Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Mar 2009 11:48 UTC, submitted by PLan
In the News In a move that would certainly shake up the computer industry quite a bit, IBM is reportedly in talks with Sun Microsystems about the possibility of IBM acquiring Sun. Sun is going through hard times at the moment, and has been actively looking for someone to be acquired by.
Thread beginning with comment 353758
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Solaris is dead.
by Windows Sucks on Thu 19th Mar 2009 00:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Solaris is dead. "
Windows Sucks
Member since:
2005-11-10

[q]What has that go to to do with the price of fish? The problem with Solaris isn't the lack of technology, it is the lack of leadership within Sun to bring all the products together in a cohensive offering to customers so that a solution can work out of the box rather than having to spend thousands on assembling the individual componens oneself.

There is a reason why Windows has made a jump in marketshare on the server - people want turnkey solutions and Sun is still stuck in the day when the likes of SCO were charging extra on their products for the TCP/IP stack, UFS support and individual components. Customers don't want that, they want an out of the box turn key solution.


Windows marketshare on the server is only large for workgroup serving. They took out Novell and Banyan for that market. Not any Unix or Linux products. Super computing is Linux, Webhosting is Linux, Email hosting is Linux, a lot of home and office networking is Linux.

Yes Open Solaris has a much bigger HAL then Solaris proper, Linux can be ported quickly to almost anything you throw at it.


I didn't mean HAL, I meant HCL That was a typo.

Also I didn't say that Solaris was not good. What I said was the Linux was more flexible.. Meaning you can do more with it, you can use it on more hardware, the license is more flexible etc. Companies want that, companies like that, which is why Red Hat is killing Sun. Oh and lets talk about some other stuff that actually does suck with Solaris! The compiler!!! Sucks. The way you patch and install software in Solaris sucks!! (Which is why they had to get Linux guys to come on and show them how to try and make solaris more Linux like) the OS install process SUCKS!

Oh and lets look at BSD. Why did BSD not take off like Linux? It was around before Linux (Like Solaris) Because still BSD is just not as flexible nor is the license. People always say "The BSD is better, the license is better" Yeah the license is better for companies like MS to come along and steal code and ideas and not give 1 line of code back! (Which happened)

Oh and I am not a Johnny come lately Linux or other OS fan boy. I am a a LONG time Linux user that was using Linux when Metro X was the config tool. When Caldera was cool and Banyan was the number one workgroup server environment. So I was around when Linux got popular, I helped it get there by replacing Windows servers, Unix servers and Novell servers for my customers with Linux. And I said months ago that Sun was done, Solaris was done. When a company like Red Hat makes less then half the money you do but has close to the market cap, there is a MAJOR problem.

Any way if IBM buys Sun, Solaris will be dead. Might want to get on the Linux bandwagon while we are still accepting members. LOL!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Solaris is dead.
by kaiwai on Thu 19th Mar 2009 01:25 in reply to "RE[4]: Solaris is dead. "
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Windows marketshare on the server is only large for workgroup serving. They took out Novell and Banyan for that market. Not any Unix or Linux products. Super computing is Linux, Webhosting is Linux, Email hosting is Linux, a lot of home and office networking is Linux.


Pardon? you obviously haven't seen the numerous deployments of Exchange, Sharepoint (as part of the Office System). I shudder when I see these things deployed but at the same time I realise that is what customers want.

For example, there are replacements for the whole Microsoft stack already out there - why isn't there an organisation who can pull all these projects together, integrate them into an operating system, put a nice easy to use front end on it - and sell it.

Again, out of the box turn key solution that works with minimum fuss and bother.

I didn't mean HAL, I meant HCL That was a typo.


A big list of hardware doesn't mean that the hardware is fully supported or the quality of the support is up to standard, able to be supported on alternative architectures or just a matter of recompiling given that drivers have platform specific code.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Solaris is dead.
by Windows Sucks on Thu 19th Mar 2009 02:32 in reply to "RE[5]: Solaris is dead. "
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

[q]Pardon? you obviously haven't seen the numerous deployments of Exchange, Sharepoint (as part of the Office System). I shudder when I see these things deployed but at the same time I realise that is what customers want.


Yes I work for the US government so I see MS used all the time everyday. But as I said mostly for Workgroup tasks like File and Print serving. Yes Sharepoint is doing well, but again for Workgroups, same with Exchange.

But when it comes to other tasks like web hosting, database hosting and edge serving like mail bridgeheads for Exchange, real DNS (Not that MS auto update crap) IDS's, Firewalls etc people use Linux or Unix for that.

[q]For example, there are replacements for the whole Microsoft stack already out there - why isn't there an organisation who can pull all these projects together, integrate them into an operating system, put a nice easy to use front end on it - and sell it.


Novell has that whole stack with their Open Workgroup Server. Which includes Edirectory, Mysql, Groupwise, File and Print Sharing etc. BUT Novell sucks at marketing and their channel can't come close to MS.

A big list of hardware doesn't mean that the hardware is fully supported or the quality of the support is up to standard, able to be supported on alternative architectures or just a matter of recompiling given that drivers have platform specific code.


True, but we already see the LARGE number of every day devices that Linux is used on and used well on, from Tivo to the Google G1. When people think of "Unix or Unix like" they think of Linux, not Solaris, AIX, BSD or SCO. Only Solaris lovers use Solaris at this point.

I mean a simple example of how flexible Linux is. We had 200 IDS devices that we got from Cisco to monitor our network. They cost an arm and a leg and they sucked. The guy who managed them decided one day they could do it better and cheaper with Snort. Now to do this do you think Solaris was thought of?? Nope. Not even on the table. The guy grabbed Debian Linux, found a place to get 200 small rack mount servers, built an in house Apt server and built his own custom IDS OS from Debian. Set it up so he could quick ghost 10 IDS's at a time and have them sent to the remote offices in the field. We replaced all 200 in like a month, all running Debian, saving tons of money and headache. Simple. Could you roll your own version of Solaris or Open Solaris real quick? Not.

That is where Linux shines.

People have been ducking it for a long time but Solaris is dead. It might linger like OS2 but that is about it.

Reply Parent Score: 2