Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Apr 2007 23:18 UTC
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris "Sun's CEO Jonathan Schwartz loves to splatter the media with the line that Windows, Red Hat Linux and Solaris stand as the only operating systems of significance in the server kingdom. We've spent the last few years struggling to appreciate the seriousness of that claim. Sun's declining system sales failed to inspire much optimism about the company conquering the data centers of tomorrow with a deflating 'venerable' OS. A couple of recent items, however, have tweaked our view of Schwartz's favored claim. It could well be that Solaris - of all things - provides the 'iPod moment' Sun seeks." In the meantime, Sun upped the speed of some of its SPARC chips.
Permalink for comment 227668
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: The turning point
by ormandj on Thu 5th Apr 2007 01:47 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: The turning point"
ormandj
Member since:
2005-10-09

Consiering that new versions / updates are only released quarterly, not very often. The point of the Developer version is to allow developers to experiment with new technology. It is *not* a fully supported stable release intended for developers that are looking for a hassle-free maintenance environment.

You misunderstand the purpose of Solaris Express.


I do understand the point of SX, hence me saying it wasn't a good option...

That is subjective at best. I used Solaris 10 GA (not express) on my workstation every day for a year or more before my work changed that I needed functionality only found in the Express releases. Therefore it fit my definition and need of a "modern" OS. It is far from accurate to imply that Solaris 10 (even the general release) is not a "modern" OS.

By your reckoning, Windows XP, and Windows 98 would also probably not be a "modern" OS since they didn't come with out of the box (originally) DVD or full mp3 support.


I'm glad you were able to use it daily, most developers I know are unable to. I suppose if you *only* used it as a workstation, in the strictest sense of the term, you could be "ok".

I don't believe I mentioned anything about DVD or mp3 support, nor am I claiming Solaris isn't a modern OS. Technically, it's very sophisticated and has amazing technology. That's why I run it on my servers, all gazillion+ of them. It's just not a modern desktop OS. It passes as a workstation, but only if you only use it for work.

Installing the nVidia drivers fixed that problem for me. I can only assume there is something else going on.


I'm glad it worked for you, it hasn't worked for me and many other people on the support forums. I'm told it's related to PCI Express.

Solaris is an *enterprise* level operating system. Not your break-my-gentoo-fedora-whatever OS. This means just like RedHat Enterprise Linux, Debian Stable (arguably enterprise) and others, yes, things are NOT bleeding edge and by some people's reckoning "severely out of date."


Really? Thanks for clarifying that, I forgot why I use it at the enterprise level in my data center.

I'm commenting on Solaris as a desktop OS. It's beyond "not bleeding edge", it's stone age. I understand stability concerns, I very much appreciate backwards compatibility, etc - I know all the trumpeted logic behind the stale software. Some things go beyond "stale" though, it becomes apparent focus is put into the bread-winners for Sun (for obvious reasons) and other areas lack due to it. I can't say I blame Sun for spending their engineering $$/time where they do, but if they actually do want to appeal to the more common/average desktop user, they'll have to become a reasonable modern desktop OS - at this point - they are not. Don't mistake my comments as insults, or as some kind of misunderstanding. I do understand. I'm simply pointing out what Solaris/Sun will have to do in order to become more of a player on the desktop front.

They already have a "usable" and more than "modern OS"...just not by your definition which is rather inaccurate.


It's a modern OS for servers. It's not modern for a desktop OS. I hope I don't have to break down the separation for you, I've always generally agreed with you in the past and I think we are just having a disconnect here. I am not talking about Solaris as a whole, I am discussing it purely from the aspect of a desktop user.

Oh whoopee doo. Seriously. RedHat has the same thing with RedHat Enterprise Linux, so does SuSE with their Enterprise distribution.


Huh? Even RHEL4 had Firefox, let alone 5. I believe RHEL4 went gold Feb of 2005. I don't know what you're getting at here.

You want a newer browser? There are newer versions available that Sun contributes from ftp.mozilla.org, and from www.opera.com!


If Sun wants desktop market share, this mentality of "if you want it, do it yourself" has to stop. That doesn't fly with joe blow desktop user, and even most entry-level developers. The entry-level devs, especially, are the people Sun needs to appeal to if they want to survive. Those are the people who will either love or hate sun when they are in management positions 10 years down the road. Sun is moving in the right direction with all the "cool" stuff in Solaris as it is, they just need to keep it up and make sure they cater to their future, not just the current installed base. This isn't mutually exclusive!

Finally, it is hardly fair to complain about the versions of software found in Solaris 10 considering it went "gold" a few *years* ago. Their customers demand stability, support, and compatibility. Yes, that's right, their *paying* customers. This means certain restrictions are in place on what can be updated and how often.


A few years ago, Mozilla 1.7 was terrible. It still is. I'm well aware of how Sun works internally, as well, thank you very much. I'm also aware how they make their money and why people stick with them. Many of those reasons are the reasons I deal with them and why my company does business with them. They just need to start pushing their OS to new users so it maintains mind share.

Little things, like default paths being basically a blank slate, and so forth can make the difference between somebody giving Solaris a fair shot, or installing something over it. I had to force myself to keep working with Solaris for the first month or so I was using it because of all the counter-intuitive things that I was used to not worrying about becoming an issue. This was server-side, since that's the capacity I deal with Solaris in. I can only imagine what it must be like for somebody who's been using Debian/RHEL/whatever for some time to attempt to give Solaris a shot.

What's sad about this all, Solaris truly is a wonderful, advanced, and capable OS. Absolutely no doubt about this. You just have to wrap your head around all the oddities and the steep learning curve. There is no reason for it to exist in the form it does now, and simple things such as including a modern (yet stable and tested extensively) browser, setting a sane default path, etc would truly make the OS that much easier for new users/potential switches to grasp onto and embrace. They are the ones who will make or break Sun in the future.

So, in summary, I think we see things generally the same, just somehow I conveyed my opinions in the wrong manner and came across as calling Solaris (as a whole) trash. I absolutely do not mean any such thing.

# uname -srv
SunOS 5.10 Generic_125101-04
#

:)

Reply Parent Score: 2