OpenOffice document handling.

Due to being my primary development box, the system can be on for many days and OpenSolaris is fine with this. My only gripe is that while suspend-to-ram works, the resume-from-ram does not work (for now ?) for my hardware. Hopefully, this will be addressed in near future as hardware support for OpenSolaris broadens.

You should also remember that Solaris/OpenSolaris is packed with alot of technologies and the operating system has a proven commercial/warranty/real-world track record. While Linux grew from someone's bedroom, Solaris was being designed and implemented by engineers in a commercial environment with the intent of satisfying real-world criteria.

You need to ask yourself ...

"How good would another operating system run if it contained Solaris-type technologies (e.g. DTrace, ZFS, predictive self-healing framework, crossbow virtualised networking, etc.) and a design also focusing on scalability for big iron hardware (as in multi-processor SPARC-based solutions) ?"

You may think specific Solaris technologies may not matter and so compare operating systems using some common simple denominator and that is like when people compare the performance of OpenSolaris (a real UNIX system) with Linux/BSD (UNIX clone) using gcc-compiled software. The fallacy with this is that anybody doing serious development on Solaris/OpenSolaris use the SunStudio (not GNU gcc/g++/etc.) tools. The SunStudio tools are optimized for Solaris. These tools also allow the developer to perform DTrace-related experiments for the executable being developed.
All this and more leading to the developer being made much more proficient during bug/optimisation diagnosis and leading to better quality software development.
------------------------------------------

Reply Score: 2

Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

OpenOffice descends from Sun's StarOffice.
By using OpenSolaris' package management system you can download OpenOffice (for free, as with all other packages and system/security updates).


Ummmmm, almost all versions of Linux include Open Office, I should not have to spend 30 minutes or more downloading it when I can spend 5 min on any Linux version and get the latest patches.

"If it came down to hardware support, we would all be using Microsoft's operating systems. Hardware support for many free operating systems would be much better if many more hardware manufacturers released relevant technical documentation. For me, I am generally happy with the hardware support."


On the hardware I tried it on Linux worked 100% out the box. Open Solaris did not.


When is OpenSolaris slow ?
Or is it that your computer system is not optimal
for running OpenSolaris. My experience is with AMD64 systems (Athlonx2, Opteron) and these direct-connect architecture type systems cause OpenSolaris to rip into the tasks at hand.


Ummmmm, Windows 7 and Linux (Fedora and Ubuntu) both fly on my Dell 755 and my iMac. Open Solaris takes 3 times as long to boot up as both versions of Linux I use.

You should also remember that Solaris/OpenSolaris is packed with alot of technologies and the operating system has a proven commercial/warranty/real-world track record. While Linux grew from someone's bedroom, Solaris was being designed and implemented by engineers in a commercial environment with the intent of satisfying real-world criteria.


Ummmmm, yeah that is why Sun is no more and Red Hat is making money hand over fist. Yes I know Solaris has some cool tech. But its convoluted to use, installing software is a pain in the butt. Oh may fault on Open Solaris its not a pain in the butt cause they hired a Linux guy Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris WHAT?? More Linux like.

You may think specific Solaris technologies may not matter and so compare operating systems using some common simple denominator and that is like when people compare the performance of OpenSolaris (a real UNIX system) with Linux/BSD (UNIX clone) using gcc-compiled software.


I am comparing the fact that Open Solaris is being pushed against Linux on the desktop not the server. If you look at it that way on 386/X64 hardware then in reality things like Dtrace, Zfs etc dont really matter.

I mean do you think they brought in Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris more easy to use on servers??

Anyway all this point will be moot if and when Oracle changes the license. The Solaris kernel will be dead and all the fancy stuff will be on Linux.

Linux is the future of computing between Linux and Solaris. Solaris might as well be dead, Sun is.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Open Solaris is not bad
by cade on Thu 4th Jun 2009 04:38 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Open Solaris is not bad"
cade Member since:
2009-02-28

-------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"Ummmmm, almost all versions of Linux include Open Office, I should not have to spend 30 minutes or more downloading it when I can spend 5 min on any Linux version and get the latest patches."

So what if Linux includes OpenOffice by default.
Some people might use Abiword, other's may use KDE office, others may use OpenOffice. So, should OpenSolaris contain all these by default. The choice is there to download it or not. Personal responsibility, it's a good thing !

If you cannot be productive while updating/patching your system then that's your problem or your computer's problem. I patch OpenSolaris while I code and build my C++ libraries and am still productive. With a cable modem (my broadband plan being slower than ADSL2+) I patch my system leading to a new boot environment in ~15 minutes.
-------------------------------------
It was mentioned:
"On the hardware I tried it on Linux worked 100% out the box. Open Solaris did not. "

You can either accept "hardware is hardware" and what that entails in the proprietary world of hardware tech or contribute to the free operating system world with hardware-related research or wait until hardware support broadens.
-------------------------------------
It was mentioned ....
"Ummmmm, Windows 7 and Linux (Fedora and Ubuntu) both fly on my Dell 755 and my iMac. Open Solaris takes 3 times as long to boot up as both versions of Linux I use."

Like I mentioned in a previous post, OpenSolaris has many technologies that other operating systems do not have and it would not be surprising if boot time increases.

However, on my HP xw9300 box OpenSolaris 2009.06 boots in 40 seconds (GRUB --> Gnome login screen) and shuts down in 10 seconds (shutdown dialog --> power OFF). This is fine especially with all the goodies the OpenSolaris kernel is packaged with.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned:
"Ummmmm, yeah that is why Sun is no more and Red Hat is making money hand over fist. Yes I know Solaris has some cool tech. But its convoluted to use, installing software is a pain in the butt. Oh may fault on Open Solaris its not a pain in the butt cause they hired a Linux guy Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris WHAT?? More Linux like."

The issue at hand is OpenSolaris, not Sun.
OpenSolaris is not Linux or linux-like, it is a real UNIX (Re: OpenGroup accreditation).
Linux is a unix-clone.
A UNIX accredited system is a proven system. What is the point of achieving a UNIX accreditation and then throwing it away and becoming a unix-clone ?

See Crimson Consulting whitepaper comparing real-world experiences between Solaris and RHEL. RHEL is basically a "toy", a "joke" for any serious environment. Read about RHEL's suspicious licensing model and Linux' scalability issues. There are quite a few news articles on the net about small/large shops initially using Linux but then replacing it with OpenSolaris due to workflow-scalability issues with Linux. If Linux were so good, why do IBM/HP still support AIX/HP-UX ?

I am a serious C++ developer and I find OpenSolaris admin fine. Software installation using "pkg" command from XTerm or GUI IPS program is simple. What's the problem here ?
Who care's who Sun hired to do whatever, the open-sourced OpenSolaris technology is fine and Sun has allowed me to use it for commercial (i.e. "bread and butter") ventures for free. If I ever need to scale up to SPARC platform then Sun/Oracle will be ready at hand for any serious communication.

You should realise that the good thing Linux did was that it made Sun go back to it's roots and open source their flagship operating system. I look forward to OpenSolaris getting more enhanced as time goes by.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"I am comparing the fact that Open Solaris is being pushed against Linux on the desktop not the server.
If you look at it that way on 386/X64 hardware then in reality things like Dtrace, Zfs etc dont really matter."

What's the problem ?
Are you afraid of competition ?
Linux will not disappear.

Your comments on the relevance of Sun's technologies are a bit puzzling. Are you a coder, an admin, a casual operating system user/sampler ?
If you were the latter, then okay you do not realise the benefit. But if you are a coder/admin person then you probably have not realised what you have stumbled upon with the Solaris technologies (and by the way these technologies are open-sourced). I say this not as someone who "hates" Linux. I am happy that Linux exists since it adds to the existing pool of unix type systems in this world and I have noticed when people use a unix type system they end up knowing more about their computer environment unlike many Windows users. It just happens that I prefer OpenSolaris.

FYI, I used Slackware Linux during my engineering doctoral work in the 1990's for massive amounts of coding and I was happy for it as Microsoft's operating systems were not a suitable solution for my software development needs.

Competition is another reason why Linux would get better. To think that Linux is the be-all/end-all and that there it not enough room in the WORLD for unix clones as well as real unixes (e.g. (Open)Solaris, AIX, HP-UX) then you need to re-think your philosophy on this theme.
e.g.
Linux is not a UNIX, it has no accreditation from the OpenGroup. It is a UNIX clone. The lack of standardisation in Linux is not surprisng due to the unbridled way it's distributions are developed. You would not risk using a non-standardised system for life-support systems, nuclear reactor management systems, multi-million dollar scientific equipment, etc.

My friend is network admin at Alcatel. They use multiple systems as one system does not satisfy all their needs. The use multi-process SPARC system for database infrastructure, HP-UX boxes for engineering work, RHEL for fileserving/etc., and Windows client for desktop duties.

Technologies like {Dtrace, Zfs, etc.} do matter as they are also relevant while developing software on my workstation.
e.g. ZFS allows me to patch my system with rollback support. Keeping a system up-to-date is a good idea. If I do not like the new patched system I then just rollback to the previous system (i.e. boot environment) and patch later with newer patches.

DTrace allows me to diagnose my system but also perform experiments on my newly built software to get an enhanced view of the dynamic nature of the software not readily available from a debugger and other tools, leading to a higher quality software development process. If you believe good quality software is not important then that's your opinion but as a developer my responsibility/philosophy is to always strive for something good.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"I mean do you think they brought in Ian Murdock to make Open Solaris more easy to use on servers??"

Not surprising and this is a good thing for the OpenSolaris community. With Solaris' server lineage it is obvious that Sun wanted to make Solaris geared also for the workstation/desktop type user. I use the "dev" repository and as I have been regularly patching my system I have seen that this goal is steadily being reached.
e.g. For me, OpenSolaris 2008.11 would cleanly shutdown in about 1 minute. OpenSolaris 2009.06 shutdowns in 10 seconds.
-------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned ...
"Anyway all this point will be moot if and when Oracle changes the license. The Solaris kernel will be dead and all the fancy stuff will be on Linux.

Linux is the future of computing between Linux and
Solaris. Solaris might as well be dead, Sun is."

OpenSolaris, not Solaris, is licensed under CDDL.
Oracle is not saying a word about OpenSolaris.
OpenSolaris is a different issue as the formal OpenSolaris community is involved here.

Just because Sun was bought it does not mean it's technologies have to disappear. If Solaris/OpenSolaris
scares you then do not worry too m

Reply Score: 1

Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

LOL! Why would I be scared of Open Solaris or Solaris in general. Remember it's Linux that helped kill Solaris not the other way around.

On top of that tell me ONE OS that has large market share that is not made or managed by a corporation? Which means if Sun goes away and Oracle does not become a corporate sponsor of Open Solaris then Open Solaris will be right there like Slackware. Something that coders use and people who have nostalgia for Solaris will use and that will be that!

And you can say that Linux is a joke. But last time I looked Sun was losing money and Red Hat was making it. So the joke is on Sun and Solaris.

I am sorry but Linux is everywhere. And yes its a Unix clone that took the Unix model and made it more flexible. That is why Linux is in phones and devices and on almost every super computer in the world.

That is why companies and orgs like:

Sherwin-Williams (Moved from HP-UX to Red-Hat)

Axiom (Moved from Slow Laris to Red Hat)

Orange County Public School (Moved from AIX to Red Hat)

NYSE (600 servers from HP UX, IBM AIX, and SUN Solaris to Red Hat Enterprise Linux.)

Dartmouth University (Sun ONE Directory Server to Red Hat Directory Server)

And the list goes on and on and on. Scared of Open Solaris. Please don't make me laugh anymore my sides are hurting. LOL!

Oh and I am a sys admin for the US Government. We moved from Solaris and AIX to Red Hat, Windows and Debian.

And I know a lot of what I am talking about is Linux against Solaris and not Open Solaris. But who uses Open Solaris? Oh yea coders such as yourself. Not real sys admins like me who are actually running systems in the field.

Open Solaris is not even a blip on the radar for real world deployments. I bet even though Open Solaris is backed by Sun there are more real world deployments of Debian (That has no support or company backing) then Open Solaris. Crap might be more real world deployments of Deb then Solaris proper at this point! LOL! (Don't quote that as fact, I will have to research that)


So what if Linux includes OpenOffice by default.
Some people might use Abiword, other's may use KDE office, others may use OpenOffice. So, should OpenSolaris contain all these by default. The choice is there to download it or not. Personal responsibility, it's a good thing !

If you cannot be productive while updating/patching your system then that's your problem or your computer's problem. I patch OpenSolaris while I code and build my C++ libraries and am still productive. With a cable modem (my broadband plan being slower than ADSL2+) I patch my system leading to a new boot environment in ~15 minutes.


I am lost on your logic here. First off it would not take any longer for someone to remove Open Office and install Abiword (Open Solaris is Gnome based so not many people gonna use KOffice there) then it would to install Open Office, so since WAY more people use Open Office then Abiword why not just include it. Now maybe its just too big to fit on one CD. That would make sense.

It was mentioned:
"On the hardware I tried it on Linux worked 100% out the box. Open Solaris did not. "

You can either accept "hardware is hardware" and what that entails in the proprietary world of hardware tech or contribute to the free operating system world with hardware-related research or wait until hardware support broadens.


Here again I am confused, If Linux works out the box (Fedora 11 and Ubuntu 9.04) then that would mean that the "Free OS world" has already worked on the drivers etc for this hardware. Oh yeaaaa, that stupid license that Sun put on Open Solaris wont allow you to mix in GPL stuff. So that would mean you have to write it all over again for Open Solaris! Darn.

You should realise that the good thing Linux did was that it made Sun go back to it's roots and open source their flagship operating system. I look forward to OpenSolaris getting more enhanced as time goes by.


As I said above, if Oracle does not sponsor Open Solaris then its dead.

Your comments on the relevance of Sun's technologies are a bit puzzling. Are you a coder, an admin, a casual operating system user/sampler ?
If you were the latter, then okay you do not realise the benefit. But if you are a coder/admin person then you probably have not realised what you have stumbled upon with the Solaris technologies (and by the way these technologies are open-sourced). I say this not as someone who "hates" Linux. I am happy that Linux exists since it adds to the existing pool of unix type systems in this world and I have noticed when people use a unix type system they end up knowing more about their computer environment unlike many Windows users. It just happens that I prefer OpenSolaris.


Ok you want to talk tech so lets talk tech.

Solaris is better then Linux and so is Open Solaris because Open Solaris has all this tech from Solaris like Dtrace and ZFS right?

Well lets take a peak into the past shall we:

Hummmm, when MS came along making work group servers in the early 90's who had the better tech?:

Banyan
Novell
Or
Microsoft

Hummmm Banyan and Novell had scalable directory services and high level security, With Banyan being used at almost every government agency in the mid 90's. MS had crappy NT domains on Windows NT 3.51

Banyan had the Street talk protocol and Novell had IPX/SPX, Microsoft had NetBEUI. Blah. NetBEUI was not even routable at the time.

And here we are in 2009 and where is Banyan? Dead. Where is Novell? Selling Linux and in reality might as well be dead.

My point here is that having so called better tech means nothing. Does not mean at all that your product or whatever is going to become a market leader. What makes a market leader is perception.

This is why even though now General Motors makes cars as good in quality and cheaper then Toyota, people will still buy Toyota and pay $3000 to $5000 more for that car! Why? Because of the perception that GM cars suck.

Which is why you can never loose your job for buying Microsoft. Their products suck but there is the perception that you can do more with MS products and that MS will always be there to fix your problems.

While there is a white paper saying Linux is a toy, Linux is growing, Unix is not. Even Unix companies like IBM and HP are selling what??? Linux! In some cases against their own Unix products. Even Sun was selling Linux, till they realized they were helping kill themselves.

And I don't have a problem with Open Solaris. I was just pointing out the issues they need to fix if they are going to compete on the desktop front.

Like you said it takes 40 seconds to boot Open Solaris, in that time I could of booted my Fedora machine, logged in, sent an email and started shutting down with the new boot scripting Fedora has added.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Open Solaris is not bad
by akrosdbay on Thu 4th Jun 2009 07:23 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Open Solaris is not bad"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09

LOL! Why would I be scared of Open Solaris or Solaris in general. Remember it's Linux that helped kill Solaris not the other way around.


Solaris is dead! That is news to me. May be the billions in revenue Sun made last quarter were fantasy.

Redhat makes $652 million a year. Sun makes $642 million in software revenue not including the service sales for software. If you assume they make even a few hundred million in software services/year from the $4 billion they make in service. Sun easily makes more money per year selling software than Redhat.

Sun's SPARC CMT server line alone makes $1.3 billion+ a year. That line only runs Solaris.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Open Solaris is not bad
by akrosdbay on Thu 4th Jun 2009 07:33 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Open Solaris is not bad"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09


On top of that tell me ONE OS that has large market share that is not made or managed by a corporation? Which means if Sun goes away and Oracle does not become a corporate sponsor of Open Solaris then Open Solaris will be right there like Slackware. Something that coders use and people who have nostalgia for Solaris will use and that will be that!


Too many ifs and buts there. Oracle is deployed on Solaris more than any other OS. You are dreaming if you think Oracle is going to kill Solaris.

And you can say that Linux is a joke. But last time I looked Sun was losing money and Red Hat was making it. So the joke is on Sun and Solaris.


Redhat made $652 million in revenue last year. Sun made $13 billion. Redhat has very low R&D overhead because they are mainly integrators of software others produce.

Redhat's net income is $78 million. Oracle claims they can make $1.5 billion profit in the first year from the Sun acquisition. Don't kid your self redhat is not even in the same league.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Open Solaris is not bad
by akrosdbay on Thu 4th Jun 2009 07:58 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Open Solaris is not bad"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09


Like you said it takes 40 seconds to boot Open Solaris, in that time I could of booted my Fedora machine, logged in, sent an email and started shutting down with the new boot scripting Fedora has added.


Bollocks. Fedora 10 takes more than a minute to boot.

This article lists it at 69.27 seconds.
http://www.junauza.com/2009/04/boot-speed-war-xubuntu-904-vs-fedora...

This one says 66 seconds:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=fedora_boot_perf...

Try to be honest in your comments. The pro linux hyperbole is unnecessary.

Edited 2009-06-04 07:59 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Doesnt work for me
by marcelkoopman on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 19:40 UTC
marcelkoopman
Member since:
2007-03-23

I've tried the livecd on two machines, one desktop and one laptop. Both I am greeted with a console login because the X server cant boot the VESA driver. Man, this is 2009, cant they get right what was done by Linux 5 years ago? How am I able to install it now?

Reply Score: 1

Disapointing
by tony on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 07:50 UTC
tony
Member since:
2005-07-06

From what I've been able to research, it does look like OpenSolaris is "pay or run unstable", although it's a little confusing.

Take Ubuntu or Fedora, for example. You install the latest release, such as Fedora Core 10 or Ubuntu 9.04. Through a GUI or command line, or on an automated basis, a package manager downloads and installs the latest updates, security and otherwise. Primarily for security, it's important to keep up to date.

The update will load up any updates of Firefox, MySQL, the Linux kernel, Apache, OpenSSL, whathaveyou. It won't update everything, just what needs to be changed due to security/stability/bugfix. While the versions of those applications change, the distro (Ubuntu, Fedora) is still the same version. Even though the kernel version may change, it's still the same distro version.

I've received updates, but I'm not running a development release. I'm running what is considered, and designed as, a "stable" release.

Windows and Mac OS X work in similar ways.

Most distros/operating systems will keep updating packages for past releases. Even though 9.04 is the latest for Ubuntu, they still release updates for 8.10. Mac still releases updates for 10.4, and Windows for XP.

OpenSolaris seems to have a different model, and I think that's whats so confusing. There are numerous confused posts on the OpenSolaris boards with essentially the same question.

How does one, without paying for support, keep OpenSolaris up to date, without running a development/unstable release? It's pretty clear how to do that with most Linux distros, but less clear for OpenSolaris.

Edited 2009-06-03 07:52 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Solaris is *NOT* Slow
by tony on Thu 4th Jun 2009 01:08 UTC
tony
Member since:
2005-07-06

I've got an issue with the whole "not being able to update without going bleeding edge thing", which frankly is a huge turn off.

However, the term "Slowlaris" is completely unjustified. It was a term coined during the transition from BSD-based SunOS 4 to Sys V-based Solaris in the late 90's. Solaris required more memory, and when high-end workstations had 32 MBytes, memory was fairly precious. Use too much, and you'd swap out, hence the term "Slowlaris".

However, that hasn't been the case in over a decade. So while the term Slowaris has an agreeable snark to it, it's wholly unfounded.

Because it takes longer to boot isn't really a huge concern. If it's a desktop, it's annoying, but it's not going to really affect your on-boot performance.

I ran a Solaris test a couple of years back comparing MySQL performance, and it tested very favorably to Linux, and they both trumped FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD in those MySQL benchmarks. Solaris has long had a very reliable SMP function and threading system.

Still, the update issue is rather a shame.

Reply Score: 1