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 227226
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I'm starting to love Sun.
by kajaman on Wed 4th Apr 2007 09:03 UTC
Member since:

While I'm a Linux user for a long time, and I consider this OS very good, I would like to see more free OSes in the market. The more you can choose from, the best. It is an issue of choice, competition (which is a Good Thing) and security (I can imagine viruses spreading across world where 99% of machines run Linux on the same processor architecture).
I got my Solaris 10 Developer edition yesterday, installed it on Qemu... it looks heavy and kind of old in comparison with Gentoo or even Debian, but while comparing it to RHEL... that is another thing. What I would like to see is version of Solaris that wouldn't compete with RHEL, but with Debian/Ubuntu, because this is what most people are looking for nowdays. Anyway, Solaris looks like it is a good choice for servers considering it's high-end features such as zones, zfs etc. and excellent Java integration.

Reply Score: 4

RE: I'm starting to love Sun.
by agrouf on Wed 4th Apr 2007 11:50 in reply to "I'm starting to love Sun."
agrouf Member since:

What about Solaris as a kernel?
sudo aptitude install openSolaris

There Solaris doesn't compete with Ubuntu, but with Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Flatland_Spider Member since:

What I would like to see is version of Solaris that wouldn't compete with RHEL, but with Debian/Ubuntu, because this is what most people are looking for nowdays.

I would like to point you towards Belenix.

I think it might be what you are looking for. Works quite well, and is rather speedy. It does have an odd tendency to only recognize 80GBs of a hard drive though.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: I'm starting to love Sun.
by shykid on Wed 4th Apr 2007 15:12 in reply to "I'm starting to love Sun."
shykid Member since:

For the tech enthusiast, I think Solaris beats the pants off of RHEL if for no other reason than it's more fun to play around with. You have DTrace, Zones, et al., and and it's just plain something different--it's not "just another Linux distro". Solaris is clunky and old compared to Linux, and I wanted to pull out my hair trying to install it alongside SUSE and Windows, but it still seems new and fresh compared to RHEL because most people have never given it a try.

One of the closest things we have to a "desktop" Solaris is Nexenta OS ( Hell, it is Ubuntu sitting on top of the Solaris kernel. I've been playing around with Nexenta lately. I couldn't install it on my actual hardware, unfortunately, but it runs fairly well in Parallels Workstation.

By starting OpenSolaris, Sun has finally realized what they should have known from the start: if they would release Solaris's source code in the wild, the geeks would flock to it by the droves. The geeks would toy around with it and might just learn to like it, and the resulting geek-power would drive sales of the "real" product; the geeks would deploy it where they work or recommend it to other geeks that are likely to deploy it. By gaining usage of their OS on x86, they increase the likelihood of their customers purchasing SPARC hardware when it comes time to upgrade. The moral of the story is a company should never undestimate the marketing power of their enthusiast community.

I believe this is something Microsoft desperately needs to learn. If they would just release Windows Server in the wild--hell, they don't have to release source code or even the full product, just maybe a free-for-non-commercial-use Windows Server Enthusiast Edition or something of the like--their enthusiasts would do the rest. I think the risk of losing money by doing this is a non-issue for MS. First of all, they don't have to offer technical support for the free product, and secondly, if someone wants to use Windows Server and can't afford it, they pirate it anyway--or worse: move to Linux/BSD/Solaris.

I am the God of rambling and off-topic comments.

Edited 2007-04-04 15:15

Reply Parent Score: 3

phil4 Member since:

Couldn't agree more with you!

Reply Parent Score: 1

yak8998 Member since:

I'm not sure how much the MS suggestion would help. We run all the flavors of it at work, and I'm not overly impressed. Don't get me wrong, it isn't bad by any means, but I'll take AIX any day of the week over it (or another *nix...or openVMS is pretty sweet)

Reply Parent Score: 1