Linked by John Finigan on Mon 21st Apr 2008 19:00 UTC
When it comes to dealing with storage, Solaris 10 provides admins with more choices than any other operating system. Right out of the box, it offers two filesystems, two volume managers, an iscsi target and initiator, and, naturally, an NFS server. Add a couple of Sun packages and you have volume replication, a cluster filesystem, and a hierarchical storage manager. Trust your data to the still-in-development features found in OpenSolaris, and you can have a fibre channel target and an in-kernel CIFS server, among other things. True, some of these features can be found in any enterprise-ready UNIX OS. But Solaris 10 integrates all of them into one well-tested package. Editor's note: This is the first of our published submissions for the 2008 Article Contest.
Thread beginning with comment 310896
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Note to future contestants
by sbergman27 on Tue 22nd Apr 2008 18:33
in reply to "RE[3]: Note to future contestants"
Member since:2005-07-24
I figure that with popularity comes envy of that popularity. And with that comes potshots. Ask any celebrity. As Morrissey sings, "We Hate It When Our Friends Become Successful".
http://www.oz.net/~moz/lyrics/yourarse/wehateit.htm
It's probably best to simply expect potshots to be taken at Linux and Linux users and accept them with good grace. Politely pointing out the potshots is good form. Drawing them out into long flame-threads (as has not yet happened here) is annoying to others and is thus counterproductive. It just attracts more potshots.
Edited 2008-04-22 18:41 UTC
RE[5]: Note to future contestants
by jwwf on Tue 22nd Apr 2008 19:16
in reply to "RE[4]: Note to future contestants"
Member since:2006-01-19
I figure that with popularity comes envy of that popularity. And with that comes potshots. Ask any celebrity. As Morrissey sings, "We Hate It When Our Friends Become Successful".
http://www.oz.net/~moz/lyrics/yourarse/wehateit.htm
It's probably best to simply expect potshots to be taken at Linux and Linux users and accept them with good grace. Politely pointing out the potshots is good form. Drawing them out into long flame-threads (as has not yet happened here) is annoying to others and is thus counterproductive. It just attracts more potshots.
http://www.oz.net/~moz/lyrics/yourarse/wehateit.htm
It's probably best to simply expect potshots to be taken at Linux and Linux users and accept them with good grace. Politely pointing out the potshots is good form. Drawing them out into long flame-threads (as has not yet happened here) is annoying to others and is thus counterproductive. It just attracts more potshots.
Certainly this happens. On the other hand, who would be better than a celebrity to demonstrate the "because I am successful, I must be brilliant" fallacy we mere mortals are susceptible to. I think we would both agree that the situation is complicated.
Myself, I believe that a little bias can be enjoyable in a tech article, if it is explicit. It helps me understand the context of the situation--computing being as much about people as software.
RE[4]: Note to future contestants
by anomie on Tue 22nd Apr 2008 19:52
in reply to "RE[3]: Note to future contestants"
Member since:2007-02-26
The author of this article is clearly a tacky, presumptuous speculator
Don't twist words. My comments were quite obviously in reference to a particular sentence. (I'd add that I enjoyed the majority of your essay.)
If I could find just two 'folks' who like linux and resent non-linux hype relating to ZFS, it would make my statement technically a fact.
Facts are verifiable through credible references. This is basic Supported Argument 101.
Having spent my time in academia, I am tired of this kind of sophistry of "demonstrating facts".
Good god, man. What academic world do you come from where you don't have to demonstrate facts? You're the one insisting that your statements are fact.
Sure you're entitled to your opinion. But don't confuse facts with speculation. That is all.
edit: added comment
Edited 2008-04-22 19:54 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-19
Let's not confuse facts with speculation.
You wrote: "It has also gotten some derision from Linux folks who are accustomed to getting that hype themselves."
In interpretive writing, you can establish that "[ZFS] has gotten some derision from Linux folks" by providing citations (which you did not provide, actually).
But appending "... who are accustomed to getting that hype themselves" is tacky and presumptuous. Do you have references to demonstrate that Linux advocates deride ZFS specifically because they are not "getting hype"? If not, this is pure speculation on your part. So don't pretend it is fact.
Moreover, referring to "Linux folks" in this context is to make a blanket generalization. "
+1. The author of this article is clearly a tacky, presumptuous speculator, short on references and long on partisanship.
Seriously, I know I shouldn't reply here, but in the light of the above revelation, I will. It is extremely silly to turn this into some semantic argument on whether I can find documentation on what is in someone's heart. If I could find just two 'folks' who like linux and resent non-linux hype relating to ZFS, it would make my statement technically a fact. Are you willing to bet that these two people don't exist?
Yet, would this change anything? No, it would be complete foolishness. Having spent my time in academia, I am tired of this kind of sophistry of "demonstrating facts". I read, try things, form opinions, write about it. You have the same opportunity.