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.
Thread beginning with comment 227217
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Bring it on!
by sbergman27 on Wed 4th Apr 2007 08:23 UTC
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

I welcome Solaris as competition to Linux in areas outside of pure server usage.

I'm a Linux advocate. But for a community that is always going on about the value of competition, our kernel needs some.

There are the BSD's, of course. But, for whatever reason, the BSD's don't seem to be competing head to head with Linux. (My own guess is that the Linux world finally got half a clue about the basics of marketing, resulting in our shooting ourselves in the foot somewhat less frequently.)

OpenSolaris is just getting off the ground. But it has the potential to be a major contender. Of course, Sun may be shooting themselves in that particular foot by carefully maintaining license incompatibility with Linux. Despite the major differences in their respective kernel internals, drivers seem to me to be one area where code might effectively be shared. And drivers are what Solaris needs most.

But, as I say in the subject line, bring it on!

I absolutely adore Linux. But I'm not married to it.

Sun, after a long period of corporate multiple personality disorder that would have put "Sybil" ( http://tinyurl.com/3atevt ) to shame, has finally rallied its resources and seems ready to join the community as a full-fledged member.

Edited 2007-04-04 08:25

Reply Score: 4

RE: Bring it on!
by binarycrusader on Wed 4th Apr 2007 11:59 in reply to "Bring it on!"
binarycrusader Member since:
2005-07-06

OpenSolaris is just getting off the ground. But it has the potential to be a major contender. Of course, Sun may be shooting themselves in that particular foot by carefully maintaining license incompatibility with Linux. Despite the major differences in their respective kernel internals, drivers seem to me to be one area where code might effectively be shared. And drivers are what Solaris needs most.


Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold water. Even if you got past licensing, the driver model for Solaris and *BSDs is extremely different from that of Linux. You would pretty much have to rewrite most drivers from scratch to get them working. As such, there would be little benefit driver wise from changing the license.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Bring it on!
by IanSVT on Wed 4th Apr 2007 12:21 in reply to "RE: Bring it on!"
IanSVT Member since:
2005-07-06

Wouldn't or couldn't FreeBSD's Linux compatibility layer help with this issue?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Bring it on!
by sbergman27 on Wed 4th Apr 2007 14:37 in reply to "RE: Bring it on!"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold water. Even if you got past licensing, the driver model for Solaris and *BSDs is extremely different from that of Linux. You would pretty much have to rewrite most drivers from scratch to get them working.
"""

I would be interested in further commentary from others on this point. The reason I made that statement is that sometime back I made a comment arguing your point. i.e. I was contending the the internals were so different that almost nothing could be shared, for technical, rather then legal reasons.

Someone, I can't remember who it was, disagreed with me on the point that drivers could not have significant portions of code shared. It was someone that I felt probably had a better technical grasp of the situation than did I. It may have been Butters or Rayiner, but like I say, I can't remember for sure.

But I would be interested in further informed commentary on the matter.

Edited 2007-04-04 14:41

Reply Parent Score: 2