Sun this week at LinuxWorld revealed its Java Desktop 3.0 enterprise Linux desktop environment. Sun has not yet given a laundry list of features, but has indicated that device support and productivity are the foremost attributes of the upgrade.
Post a Comment
I thought JDS3 was supposed to be based on Solaris?
Since Solaris is available for free, and is allegedly going to be open source in the near future, I would have thought this would be a great opportunity to showcase Solaris 10.
It seems that Sun constantly claim Solaris to be superior, yet end up actually advocating the use of other products through poor support for their own technogies on Solaris e.g. Java on Windows/ JDS on Linux.
They offer both. You can choose from Linux 2.6 (SUSE-based) or Solaris 10, IIRC.
I don't know why people would want to waste their time with JDS though. Novell's Linux Desktop 9 is not only cheaper [0] but is also an all around better distro IMO.
[0]
$50 NLD9
$100 JDS (Sale $50)
productivity suite:
JDS comes with StarOffice.
NLD comes with OpenOffice.org.
that's one difference.
I'm running Suse and love it. If Sun wants marketshare and mindshare, they simply must provide a freely available version with free updates. Then, they should provide a very easy paid support option for people that want it, and tie that in to java support as well. They have some fantastic properties and technologies, but they are not leveraging them well at all.
"Novell's Linux Desktop 9 is not only cheaper [0] but is also an all around better distro IMO."
How is Novell cheaper, in light of Solaris 10, which includes JDS, being free of charge and the Linux-based JDS being the same price as you indicated?
I looked at JDS3 in Solaris Express a while ago and thought it was really well done. It seemed they hadn't finished populating the launch menu, though.
I am using JDS 3 on Solaris 10 x86 right now and I must say its nice. It really strips down the menu to just what a home user or office user would need: One browser, one IM client, one digital camera apps, etc. Except for things like Star Office, everything is given simple generic names "Wed Browser" Mozilla 1.7, "Instant Messenger" Gaim, "Cd Player", etc. Its not for a power user but if you want a simple, solid and well thought out enviroment, its hard to beat.
<<How is Novell cheaper, in light of Solaris 10, which includes JDS, being free of charge and the Linux-based JDS being the same price as you indicated?>>
No support and the regular price of JDS is $100. Ofcourse if you want free, theres also SUSE 9.2 via FTP install or free DVD iso. Also the other 300+ free Linux distros.
100 > 50
Math is FUN!
How about they invested some resources on java-gnome for their Unix frontends. I know of no free software developer interested in or attracted to swing. Or are they just going to continue watching Mono still their thunder?
JDS 3 on Solaris Final release is quite nice. It's all you need for a corporate desktop.
The only adder needed is more drivers for Solaris. If new community distros show up with the free drivers that are already avaialble now for Sol-10 then it's a done deal for me -- Solaris 10 with gnome or kde.
BTW: in case you didn't know Solaris 10 comes with KDE as an option, all you have to do is execute one command to install. It's all on the disks.
BTW-2 there is a bunch of other stuff on the Solaris 10 disks that are dynamite. Download and try -- it's free.
people would just get cheaper support elsewhere then
From what I understand, with OpenSolaris, all those drivers that are available around the net for Solaris are going to be merged into the maintree. IIRC, Solaris 11 will be the one fully based off OpenSolaris.
Personally, contra to the nay-sayers, I think that OpenSolaris will be a sucess mainly because of these two things:
1) Technologically, it is a marvel to look at. Programmers will flock to look at a piece of engineering excellence, and want to learn off the code so that they can produce products that can exploit as much of the features in Solaris as possible.
2) The license; its free enough to make it not too restrictive, yet restrictive enough as not to allow people to poach technologies off it.
By the time Solaris 11 is released, the question will be "why use Linux when Solaris is here?". The *ONLY* reason why Linux became popular was because of hype and the fact it was close enough to being UNIX, but without the price tag. Considering now there are only three competitve UNIX/UNIX-Likes out there; *BSD, Linux and Solaris, the interesting thing will be what will happen in the future.
The *ONLY* reason why Linux became popular was because of hype and the fact it was close enough to being UNIX, but without the price tag.
I don't think so. I think the reason Linux became popular is that it did not really belong to anyone but the Linux community. The GPL is what made Linux popular, IMO.
The license; its free enough to make it not too restrictive, yet restrictive enough as not to allow people to poach technologies off it.
That doesn't seem to be very free. It's a lot more restrictive than the BSDL, the GPL and most other open-source licenses.
In any case, as it has been discussed before on this site, I don't think that OpenSolaris will overtake Linux, because it doesn't have the mindshare, momentum and community that Linux has. I do hope it will succeed, but I don't think it will take the wind out of Linux's sails.
Oh well, time will tell I suppose.
<<Considering now there are only three competitve UNIX/UNIX-Likes out there; *BSD, Linux and Solaris>>
<QUOTE>
Sun has lost six points of share in the UNIX market with Solaris in the last three years, and AIX has gained 8 points of share.
</QUOTE>
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-chiphopper/?ca=dgr...
I don't see how things have changed with Solaris 10 and [phantom]OpenSolaris.
Wheres the huge migrations away from Linux? Wheres "Unbreakable Solaris" from Oracle? Wheres the ISVs pledging support for Solaris?
Solaris 10 is the hype friend, not Linux.
Linux became popular because companies were forced to disclose source and so other companies took advantage of that, creating hundreds of distros. The so-called GPL 'viral' effect. As you notice, there are few companies that use BSD code that disclose the source thus preventing this effect.
Aside from that, It was a UNIX clone and competitive to FreeBSD.
The question isn't the technology. The question is support. People use linux now because it's widely supported. If Solaris gains enough support it may overtake it, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.
The absense of the so called viral-effect of the GPL also may play a major role in it. Ofcourse, the GPL prevent anyone from wanting to pirate software because you can't really unless if its a red hat distro or a distro with a buncha commercial code ;P .. Oddly enough those distros have not been as successful as the free ones.
Maybe you should run Solaris and Linux and benchmark them and then tell me how accurate your statements are?
Oh, be sure not to be biased against solaris by running linux apps that are tuned for linux
"100 > 50
Math is FUN!"
No, you said yourself the sale price is $50. Sun's website reinforces this.
<<Maybe you should run Solaris and Linux and benchmark them and then tell me how accurate your statements are? >>
I can't, Solaris 10 won't run on my machines!
Cicero 4564 and an old (1999) Compaq Presario.
The Cicero simply won't boot. Yup checked the obvious BIOS and possible bad CD.
The Compaq runs fine but X does not start (intergrated SIS 8MB display adapter)
Both of these machines are able to run recent Linux distros fine.
<<No, you said yourself the sale price is $50. Sun's website reinforces this.>>
You know the difference between a sale price and the regular price don't you?
<QUOTE>
For a limited time, get 50% off the price.
</QUOTE>
http://www.sun.com/software/javadesktopsystem/get/index.xml
By the time Solaris 11 is released, the question will be "why use Linux when Solaris is here?". The *ONLY* reason why Linux became popular was because of hype and the fact it was close enough to being UNIX, but without the price tag.
Why do you assume Linux will cease all development and innovation until Solaris 11 is released.
I do not think the MySQL benchmarks -- which we have all seen -- where all hype. If you do not remember GNU/Linux beat Solaris 10.
If you do not remember Solaris 9 was terrible and sluggish on the PC architecture, if GNU/Linux can rival and beat a UNIX, such as Solaris 9, I would rather use GNU/Linux.
Linux also became very popular because it attracted developers that lead to GNU/Linux, which is better than or rival/ed commercial operating systems like Solaris, SCO, and BSDi atleast on the PC architecture.
"I don't think so. I think the reason Linux became popular is that it did not really belong to anyone but the Linux community. The GPL is what made Linux popular, IMO."
Given an average person's ability to parse the legalese in the GPL, my opinion is that the GPL had little to do with Linux' popularity. What drove Linux beyond the BSDs in popularity was price plus hype plus the conservative nature of the BSD maintainers putting people off (often called "elitism" though it is not).
The anything-goes hackers all went to Linux and GNU, while the people who admired the simplicity and functionality of UNIX went to BSD. This is why the BSDs are still unparalleled for network infrastructure with great tools like pf and ipf with crystal clear man pages, while Linux gets hobbled by confusing sets of tools and stale FAQs.
OpenSolaris is zero-cost, is getting plenty of hype, yet combines some of the consistency and clarity of the BSDs--don't write this puppy off anytime soon.
Not quite; actually in the MySQL benchmarks a beta (build 69) of Solaris 10 was beaten by a very small margin. There were actually some enhancemts that went in after 69 but before FCS that almost certainly would affect these results. I'd be *very* interested to see it run again against FCS.
alan.
I guess they just used props for the presentation, seeing as SUN wants to fire everyone associated with these projects.
Thanks for the hard work in getting this done, here is your pink slip. What a terrible attitude from a half-baked, bankrupt company (not yet financially, but morally at least)
What drove Linux beyond the BSDs in popularity was price plus hype plus the conservative nature of the BSD maintainers putting people off (often called "elitism" though it is not).
Wasn't Linux endangered of being forked at one point because Linus personally handled all patches into the kernel, did he not meet with his lieutenant to discuss the practice. Many major features were revoked from mainline simply because they were not "right(according to Torvalds)" or integrated in a slow fashion. This is a pinnacle of elitism.
This is why the BSDs are still unparalleled for network infrastructure with great tools like pf and ipf with crystal clear man pages, while Linux gets hobbled by confusing sets of tools and stale FAQs.
I admit, I am ignorant to pf; what can it do that I can't do with iptables; functionality wise not semantical differences?
But I do not know how BSD is unparalled for network infrastructure, FreeBSD did not even have a multi-threaded network stack until 5.3.
"But I do not know how BSD is unparalled for network infrastructure, FreeBSD did not even have a multi-threaded network stack until 5.3."
I believe you're suffering from buzzword-itis. You don't have to multi-threaded to have the best infrastructure. If you havn't noticed the BSD network stack is not just robust in terms of simultanious connections and pushing data, but its acutally very reliable under heavy loads - something that linux hasn't actually been known for in the past.
Didn't Sun just lay off 2000 or so workers last week who where working on JDS and Linux?
Do they have anyone left to work on it or will development slow down to a crawl?
Oz
I think having a multi-threaded network stack is a good edition to a smp server, and is an expected feature of any operating system which hopes to compete at the enterprise level.
Windows 2000 relized this, Linux realized this in 2.3 unstable. FreeBSD realized this in 5.3. That is why Linux is more used.
Well, if JD3 is anything like Solaris 10 then I can't see it go anywhere.
I tried Solaris 10 yesterday and was puzzled.
Who exactly is it for?
Is it a server? desktop? what?
If server then one could not tell from the install which doesn't provide any clues to what's happening whatsoever.
If desktop, then where are the config utilities for users?
The lame desktop that comes up (yeah, I did get it installed and working just fine) doesn't even provide any links to documentation, no clues whatsoever if someone want's to learn.
Isn't there supposed to be some kind of fancy configuration app in Solaris that helps to configure everything?
I sure didn't find anything related to Solaris. Only the Gnome desktop stuff which I am familiar with and don't care for in the least.
I think I'll continue to cherrish my beloved Slackware which works as a server, desktop, and also runs some cool games like UT2004 as a bonus instead of getting pulled into some adventure with totaly illogical server/desktop, can't make up its mind, split personality, schizofrenic Solaris.
I am a Redhat/Fedora man and probably always will be but I see many real viable choices arising in the nix world. Competion, cooperation, and innovation are going to be rampant in the nix world to the point that MS will not be able to compete as a stand alone. MS will probably eventually come out with a OSS nix one of these days in order to stay competitive. And, probably most of the good programs that will run on one nix will run on all nixes.
Sun and Solaris will make a great addition to the OSS world if they don't make a fatal about face.
This discussion about OpenSolaris going to be success or failure should have raised some red flags on the Solaris fanboys' minds by now...
The simple fact that many people in the community are actively predicting a monumental failure just proves that it won't be that Linux-killing success that Sun wants it to be.
More, this whole OpenSolaris/SDDL thing is making Sun look somewhat like a new SCO (with the proper differences). Doesn't that just cries "Sun doesn't get it"?!
NDL retails for $50, but Novell tells me it's available at a "substantial discount" from authorized partners.
I use it every day. Dunno how it compares to Sun's desktop, but Novell Desktop Linux is pretty fine for an office environment.
I am not a five minute Linux fanboy, nor am I a fanboy of any sort. And I completely disagree with the word "fanboy."
Fast forward to today. Solaris 10 x86 is free, and in a couple of months time, opensourced. So where is the advantage now for Linux?
Linux will probably still outperform Solaris. Even if it dosn't this does not spell the end of Linux. Linux truly has community support as does the open-source BSD's, and that is why they still exist today, inspite of the technical superiority of Linux. Linux was initially built by a community and had its basis around one, not corporations.
And even FreeDOS -- an attempt to clone a largely obsolete operating system -- still exists and has had releases as late as 2004. Linux only of late has had alot of corporate support, the Linux community will survive without corporate support. Even the GNU/HURD effort persists because the GNU/HURD developers believe in an ideology, even if they are light-years behind Linux in practical technology.
Contra to the myth perpertrated by the 5minute linux fanboys, customers *don't* care about Linux, all they care about is the cheap and fairly reliable factor
Linux is cheap and reliable.
On the x86 architecture Linux has been a proven success, and has been better than many commercial alternatives; including Solaris 9. Solaris 10 finally has the muster to compete with Linux on the PC architecture; I am not just going to switch to Solaris because of Solaris hype, most which was subsequently proven to be hype; especially after the MySQL benchmark.
And even Solaris recognizes the strength of a community, that is why they are trying to artifically create one around OpenSolaris.
"I am not a five minute Linux fanboy, nor am I a fanboy of any sort. And I completely disagree with the word "fanboy.""
Fast forward to today. Solaris 10 x86 is free, and in a couple of months time, opensourced. So where is the advantage now for Linux?
Linux will probably still outperform Solaris. Even if it dosn't this does not spell the end of Linux. Linux truly has community support as does the open-source BSD's, and that is why they still exist today, inspite of the technical superiority of Linux. Linux was initially built by a community and had its basis around one, not corporations.
Interesting, and you've never used Solaris 10. Once I've got my machine up and running (I'm building an Opteron box), I'll be another contributor to Solaris - be it not necessarily in code, but providing packages of software built using Studio 10 with all the optimisations available.
The fact remains that Solaris DOES have a community.
And even FreeDOS -- an attempt to clone a largely obsolete operating system -- still exists and has had releases as late as 2004.
You do you realise that there is a purpose of FreeDOS beyond running it as a desktop or server operating system?
Linux only of late has had alot of corporate support, the Linux community will survive without corporate support. Even the GNU/HURD effort persists because the GNU/HURD developers believe in an ideology, even if they are light-years behind Linux in practical technology.
Sorry, there is already a 'Solaris community', they may not be has noisy as the Linux one, but it does exist, and they work hard to filling the gaps in Solaris that haven't been addressed yet.
Contra to the myth perpertrated by the 5minute linux fanboys, customers *don't* care about Linux, all they care about is the cheap and fairly reliable factor
"Linux is cheap and reliable."
On the x86 architecture Linux has been a proven success, and has been better than many commercial alternatives; including Solaris 9. Solaris 10 finally has the muster to compete with Linux on the PC architecture; I am not just going to switch to Solaris because of Solaris hype, most which was subsequently proven to be hype; especially after the MySQL benchmark.
What MySQL benchmark? I've only see a couple of benchmarks, and they're pretty subjective when justifying a move from one operating system to another.
You can stick with what ever you want. Its a free world, but don't go around thinking that just because you find Linux the bee's knee's, means that every other person will do the same.
Linux is a great desktop, I've got my parents, brother and sister setup using Slackware. They love it. I would never think of setting up Solaris for them - the hardware support is low, and it really isn't that desktop friendly BUT with that being said, I find it a great workstation operating system.
Yes, the operating system is picky about the hardware supported, but my experience is, the hardware it does support, it supports *VERY* well. As long as you stick to the supported pieces of hardware, you won't have a problem.
What MySQL benchmark? I've only see a couple of benchmarks, and they're pretty subjective when justifying a move from one operating system to another.
Exactly, that is why I am not moving to Solaris; because it is not a better server on the typical pc-architecture systems, and has a terrible track record on the pc-architecture.
http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/27/1243207&tid=7...
Sorry, there is already a 'Solaris community',
Never said their wasn't.
You do you realise that there is a purpose of FreeDOS beyond running it as a desktop or server operating system?
I have a feeling that you have read only the quoted portions of my post. A central tenet of my post was that not all operating systems developed have purposes beyond being a server or a desktop, or even making money.
Interesting, and you've never used Solaris 10.
Ofcourse I have used it.
"I think having a multi-threaded network stack is a good edition to a smp server, and is an expected feature of any operating system which hopes to compete at the enterprise level."
Actually from I've been seeing, the industry is moving to off-load the I/O processing from the CPU onto the NIC cards themselves by embedding dedicated processors. Intel and SUN have both been working on this for a while now since there is a trend that the more bits you push the more processor intensive the I/O becomes. Now unless these dedicated NIC processors happen to be SMP - I'm still not seeing the importance of multi-threading the network stack.
I don't see how things have changed with Solaris 10 and [phantom]OpenSolaris.
Wheres the huge migrations away from Linux? Wheres "Unbreakable Solaris" from Oracle? Wheres the ISVs pledging support for Solaris?
Solaris 10 is the hype friend, not Linux.
You expect huge migrations in a month. Solaris 10 was only released less than a month ago. Oracle already supports Solaris, they don't need to advertize it, it isn't new for them like linux was. Solaris already have a huge ISV base, why do you expect more news, in fact more then 200 x86 ISVs have already plegded support.
Solaris 10 is real.
I have seen that to Vincent. And that is a very good point. Though saying you have a multi-threaded network stack looks several years ago, is better than saying we just got a multi-threaded network stack several months ago.
Lets just agree to disagree.
Personally, Linux, *BSD, Solaris etc. are going to thrive. All of them have supporters, developers, hackers etc, each doing their part to improve their platform of choice.
IMHO, I don't want to see any operating systems disappear. Without Linux, there would have been no incentive for Solaris to improve on the x86, there would be no incentive to pull SUN's SPARC server pricing out of the stratosphere and down to earth, and there would definately no incentive for them to start offering their AMD server line up (which is a pretty good line up when compared to the rest of the industry).
OpenSolaris WILL give Linux competition, but I think the bigger enemy that both sides should concertrate on is Windows and the use of patent and DRM ridden technologies, and trying to come up with free (both speech and code) alternatives for both platforms.
Both sides should work together creating solutions for both platforms that can ultimately provide a replacement for Windows - Linux would be a great replacement for POS servers which are used at McDonalds, and are currently SCO UNIX. Solaris would be a great replacement for quad boxes running Windows and Exchange (Solaris + JES is a great combo).
On Johnnathon's Blog, he has already talked about an ISP replacing Linux boxes with Solaris - outlining the fact that the only reason why the company went with Linux was the fact that it ran on x86 boxes.
Personally, I don't see it as a win for Solaris; I see it as a loss for Microsoft. A loss for Microsoft, who ever wins it, is a good thing.
"Though saying you have a multi-threaded network stack looks several years ago, is better than saying we just got a multi-threaded network stack several months ago."
I do agree with you there, whatever its overall usefulness -- its never good to the one thats more than fashionably late to the party.
"The lame desktop that comes up (yeah, I did get it installed and working just fine) doesn't even provide any links to documentation, no clues whatsoever if someone want's to learn."
The lame desktop is GNOME, complete with Mozilla, Evolution, and StarOffice. The links to documentation are: http://docs.sun.com (accessible from www.sun.com) and http://sunsolve.sun.com (also accessible from www.sun.com).
Isn't it funny how people overlook the second paragraph of the MySQL benchmark article.
Before you skip ahead to the results section, bear one thing in mind: the question this article asks is "how would MySQL perform on these operating systems?" It is not, "Which is the best operating system?" In any benchmarking test, there will winners and losers, but the highest performer in one category for a limited set of tests does not a "best" operating system make. Each operating system has its strengths and weaknesses, and a single benchmark can only show a single strength or weakness with a very limited set of parameters.
and the following in the conclusion.
Scalability: overall
Overall, Linux 2.4, Linux 2.6, and Solaris scale the best with the tested MySQL operations. FreeBSD 5.3 (KSE and linuxthreads), and FreeBSD 4.11 (linuxthreads) also scale fairly well. FreeBSD 4.11 with the default libc_r threading, NetBSD 2.0, and OpenBSD 3.6 don't seem to benefit at all from the addition of multiple processors, and in some cases the results were even worse than the single-CPU configuration.
I guess that the problem with any kind of benchmark is that folks will quote the bits that they like, rather than actually looking at the conclusions (which they may not).
Alan.
ps: I've said this before, but it bears repeating. The Solaris tested was beta build 69. THat is more than three months old and there have been a number of issues addressed since then which would almost certainly have a bearing on the numbers.
Adam and A nun, he moos, I know you're another pogo-stick bouncing, hyped-up linux user who came in the last 4 years, but for goodness sake, get a clue on what you're talking about. I started using it waaaaaaaaaaaay back in 1995, prior to the Linux hype. Prior to the trolls, fanboys and hyped-up freaks like yourself.
If you can't make an argument without insulting others, then why should we take you seriously?
I am not a "hyped-up" freak. I work at a company developing proprietary software products. I don't care if OpenSolaris overtakes Linux or not. I'm simply calling it like I'm seeing it - and to me, the fact that Linux didn't belong to a single corporation and was distributed under the GPL was instrumental in people flocking to collaborate with Linus, using the software, making comments and changes - in other words, building a community.
I don't believe that OpenSolaris has what it takes to repeat the Linux success story or go beyond it. I could be wrong, but I do believe that Linux's momentum could not have happened without a dedicated community. Note that this community isn't only individuals, but corporations as well. The distro makers, of course, but also IBM, HP, Unilever, Fujitsu, Hitachi, Computer Associates, Intel...
Do you believe we'll see the same type of community around OpenSolaris which, even though it's open source, is still the propriety of Sun?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for a diverse OS ecosystem, and I hope that OpenSolaris will succeed. I just think that those who see it as a Linux-killer (whatever their motivations may be) are sorely mistaken.
Please note that I managed to make a point without calling you a fanboy, freak or zealot. Thank you.
Alan, not only did that benchmark use a beta Solaris build, they didn't use any of the Linux distributions corporations would actually use.
They used Gentoo, which is compiled specifically for the traget cpu with optimiztions as a part of the install process. The fact that even this highly optimized linux distribution only marginally bettered Solaris 10 build 69 is quite a revelation.
I would like to see the benchmark repeated with RHEL 4 and SUSE with the FCS Solaris 10. The conclusions of that benchmark will be more telling of how linux compares to Solaris 10 with information that CIOs can really use..
43% of Fortune 100 companies run Solaris. That alone speaks for itself. IBM maybe the middleware king, but SUN is still top-dog when it comes to UNIX servers.
the so-called "Gentoo optimisations" make maybe 1% of a difference ( well, one can find *some* applications with which a compilation for your specific processor actually makes a noticable difference - like an image processing applications or video players - but the benchmark did not touch those areas.... )
BTW, those Gentoo people who pile up tens upon tens of weird optimisation flags should, IMHO, get a life.
the so-called "Gentoo optimisations" make maybe 1% of a difference ( well, one can find *some* applications with which a compilation for your specific processor actually makes a noticable difference - like an image processing applications or video players - but the benchmark did not touch those areas.... )
Do you have any benchmarks to prove that it doesn't make a difference.
Fine even if it doesn't.... But the point here is is the problem. Let's say gentoo got 1% of a positive difference. Solaris 10 was a beta release with further optimizations in the area that would make a difference.
I think the author could have done a better job detailing how he built his Gentoo system. Personally I use Gentoo at home and I really have no clue how much the optimizations have effected my system.
43% of fortune 100 companies may run Solaris, but I bet 100% of them run Windows. The most popular UNIX like solution is Linux for web servers.
What I find even more curious is why the author didn't use Solaris 10 build 72
which was released in november 2004.
The article was published in February 8 and 9 2005. That is nearly 3 months after the release of Build 72.
Didn't Sun just lay off 2000 or so workers last week who where working on JDS and Linux?
No. The folks who got laid off did not number anywhere near
that many.
True, a lot of them were working on JDS, but not all of them.
@Seeingitasitis:
Morally bankrupt? Using props? Please, wake up and smell
the coffee! Remember that Sun is a business and not a
charity. Layoffs happen for business reasons at Sun
and not for political ones.
And by the way, I don't like it one bit that people got
laid off from Sun.
"The article was published in February 8 and 9 2005. That is nearly 3 months after the release of Build 72."
The likely explanations are:
1) "Unbiased journalism" is an oxymoron. Testing an old beta version of Solaris against an optimized Linux distro is still Solaris vs. Linux, right?
2) The author was just too lazy to download newer ISOs, thus probably too lazy to do proper benchmarking, anyway.
Right, Solaris still lost anyway. Build 72 wasn't availible when Sun hyped up claims of Solaris performing so much better than GNU/Linux.
Right, Solaris still lost anyway. Build 72 wasn't availible when Sun hyped up claims of Solaris performing so much better than GNU/Linux.
Please post data on said hype. Also we are talking about the MySQL benchmark, incase you didn't read the article and Alan's post of the snippet from the article. The article clearly claims the the MySQL benchmarks are not the be all and end all of benchmarks to definatively say that any one OS is the best.
I don't think so. I think the reason Linux became popular is that it did not really belong to anyone but the Linux community. The GPL is what made Linux popular, IMO.
Actually, I think what made Linux popular was simply that it seized the initiative. I started using it around '92 or '93, I think, and the reason I started using it wasn't because of the license or the technology (which was actually pretty shoddy in those days), but simply because it was the only Unix-like OS available for a 386 besides SCO, and I couldn't afford a $1000+ license. There were a few other things out there, like TinyBSD, or Coherent, but BSD development really hadn't coalesced, and Coherent wasn't available as a simple download from the net. Ultimately, I think those things were what gave Linux it's momentum: A.) it was available, and B.) it was easy to get, and (fairly) easy to find support for in Usenet and such. Basically, it was the first OS that was a true creature of the internet.
Probably if Solaris had been available for x86 and for free, or at least at a price competitive with DOS/Windows by 1994, Linux would have been a non-starter. Unfortunately for Solaris x86, I think the opportunity to establish itself as an OS for the commodity market has come and gone, regardless of what merits it might have technically. Linux already has the momentum and the support behind it, and it's adequate for any application I'd be running on x86. (Obviously, if you were talking about an application that required massive resources or 7/24 reliability, you'd probably be running it on Sparc/Solaris or Power/AIX, anyway).
We have a few x86 Solaris boxes in my shop, one serves as a firewall, one as an ftp server, and a few as low-budget desktops for people who really needed access to X applications on other servers.
Solaris is a great OS, but my experience with it on x86 isn't that great. It's rather slow in comparison in Linux, and the hardware support (especially video drivers) is very much lacking in comparison. In fairness, I haven't looked at Solaris 10 on x86, so it may have improved. But truthfully, I don't see much of a need for Solaris on x86 at this point. If x86 is the platform under consideration for your app, technological prowess probably isn't your highest priority anyway, and as far as support in terms hardware and application availability, Linux has already seized the momentum. Whether or not Solaris is a more advanced OS than Linux may be open to debate, but my hunch is that in the x86 market, the point is moot, anyway.
Is probably just like the problem Apple would have if it made its OS generally available. No one is going to push their customers on it if they are a competitor of Sun's. They probably would not go on about it but rather choose something that does not benefit their competitor every time they maje a sale. Sun is probably hoping that those who like Solaris will pressure vendor to promote OpenSolaris. Sun has made its intention with OpenSolaris clear. They want control and they get to keep all the code the community contributes. Why would IBM contribute some code when Sun has made it abundantly clear they will not do Linux the same favour. They missed the whole gist of Open Source right there. You share everything, or you share nothing.
> 43% of Fortune 100 companies run Solaris.
Actually the last time I checked Sun is present in all Fortune 100 companies. The 43% figure probably comes from those companies that run their core business on Solaris. So, yeah, Solaris is pretty huge in all large enterprises.
What exactly does this have to do with Java?
The article lists Linux 2.6, Evolution, Samba and apparently it "integrates accessibility features from Mozilla and Gnome". None of those involved Java last time I checked.
In fact, it sounds like just about any other Linux distro so far. What's so special about it that I'd want to pay Sun any money?
http://hk.sun.com/featured-articles/20041012.html#foot2
Alot of these Sun conducted benchmarks are misleading and just like the Microsoft ones in that they use different hardware.
Obviously these claims are completly hyped.
Don't believe those benchmarks, then look on spec.org and tpc.org
Is JDS 3 related with the project looking glass of sun?
"Yet another stupid linux troll...
1) There is no license called "BSDL""
Actually there is. It is called the BSD License...
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
as far as I know, they are not directly related. Looking Glass is an open-source project developed by Sun, and it is based on java. But you do not get Looking Glass with JDS.
>>
Fast forward to today. Solaris 10 x86 is free, and in a couple of months time, opensourced. So where is the advantage now for Linux?
<<<
I don't think Solaris will be entirely opensourced, and even what is opensourced will not be really open - it won't be GPL, but will use Sunw's much more restrictive "opensource" license.
>>the customer doesn't give a flying continental about the license.<<
Developers certainly care. Why should a developer volunteer his/her time just to make sunw rich?
>>making up old wives tails about how SUN is the root of all evil and how Scott is the spawn of Satan?<<
Something that is freshly made up is not an old wives tales.
>>Please, if you're going to compete, please come out with some *valid* case senarios.<<
How about Sunw's history of support with anything not proprietary suwnw? Sunw's history of supporting x86 is spotty at best. Can we trust sunw to enthusiasticly support a non-sunw platform?
Sunw support of Linux is worse, sunw conspired with scoxe and msft to FUD linux. Also sunw has publically claimed that Linux is only useful as a desktop, not a server - this stupid statement is obviously designed to protect sunw's real bread and butter. Even the name "Java Desktop" is idiotic, and clearly designed to promote sunw's real baby.
Simply put, I don't trust sunw with x86 and/or Linux. Not at this point. Since there are so many non-sunw alternatives, why go with a company you can't trust for x86 and/or Linux?
Sunw has some great technology, I respect sunw for that. But, I'll go elsewhere for my x86 and/or Linux solutions.
> Sunw support of Linux is worse, sunw conspired with scoxe and msft to FUD linux
This is the dumbest thing out of the entire Linux fanboy folklore. You have to be real nutcase to really think that it is true. Sun has no relationship to SCO lawsuit and there is abolutely no supporting facts to say otherwise. Sun made a payment to SCO to buy some of the IP and the drivers Sun needed to opensource Solaris. I don't think Sun would go this far to tarnish its reputation with the SCO scuffle.
> Simply put, I don't trust sunw with x86 and/or Linux.
Who do you trust then, IBM and HP, who are the two biggest M$ whores in the known universe? IBM that is already trying to push its own agenda with Linux running on proprietary pSeries hardware and trying sway minds from x86 to Power? Sun is the biggest friend of Linux and Unix in general. Sun is the biggest reason Linux/Unix is making any inroads on the desktop and for that exact reason Sun is the #1 desktop Linux vendor (not IBM or RedHat). As far as anything Unix is concerned Sun is the only company I trust, since it is the only company that stayed true to Unix even through the toughest times.
Yet another stupid linux troll...
Hey, someone else who can't post an argument without resorting to insults.
There is no license called "BSDL"
I meant the BSD License. "L" for license. Hey, it was late. Shoot me.
3) GPL is much more restrictive in terms of rights because it doesn't allow creating propitary fork, while CDDL and MPL do.
I don't think you can. From the CDDL:
"Any Covered Software that You distribute or otherwise make available in Executable form must also be made available in Source Code form and that Source Code form must be distributed only under the terms of this License."
"The Modifications that You create or to which You contribute are governed by the terms of this License. You represent that You believe Your Modifications are Your original creation(s) and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License."
Again, I managed to make a point without insulting anyone. You ought to try it sometimes.
Sun has no relationship to SCO lawsuit and there is abolutely no supporting facts to say otherwise. Sun made a payment to SCO to buy some of the IP and the drivers Sun needed to opensource Solaris.
More coverup from OSNews' resident Sun shill. SCO granted Sun a ton of SCO stock at $1.83 per share (it went over $20/share shortly after the lawsuit FUD started) as part of the licensing deal. Straight-up deals for drivers don't include stock options!
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1024633.html?tag=fd_top
Who do you trust then, IBM and HP, who are the two biggest M$ whores in the known universe?
LOL. Sun is just a well-paid ($2B) sock puppet for Microsoft these days. Sun didn't have a choice, once their finances got so bad their credit rating was lowered to "junk" quality.
http://news.com.com/Sun+settles+with+Microsoft,+announces+layoffs/2...
I personally love Swing very much. I thought that JDS was Linux kernel and filesystem with X.org or XFree86 and everything else is built by Java. Because if they really do that, it would be so cool that Java enthusiasts would contribute their superior apps to this desktop and make it a 80% pure Java desktop for everybody.
In terms of normal use, desktop users or even business users will appreciate this desktop even though apps load time may take longer because of JVM. However, they will eventually appreciate the stability of the apps because apps developers are not allowed to touch any pointers and only to Java API. Therefore, developers cannot directly touch any kernel or user level libraries to crash the system. Although Linux apps are developed by Java, they are allowed to install native Linux apps.
Recently, Sun seems like having trouble holding their flag of Java in JCP, I believe it is time for their wonderful Java developers to show their power again.
P.S. For those C/C++ or other programmers, please do not get me wrong. I love C/C++ as well because they are so free as in freedom that you can program anything you want and you are not limited by libraries or API. However, the above suggestion is just my opinion or like. I just wanna show it to see some feedback. Happy programming 
I learned nothing about Java Desktop from most of these comments. Way to go - I was hoping to get some insights from people who use it. But I guess you're all hyped up on too much caffeine and barking up too many wrong trees, and too busy nit-picking each others' points.
*chuckle*
All this confusion about the Java Desktop being based on a linux or a solaris kernel stems from Sun inability to accurately describe their own products. Here is another illustration : the Solaris 10 Advanced User's Guide (http://docs.sun.com) contains a paragraph dealing with networking (9. Using the Network). It describes the following commands : rogin, rcp, rsh and rusers. These are collectively known as the r-commands. Daniel Barrett and Richard Silverman talk about them in their book ("SSH, The Secure Shell : The Definitive Guide", pages 12-13) :
"The r-commands don't encrypt their connections and have a weak, easily subverted authentication model. (...) Given SSH superior security features and that ssh is backward-compatible with rsh (and scp with rcp), we see no compelling reason to run the r-commands any more. Install SSH and be happy."
In most Unix books published recently, these commands are mentioned as junk. Even the OpenBSD store sells a poster depicting their burial by Puff the blowfish.
On one hand, Sun boasts about Solaris 10 built-in security (N1 Grid Containers, process and user rights management, automated patch tools, Solaris Cryptographic Framework, etc.), on the other they still ship notoriously insecure protocols five years after OpenSSH was released. So, what are end users supposed to believe ?
It should have been Sun, instead of Sum. I guess I should go to bed now.
> On one hand, Sun boasts about Solaris 10 built-in security (N1 Grid Containers, process and user rights management, automated patch tools, Solaris Cryptographic Framework, etc.), on the other they still ship notoriously insecure protocols five years after OpenSSH was released. So, what are end users supposed to believe ?
Err, are you trying to make fun of your own arrogance and ignorance or what exactly are you trying to achieve with this nonsense you posted? All r-commands are shipped with Solaris 10 as an option, just as in pretty much any Linux distribution out there -- you can take it or leave it depending on your needs to support legacy environments. But if speak strict security Solaris 10 is still miles ahead of Linux, its a fact.
strict security Solaris 10 is still miles ahead of Linux, its a fact
More FUD. Both Linux and Solaris have the same security rating (EAL 4+)
More FUD. Both Linux and Solaris have the same security rating (EAL 4+)
Well, to be fair, only SuSE Linux has been awarded the EAL4 rating, and only very recently. That said, this is an important landmark for Linux as it means it can now be used by the DoD, IIRC.
only SuSE Linux has been awarded the EAL4 rating
Unfortunately, that's how the rating works: one specific version (you can't even apply updates without hoop jumping) of an OS. No "family" certifications.
> More FUD. Both Linux and Solaris have the same security rating (EAL 4+)
Yeah, dream on. Linux hasn't certified at EAL 4+ yet, only Trusted Solaris has that rating. I don't think Linux will be able to achieve EAL 4+ in a few years at least, since (if I'm not mistaking) that level of certification requires a trusted desktop, which is completely absent in the Linux land but is present in Trusted Solaris.
Linux hasn't certified at EAL 4+ yet
The only thing you read must be Sun sales brochures.
http://www.pcmag.co.uk/news/1161261
> http://www.pcmag.co.uk/news/1161261
Heh, it would interesting to see under what conditions they achieved the certification. They could have achieved it under conditions of the server being uplugged from the network (M$ did that with Windows NT a long time ago). If you know a thing or two about security, comparig Trusted Solaris with anything in the Linux land (including SELinux) is just laughable -- there are too many pieces still missing in Linux to make a decent contender to Trusted Solaris. SELinux still doesn't have trusted desktop, trusted printing, and trusted networking just to name a few things. Trusted Solaris has been a benchmark for security for a long time and don't see this changing any time soon.
Er, you were clearly proven wrong: SuSE Linux has in fact been awarded EAL 4+. Don't try to change the subject or try to minimize this achievement.
SUSE LES 9 on IBM hardware has a rating of EAL 4+ not SUSE Linux ingeneral.
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/56451
The evaluation in compliance with the security specifications Common Criteria Assurance Level 4+ (CC EAL4+) of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 (SLES 9) on IBM eServer, as the first Linux system to be so evaluated, has been completed successfully.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5144199.html
Lab Manager of atsec's Common Criteria Testing Laboratory in Austin, Texas, notes, "No other commercial operating system has had security scrutinized and tested as regularly, on such a large number of hardware platforms, as Linux."
http://www.itsecurity.com/tecsnews/feb2005/feb130.htm
Everytime there's an article about Sun, the Sun bashers will never fail to appear.
It's either Solaris is not as fast as linux, or there's no community for openSolaris , or CDDL is too restrictive, or Sun is Microsoft's puppet....blah blah blah....and some other crap..
...and posting under multiple user names, because I keep hearing the same lies and distortions repeated over and over again. Look folks, just because you keep repeating the suggestion that OpenSolaris is not open source because the CDDL doesn't permit you to rob Solaris to enhance Linux (fat chance anyway, since most of you probably can't spell C much less code) does not, and will not, ever make it true. Furthermore, if Linux is so incredibly superior to Solaris to begin with, what do you care what the terms of the license are? You don't need all those useless bits of inferior technology right? Right?
This is both comical, and embarassing for the OSS community at the same time.
Heh, it would interesting to see under what conditions they achieved the certification. They could have achieved it under conditions of the server being uplugged from the network
No facts. You don't know anything about the SuSE Linux certification, so you try and FUD it. Typical Sun.
I can smell the fear a mile away - this certification cuts out one of the last reasons anyone has to buy Solaris over Linux.
Errr...isn't Solaris 10 free?
Let's see...Solaris 10 = free, Suse Linux = $???
Damn, what a difficult decision to make...
please, if you have not worked in big Government data center, stop critisizing Sun...
Everytime there's an article about Sun, the Sun bashers will never fail to appear.
Is it "Sun bashing" to disagree with those who predict that OpenSolaris will render Linux obsolete?
Let me put it this way: every time there's an article about Sun, some posters take the opportunity to bash Linux.
It's either [...] there's no community for openSolaris
Nobody said that. What we said is that OpenSolaris doesn't have a big enough community to be a Linux-killer.
What I don't understand is why some Sun advocates see Linux as the enemy they must beat. Why can't they be happy with peaceful co-existence? Fortunately, most people are...
wealterbyrd is the new AC in OSNews forums, apparently. Your conspiracy theories are quite entertaining. If they believe Linux is so poor on the server, why does Sun sell Linux on their servers? If they are really out to destroy Linux via SCO, why do they develop their JDS first on SuSE Linux?
Look at thier actions. If you are so worried about occasional trash coming out of their marketing department (their marketing dept. is pretty retarded at times), you really shouldn't be so worried about it. Their actions are to support Linux for customers who want it. Hell, they became the biggest Linux seller almost overnight in a single deal with China! (of course, to you, they are now supporting a communist regime...)
To reiterate what someone mentioned at the beginning of this thread.
"Errr...isn't Solaris 10 free?"
Yes with NO support.
"Let's see...Solaris 10 = free, Suse Linux = $???"
SUSE 9.2 FTP install for free
SUSE 9.2 DVD iso for free.
"please, if you have not worked in big Government data center, stop critisizing Sun..."
Please, if you don't have a clue (such as yourself), don't post at all.
Please post things in context.
In the 18 months following initial certification, six additional evaluations have tested versions of Red Hat Linux and Novell/SUSE Linux software on a range of IBM and HP hardware platforms at progressively more secure Common Criteria levels. Gordon McIntosh, Lab Manager of atsec's Common Criteria Testing Laboratory in Austin, Texas, notes, "No other commercial operating system has had security scrutinized and tested as regularly, on such a large number of hardware platforms, as Linux."
They are talking about the various linux flavors they have tested in the past 18 months. Most of them are EAL 2 or 3 only SUSE Linux ES 9 has EAL 4 on IBM eservers.
The problem with your logic is that only one Solaris, windows or AIX or HP/UX exist. Multiple different vendors do linux most of them fare far worse than any of the above mentioned. Only one Linux distro has been certified EAL 4 that too on IBM eserver hardware. So SUSE is not Linux in general.
Is it "Sun bashing" to disagree with those who predict that OpenSolaris will render Linux obsolete?
Let me put it this way: every time there's an article about Sun, some posters take the opportunity to bash Linux.
The real question is if the Sun Zealots go to linux related articles to bash linux. The answer is a big no. Why do Linux zealots never fail to cease an oppurtunity to bash Sun.
Oh..sorry..I didn't know Suse 9.2 is free..
duhhhh....who doesn't know Suse 9.2 is free???
Try getting Suse Enterprise Server for free...
Empty vessels make the most noise...
"Oh..sorry..I didn't know Suse 9.2 is free..
duhhhh....who doesn't know Suse 9.2 is free???"
Err...right.
"Try getting Suse Enterprise Server for free... "
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxenterpriseserver/eval.html
Also you get FREE 30 day installation support. Even after the 30 days have elapsed, you get free security updates.
Yeah...whatever...u win..alright? happy now??
The orginal topic for this thread is about JDS3, and now some linux freak want to argue about license fee. No point arguing with such people, cause it can never get into their heads.
"Yeah...whatever...u win..alright? happy now??"
Not really.
"The orginal topic for this thread is about JDS3, and now some linux freak want to argue about license fee."
First I don't consider myself a "Linux freak", secondly you are the one that started the conversion of license fee. In the end, I proved you were wrong.
I try to make a rebuttal and I am attacked. I'm very unimpressed by the Sun fans. You were wrong, why are you lashing out on me?
"No point arguing with such people, cause it can never get into their heads."
What are you trying to teach me?
The real question is if the Sun Zealots go to linux related articles to bash linux. The answer is a big no. Why do Linux zealots never fail to cease an oppurtunity to bash Sun.
Again, as I've said earlier, it is not "bashing Sun" to express doubts when some people claim Solaris 10 x86 will be a Linux-killer. Just like it's not bashing Linux to express doubts that it will overtake Windows on the desktop in the near future (or ever).
It should be possible to discuss the merits of Solaris without bashing Linux, don't you agree?
In these Solaris threads, the OS was compared to XP or Server Exchange instead of Linux? Does Sun only hope to take away marketshare from Linux, or do they actually plan on competing with Microsoft? Honestly, we have Sun declaring Solaris the most advanced OS in the world, and a lot of talk in this forum on how great it is, but what's the plan for dealing with MS? Is there a plan or is ruling the OSS world the only goal Sun has?
Considering Sun is one of the few companies providing complete interoperability with Active Directory and Exchange (through SJS Directory, Messaging, and Calendar Servers) environments, they seem to be one of the few poised to actually compete with MS in enterprise environments...
IMO, Sun's primary way of competing against Microsoft is with open standards. Sun really implments few (none?) closed standards like Microsoft does with Office, Windows Media, etc.
Microsoft does Passport -> Sun joins Liberty Alliance
Microsoft does .NET -> Sun continues pushing J2EE
Microsoft does MS Office -> Sun releases OpenOffice.org
Microsoft does Windows just well enough to market it -> Solaris is POSIX and UNIX compliant and soon will be OSS.
Microsoft does SMB/CIFS -> Sun does NFS
And so forth.
It was Red Hat who declared their "support" for OpenSolaris to be the "final nail in the coffin" for Sun.
By the way...
That childish remark cost them at least 1 sale involving 6 RHEL licenses and 3 years of support. I'll gladly take my money to Novell and Sun thank you very much.
"I do not think the MySQL benchmarks -- which we have all seen -- where all hype. If you do not remember GNU/Linux beat Solaris 10.
If you do not remember Solaris 9 was terrible and sluggish on the PC architecture, if GNU/Linux can rival and beat a UNIX, such as Solaris 9, I would rather use GNU/Linux."
Aren't you talking against yourself there? First you say linux beats solaris 10 beta in mysql test, and then you say solaris 9 was sluggish on x86. Which kind of says you know solaris 10 is better. What says it wont become even more optimized for x86 soon?
Considering Sun is one of the few companies providing complete interoperability with Active Directory and Exchange (through SJS Directory, Messaging, and Calendar Servers) environments, they seem to be one of the few poised to actually compete with MS in enterprise environments...
Err, no. If they're promising compatibility with Active Directory then Microsoft has won and has Sun by the balls simply because they'll always be following Microsoft, Active Directory and Exchange. Sun are also at the mercy of Microsoft's licensing terms and what Microsoft choose to release should they be stupid enough to take up any offers. I hardly calling that competing, but then, Sun always have been a pretty stupid company when it comes to such things.
First you say linux beats solaris 10 beta in mysql test
Which it did, and does.
and then you say solaris 9 was sluggish on x86.
Which it was and is.
Which kind of says you know solaris 10 is better.
Maybe he didn't bother using Solaris 10 on x86, like just about everyone else. I did, and it's certainly nowhere near a Linux system especially as a desktop, but also as a server. I thought it was going to blow Linux away performance-wise?
What says it wont become even more optimized for x86 soon?
It really doesn't matter if it does.
Actually wasn't talking so much about the corporate desktop as the home desktop. Competing on the corporate desktop is easy. Getting Dell, HP, etc. to pre-load on their PCs will be the challenge, though perhaps less of a challenge since Jobs still won't port OS X.
That childish remark cost them at least 1 sale involving 6 RHEL licenses and 3 years of support. I'll gladly take my money to Novell and Sun thank you very much.
But of course Sun have made no childish remarks of any description and have always behaved impeccably.
Besides. Even if you do end up taking your business to Sun you'll probably end up using Linux (probably Red Hat!) and not Solaris anyway, as on x86 that's all people are buying from Sun.
Is your board board owned, or controled, by Sunw, or just Sunw zealots?
There was absolutely nothing wrong with my post, I repeat, *absolutely nothing*. I was 100% respectful and truthful. No profanity, no insulting. I was just expressing my opinion like everybody else. I even ended my post by honestly complementing sunw.
Are the moderators of this board such fanatic sunw zealots, that even the slightest criticism of sunw gets your post deleted?
BTW: this is not the first time this has happend.
>>If they [sunw] believe Linux is so poor on the server, why does Sun sell Linux on their servers?<<
I'm sorry, but sunw *has* publically commented that linux is useful as desktop, but not a server. I wouldn't be surprised if sunw reversed their position, that is sunw's way.
>>If they are really out to destroy Linux via SCO, why do they develop their JDS first on SuSE Linux? <<
Because sunw is a company that is in some trouble, and for the last two years or so, instead of developing a solid strategy, suwn has been running around like a chicken with it's head cut off reversing it's position on various subjects about every other month.
Consider: sunw supports x86, sunw stops supporting x86, sunw start supporting x86 again. Sunw loves Linux, Sunw bashes linux, sunw loves linux again - but only only on the desktop not the server. No, scratch that, Linux is good on the server too. But don't forget Linux = Java. Sunw bashes msft, then sunw loves msft. For months sunw is 100% behind scoxe, both verbally and financially, then when the sh!t hits the fan it's "scoxe? . . . scoxe who?" Of course whenever a competitor comes out with a new product - out comes the news announcement: "sunw to open-source solaris" - in case you didn't know, sunw has been saying that for seven years now.
And if your are going to claim that it's just sunw's marketing dept, then you better include mcneally and shwartz in that department.
Ok, here is a good one for you.
Just been playing with Solaris 10.
Started X without any desktop.
Couldn't get out so switched the power off.
After reboot, JDS (Gnome) displays big error message that Nautilus can't be started, bla, bla, bla.
What a joke.
One shutdown and the system is hosed.
Never happened to me on Linux with KDE. And rarely on Windows too.
Err, no. If they're promising compatibility with Active Directory then Microsoft has won and has Sun by the balls simply because they'll always be following Microsoft, Active Directory and Exchange.
So let me get this straight, you consider interoperability with Microsoft to be a bad thing?
Lack of enterprise management tools is what has really been holding back Linux's foray into the world of the corporate desktop. Solaris, on the other hand, offers enterprise management and integration through standard protocols like Kerberos and LDAP, while still providing integration into existing Microsoft environments. In this way, you can begin a phased transition away from Windows and Office towards JDS and StarOffice/OO.o while allowing your JDS systems to play nicely with Windows ones and allowing users to continue using their existing accounts and resources.
Sun are also at the mercy of Microsoft's licensing terms and what Microsoft choose to release should they be stupid enough to take up any offers. I hardly calling that competing, but then, Sun always have been a pretty stupid company when it comes to such things.
Seems much more likely that you lack any kind of enterprise experience and simply don't understand what their requirements are. Go into any heavily Exchange-dependent environment and offer anything without Exchange compatibility and you're likely to get the door slammed in your face.
Sun has positioned itself to where it can sell a complete enterprise backend solution for $100/employee/yr while providing complete integration into Windows Active Directory environments and full Exchange compatibility. Given this they can *gasp* compete with Microsoft in the enterprise server space for Windows environments, something Linux has been relatively unable to do considering how cumbersome and immature solutions like Samba 3.0 are compared to SJS Directory Server (and of course, it provides nothing in terms of Exchange compatibility)
Novell is trying to get Linux there and may do so soon, however it's highly doubtful they will attain SJS's degree of reliability in integrating with Windows environments for quite some time. Until then, if you have a Windows network and want to transition away from it towars a Unix-based environment, JES is the way to go.
> If they're promising compatibility with Active Directory then Microsoft has won and has Sun by the balls simply because they'll always be following Microsoft, Active Directory and Exchange.
David, you never fail to amaze me how idiotic most of your comments are. You serously fell off the clue train and probably landed on your head. Sun is fiercely competing in both messaging and directory space with Microsoft and I bet they'll be damn if they give any of their market to MS. Read the product sheets for JES Messaging Server, it is targetted primary at the Exchange. Sun has never followed Active Directory or any of the MS federation efforts (Sun heading the Libery Alliance was the reason MS gave up on Passport). The recent dealings between Sun and MS have to do with directory interoperability from both vendors and possibly providing a federation solution accross both Sun JES Directory Server and Active Directory. Technologies from Sun and Microsoft are absolutely orthogonal to each other in all respects, so I do not see it even theoretically how MS could use Sun to its advantage.
"Consider: sunw supports x86, sunw stops supporting x86, sunw start supporting x86 again. Sunw loves Linux, Sunw bashes linux, sunw loves linux again - but only only on the desktop not the server. No, scratch that, Linux is good on the server too. But don't forget Linux = Java. Sunw bashes msft, then sunw loves msft. For months sunw is 100% behind scoxe, both verbally and financially, then when the sh!t hits the fan it's "scoxe? . . . scoxe who?" Of course whenever a competitor comes out with a new product - out comes the news announcement: "sunw to open-source solaris" - in case you didn't know, sunw has been saying that for seven years now."
Sun didn't support x86 initially in Solaris 9, but they were forced by their customer base to bring it back. Sun does listen to their customers, and they have no choice but to keep x86 from now on. It even worked out well for them, considing Solaris 10 on Opteron is pretty nifty.
Even while Sun's verbal support of Linux took a while to settle down, all the while they started out with Cobalt, then moved forward with the LX50 server, expanded to the v60x and v65x servers, and has now taken the gloves off with the v20z and v40z, all of which run Linux as a main OS option. That is a pretty consistent progression up, IMO.
Sun does not like Microsoft in any capacity. They settled with Microsoft to end years of lawsuits. $2 billion is just a touch of justice, this round.
The attempts to link Sun with SCO over the Linux lawsuits are just laugable, because there's no proof. It's a conspiracy theory. All public evidence points to Sun licensing IP from SCO for OpenSolaris and Solaris x86.
Sun has said that they have been working on OpenSolaris for five years; they will release it in June, thereabouts; and, the source code is already in the hands of the pilot program members. It is real enough.
Why the ridiculous fashion on OSNews for referring to companies by their stock ticker? Sun is Sun. It's not sunw, that's how it's referred to in a certain specific context which we are nowhere near.
"Why the ridiculous fashion on OSNews for referring to companies by their stock ticker?"
One possibility is it makes people feel important by association. The stock market is important, therefore if I use SUNW instead of Sun, I'm important, too, right?
Or, it could be an arrogant jab at the stock performance of the IT industry, Sun in particular, over the last couple of years.
Or, it could be that people are just plain lazy and can't take the time to type out "Sun"...
Considering Sun is one of the few companies providing complete interoperability with Active Directory and Exchange (through SJS Directory, Messaging, and Calendar Servers) environments, they seem to be one of the few poised to actually compete with MS in enterprise environments..
I don't believe the question was "can they?", but rather "will they?"...
>>The attempts to link Sun with SCO over the Linux lawsuits are just laugable, because there's no proof.<<
Funny thing, all those years, sunw never needed anything from scoxe. Then all of the sudden, out of nowhere, sunw needs all this scoxe technology. And, wouldn't you know it, it just happend to occure at the exact same time that msft all-of-the-sudden needed a bunch of scoxe licenses. And, funny thing, both of those incidents happend just after scoxe sued ibm, and needed all of those millions for legal expenses. What extrodenary multiple coincidnces.
But it doesn't stop there, not even close. Sunw was insistant to keep their purchase from scoxe on the QT. Now isnt' that funny? Why would a legitimate purchase be such a big secret? And stock warrants? Since when is a legitimate technology purchase come with a boat load of stock warrants?
And how about mcnealy's gloating about having the only legal version of linux right after the purchase? How about mcnealy going around parroting mcbride about the scoxe/msft bogus "indemnity" issue?
Seems like a little that just an ordinary purchase to me.
>>It's a conspiracy theory.<<
Maybe so. But such conspiracies really do happen, especially when msft is involved.
>>All public evidence points to Sun licensing IP from SCO for OpenSolaris and Solaris x86.<<
Except for the boatload of evidence I just specified.
I think that solaris will not fare well against linux. Too little too late. Linux is now enterprise ready and getting better all the time. The management at Sun really seems screwed up. The new open source solaris license is restrictive, Sun does not want to share or relinquish control. As a result Sun will not attract the community or mindshare it desires.
To succeed, Sun needs to do an IBM, that is to really get behind linux. It will take a lot more than Scott Mcnealy in a penguin suit. If Sun were to GPL java/solaris/staroffice it would gain the community and mindshare it desires and could remain relevant.
Sun does not offer any products or services that I am interested in, Sun does not have my respect as a company, therefore I am not a Sun customer. Apparently there are many others who feel the same way.
Just a minor correction, Microsofts "single sign-on" was never a federation model. It was an extremely centralised, 'give all your information to us so that we can sell it back to you' service. SUN won that round, they proved that business DON'T want to hand over their customer database to Microsoft, simply to get that information sold back at a premium, under the guise of a "single sign-on".
As for the other nuts; Solaris x86 was NEVER started. YES they offered it, but NO it was never a core part of their server strategy, so in actual fact, this is the FIRST Solaris x86 strategy.
Solaris 9 x86 was to allow people to get their applications running on Solaris x86, Solaris 10 is the big splash. In the next year, you'll some some awesome technology being released; The SPARC stations will eventually be mothballed in favour of Opteron based machines loaded with Solaris 10 and Janus as to allow existing Linux customers to continue to use the applications they rely on, until such time that the software vendor ports the application across to Solaris natively.
In 18months time, you'll see a completely different SUN, up to 8 CPUS will be dominated by Opteron, SPARCS will be the 8 way plus, as well as catering for the mission critical telcommunicationss sector, which IIRC the first Niagara will be focused on (since the first version will not be SMP enabled - Rock, which will appear a year later will be).
As for the idiot regarding GPL'ing Java/StarOffice/Solaris; StarOffice is licensed under the LGPL, Solaris will NEVER be licensed under the GPL as it would be detrimental to any third party vendor wishing to write software for that particular platform - just take a look at the hell that is writing drivers for Linux; not only are driver writers having to deal with the lava lamp like unpredictability of the Linux driver API, they've also got to make sure that they don't step on any parts of the kernel that may require them to opensource their code.
SUN, every step of the way, has taken the pragmatic approach. Not only must they keep their customers happy, but their partners as well. SUN just doesn't exist in a vacuum, and that they don't have to consider the impact of their licensing changes on their customers and partners.
Licensing, opensourcing etc. are complex issues. SUN is gradually moving through these issues, and making sure they get it right the first time.
Oh, and btw, the parts that SUN have opensourced, are actually valuable. I can't think of ONE bit of technology IBM has provided which has been worth while.
Their volume management software now plays second fiddle, their JFS is merely there for existing customers, NGPL never actually saw the light of day as a superior one was developed, namely, NPTL by Red Hat coders. Eclipse? Bah, honestly, having used it, its a joke, really it is.
This is out of the box, I can't create a form, plugins are difficult to install, stability is iffy at best etc. Please, I am a programmer; my job isn't to debug IBMs shoddy work for them.
Boy, you sound exactly like the Windows guys when Linux first appeared on the scene.
Everybody said Linux didn't have a snowball's chance in hell to upstage Windows on the desktop. The same converts are now saying Solaris can't take on Linux. See how much you guys sound like "Microsoft Shills" execpt you're now IBM or Redhat or Novell shills.
People were wrong then and people are wrong again - Linux is just the kernel - nothing else. Infact the "kernel" part of Linux is badly designed. The rest of the Linux kernel is drivers - and drivers are really easy to develop/port on other operating systems. Once Solaris gets all the drivers you'll have no good reason not to look at Solaris. You'll have all the open source apps: Gnome/kde/office/mozilla/apache/perl/mysql/qt/etc/etc.etc - so exactly what's missing? You'll even be able to emerge to your heart's content once Gentoo starts with Open Solaris.
Linux makes driver developers life hell with all the arbitrary versioning and changes - Solaris is rock solid so driver developers can focus on making stable drivers for Solaris not chasing arbitrary kernel interface changes that Linus and co can cookup in the middle of the night. Don't believe me?. Try getting your Nvidia driver working on a "linus' development 2.6.11" series and it doesn't work. Nvidia's engineers are frustrated by constant kernel changes.
As for the other nuts; Solaris x86 was NEVER started. YES they offered it, but NO it was never a core part of their server strategy, so in actual fact, this is the FIRST Solaris x86 strategy.
More coverup from a Sun fanboi. The only a reason it wasn't a "core part of their server strategy" is that they *lost* money all nine years they sold Solaris x86 and Solaris x86 support. This time they're giving away the OS and selling overpriced x86 hardware hardly anybody's buying. The funny thing is even when Sun _does_ get an x86 sale, the sale is usually based on Linux and not Solaris! If this continues, then OpenSolaris is just Sun's exit strategy - along with another wave of layoffs.
The only a reason it wasn't a "core part of their server strategy" is that they *lost* money all nine years they sold Solaris x86 and Solaris x86 support. This time they're giving away the OS and selling overpriced x86 hardware hardly anybody's buying. The funny thing is even when Sun _does_ get an x86 sale, the sale is usually based on Linux and not Solaris! If this continues, then OpenSolaris is just Sun's exit strategy - along with another wave of layoffs.
First, please don't parrot David. Sun didn't really sell x86 boxes till recently. So they really didn't have an x86 strategy. Sun used to have Solaris x86 like Microsoft used to have Windows for Alpha, Redhat had linux for SPARC. None of those were real strategies for any of the companies.
Sun with Solaris 10 is begining thier real x86 strategy, it's too premature to assume that it has not yet worked. Sun has been selling linux on x86 boxen because customers wanted them. They also have been selling Solaris 9 on x86. I find it funny that when Sun does sell linux, Linux fanbois think it is a bad thing.
I would like you and david to come back in one year and tell me if Solaris on x86 still isn't selling.
Sun didn't really sell x86 boxes till recently. So they really didn't have an x86 strategy.
The sun fanboi/shill team (kaiwai, raptor, etc.) has a new meme to parrot. In this meme, Sun's Solaris strategy between 1994 and 2002 just didn't happen! LOL.
http://www.save-solaris.org/mcnealy.html
Potential Sun customers, remember that this could happen to YOU if you fall for Sun's sales pitch de jur.
The sun fanboi/shill team (kaiwai, raptor, etc.) has a new meme to parrot. In this meme, Sun's Solaris strategy between 1994 and 2002 just didn't happen! LOL.
http://www.save-solaris.org/mcnealy.html
Nowhere in that site does it say that Sun sold and supported x86 boxes like the do today. I have said they had Solaris x86 as a second fiddle, now it is part of the prime strategy.
I see now that you aren't able to come up with cogent arguments you fallback on name calling and mudslinging, Very mature..... Atleast us Sun advocates have some decency.
From the site you linked.
All these and more show Sun's comitment to Solaris on x86.
http://www.save-solaris.org/mcnealy-nc04q4-chat.html
Q: Besides the HCL, have you had much luck with 3rd party vendors
providing native support drivers for Solaris 10 x86?
Larry Wake (A): Yes. We're getting a lot of interest from vendors
that we'd not seen before.
______________________
Q: Have you addressed the issues that earned Solaris the nickname
"Slowaris"?
Mike Shapiro (A): Yes, absolutely. A ton of performance work has
gone into Solaris 10, including large-scale subsystem improvements
(FireEngine TCP/IP, ZFS filesystems), micro-optimizations (many system
calls made faster), and h/w optimizations (taking advantage of the
SSE/SSE2 instruction sets on x86 systems for things like bcopy etc).
All this adds up to big performance wins over previous versions, and
makes Solaris 10 the fastest OS (and 64-bit) on the latest x86
hardware.
Q: Is the predicative self-healing in Solaris 10 available on x86
platform? For example, if one DIMM is going bad on my x86 PC server,
will Solaris 10 x86 safely bypass the defective part?
Mike Shapiro (A): Yes, Predictive Self-Healing will support x86
systems. The Service Manager is common and runs on both x86 and SPARC
today (and in Solaris 10 G/A in January). The x86 Predictive
Self-Healing support for the Fault Manager (for CPUs, memory and I/O)
is scheduled to appear in Solaris 10 Update 1, early next year.
Q: Besides ZFS, are there any other exciting features we may see
in future updates that just didn't make this 10 release?
Tom Goguen (A): There are a couple of others -- The Linux
Applications Environment will be coming in an update and we have an
improved x86 install and boot coming later as well.
Q: Are there differences between the x86 and Sparc
implementations of 10, and if so, what are they?
Adam Leventhal (A): In terms of functionality, there's little to
no difference between Solaris 10 on x86 and SPARC. We have the
absolute minimum amount of architecture-specific code -- the less we
have the less there is to maintain. The architecture-specific code we
have mostly handles machine-specific functions or low-level support.
______________________________________________________________________
Q: I saw a post on x86 laptops running Solaris 10. Am I dreaming
? Solaris will be open source , can we run it on (cheaper) Ultrasparcs
?
Jack O'Brien (A): see supported hardware list for all hardware
including laptops. sun.com/bigadmin/hcl. yes solaris will be open
source for all supported platforms
______________________________________________________________________
Q: The installer in Solaris 9 wasn't all that great, sometimes it
reminded me of a BSD installer. Will you release a new user friendly
installer for solaris?
Larry Wake (A): There is indeed a new installer underway for
Solaris -- it'll be out in either the first or second Solaris 10
update. Much simpler, and maybe a bit more familiar to those used to
other boot/install technologies.
_______________________________________
I see now that you aren't able to come up with cogent arguments you fallback on name calling and mudslinging, Very mature..... Atleast us Sun advocates have some decency.
LOL. I post evidence and links. You try and pretend it didn't happen and post...your vague feeling that Sun really means it this time.
Here are a few of the things Sun advocates have posted in this thread: stupid linux troll, Linux nutcase, complete moron, 5minute linux fanboys, IBM or Redhat or Novell shills, parrot. Heck, one of you guys even triggered Godwin's Law with a Joseph Goebbels reference.
LOL. I post evidence and links. You try and pretend it didn't happen and post...your vague feeling that Sun really means it this time.
Please copy paste, specific text from your "evidence and links" that shows Sun had solaris x86 as a primary strategy from 1994 to 2002.
As for the rest of you post. Even the most decent person has a tolerence level. Every Sun/Soalris articles attracts linux shills in doves mudslinging and bashing. Frankly it is getting tiring.
I want you to show me evidence that Sun advocates do the same on linux articles.
that shows Sun had solaris x86 as a primary strategy from 1994 to 2002
That's a red herring argument you made up, not me - and I'm not biting. It was Sun's ONE and ONLY x86 strategy for nearly a decade and thus a very good way to judge their actions now. As long as Sun is addicted to high-margin SPARC sales to prop up their weak botttom line, Sun x86 customers are vulnerable to the 2002 strategy. Now, if they would sell off the hardware business...
I want you to show me evidence that Sun advocates do the same on linux articles
LOL. More red herring. Do your own research. You claimed Sun advocates were "mature" and "decent" - I demonstrated that was false.
Solaris will NEVER be licensed under the GPL as it would be detrimental to any third party vendor wishing to write software for that particular platform- just take a look at the hell that is writing drivers for Linux;
Drivers are only a very small part of writing software. There's no issues with writing commercial software for Linux, it's perfectly allowed.
they've also got to make sure that they don't step on any parts of the kernel that may require them to opensource their code.
Because a hardware vendor's competitive advantage relies on having closed-source drivers, right? Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. There is no advantage, from a hardware vendor's point of view, to having closed-source drivers. They're not selling software, they're selling hardware.
In any case, it's not the hardware vendor's responsibility if you taint a free kernel with a non-free driver module, it's the users. NVidia has no problem distributing their proprietary driver, so your entire point is moot.
I see now that you aren't able to come up with cogent arguments you fallback on name calling and mudslinging, Very mature..... Atleast us Sun advocates have some decency.
You must have missed the parts where I was called names by Sun advocates for daring to suggest that Solaris might not be a Linux-killer and for expressing doubts about the CDDL.
Pot, kettle, black.
Most of the Unix technical forums are now a days populated by Linux fanboys of 2 types:
a)corporate/journo shills for the various Linux players either bashing each other or some competitor or hyping their Gods(IBM currently)
b)Linux script kiddies who wouldn't know a pointer if it hit them on their head hoping that their perl scripting would elevate them to consultant status
There no point in interacting with them because like any religion no proof to the contrary is sufficient. Most of them don't understand Unix or IBM history so I fear a section of our industry is about to experience a re-enactment of days we all thought would be far behind us!!
Some interesting sidebar reading when you guys have time:
http://sidart.blogspot.com/2005/01/linux-jihad-against-sun.html
