Linked by David Adams on Wed 24th Sep 2008 22:44 UTC, submitted by snydeq
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin has said it is time for Solaris to simply move out of the way and yield the future to Linux. 'The future is Linux and Microsoft Windows. It is not Unix or Solaris,' he claims, contending that Sun's strength in long-lifecycle apps is giving way to Linux, as evidenced by the rise of Web apps, where Linux holds a decided advantage, Zemlin claims. With capabilities such as ZFS and DTrace, Sun is trying to compete based on minor features, he says. 'That's literally like noticing the view from a third-story building as it burns to the ground.'
Thread beginning with comment 331385
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Offensive
by rhavenn on Thu 25th Sep 2008 05:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Offensive"
rhavenn
Member since:
2006-05-12


I'll pick ZFS as an example to challenge. It's a memory hog. It's a CPU hog. It has no place on any of the machines in my house, which all run ext3 reliably and nicely. Where might it be useful?


You don't happen to be running ZFS with FUSE so it runs in user land are you? Perhaps if Linux wasn't so antagonistic to anything none-GPL then perhaps they could include it in the kernel. Performance would increase dramatically.

ZFS is awesome for data centers, file repositories and server farms. It provides redundancy and load balancing with absolute ease.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Offensive
by lord-storm on Thu 25th Sep 2008 06:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Offensive"
lord-storm Member since:
2005-07-12

"
I'll pick ZFS as an example to challenge. It's a memory hog. It's a CPU hog. It has no place on any of the machines in my house, which all run ext3 reliably and nicely. Where might it be useful?


You don't happen to be running ZFS with FUSE so it runs in user land are you? Perhaps if Linux wasn't so antagonistic to anything none-GPL then perhaps they could include it in the kernel. Performance would increase dramatically.

ZFS is awesome for data centers, file repositories and server farms. It provides redundancy and load balancing with absolute ease.
"

No he is running solaris maybe on a old system maybe 32bit? Oh thats right SUN has had 64bit for the last ten years... So maybe old code isnt that great ZFS shouldnt work in 32bit in my opinion it should probably be run on 128bit procs that haven't been developed yet (since its a 128bit filesystem)

Reply Parent Score: 1

v RE[3]: Offensive
by Windows Sucks on Thu 25th Sep 2008 07:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Offensive"
RE[4]: Offensive
by javiercero1 on Thu 25th Sep 2008 08:20 in reply to "RE[3]: Offensive"
javiercero1 Member since:
2005-11-10

Wow... your logical dissonance is astounding.

Following your logic: Microsoft smokes Linux in the market place, ergo...

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Offensive
by BluenoseJake on Thu 25th Sep 2008 15:05 in reply to "RE[3]: Offensive"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

BSD and Solaris are not the same thing, so don't group them together. BSD and Linux are fairly neck and neck in speed, and features, even though Linux has much wider hardware support. Solaris is a different OS, with different strengths and weaknesses

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I have MS telling me how I can use my computers enough, I don't need Apple's even more overbearing stewardship over my computers.

As for the BSDs, they tend to be more stable and standardized than the various Linux distros. OpenSSH, you can thank OpenBSD for that. I'd go more FreeBSD for my personal needs. In terms of server OS, for me, it comes down to Debian Stable/Testing or BSD and there's a reason why OpenBSD is so popular for publicly facing servers.

Windows speed versus Linux speed; sure.. Linux and Unix like OS are way ahead on many fronts. BSD being slower and more bloated than Linux based OS; your not thinking clearly.

Reply Parent Score: 2