Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Jun 2009 17:50 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris The team at Sun behind OpenSolaris has unleashed OpenSolaris 2009.06 upon the world. This new release comes packed with new features, changes, improvements, and fixes, and is the first release of OpenSolaris for SPARC, adding support for UltraSPARC T1, T2 (Sun4v), and UltraSPARC II, III and IV (Sun4u). Read on for some of the improvements that stand out.
Thread beginning with comment 366657
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Open Solaris is not bad
by Windows Sucks on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 16:24 UTC
Windows Sucks
Member since:
2005-11-10

They have a LONG way to go to catch up to Fedora and Ubuntu though.

For one Open Solaris is SLOWWWWW (Solaris has always been called Slow Laris by most admins I know anyway)

It doesn't support as much hardware on the desktop as Linux and what it does support is not as good as linux yet.

Owned by Sun but does not come with office suite?? Doesn't Sun own an Office Suite?

A lot of out of date packages.

And the worst text crap for setting the keyboard etc during the live CD boot up.

No option to add NTP by default.

I did like their Gnome layout and the config options.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by fretinator on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 17:01 in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree that Solaris has a ways to go - but not a long way. It has come a very long way since just a few years ago. Solaris on laptops was just a distant dream for most (unless you paid a few grand at Tadpole). Now, it is a reality for some, just not me ;{

I tried the 2008.11 (is that the right number??) on a Compaq NC610 I used to have. It was ALMOST awesome. The video was perfect - 1400x1050. I thought for sure it would stumble on that. The wireless worked out of the box - even with encryption on. But the funny thing was - no mouse! The compaq had a touchpad AND a pointing stick. Neither worked. I tried enabling both in the bios, and also just enabling one or the other - it didn't matter, no mouse. It's kind of hard to use a graphical desktop without a mouse, so I gave up.

I currently have an Asus 1000HE netbook (shame on you Asus for your Linux abandonment - it'll bite you). I tried a beta of 2009.06 on it and everything worked but the wireless (ath9k driver in Linux). I googled myself silly on it, but never got anywhere.

As you can see, they are getting close! One of these days I'll be able to have that Solaris laptop. If I was rich, I would buy a pre-loaded one - I think Toshiba has one. Good luck, Soloracles!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by Jondice on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 03:16 in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
Jondice Member since:
2006-09-20

I started using linux around 2000 in highschool, and can remember when it was much worse off than Solaris was now w.r.t. desktop/laptop support. Solaris is improving just as quickly if not more so in these regards, though certainly it is true that linux development eased some of the stepping stones (such as Nvidia drivers and certain driver models).

But if Solaris doesn't work or you don't need it or care about its additional features, why not go linux? That's fine, too. Same could be said for Linux vs Windows or anything really.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Open Solaris is not bad
by strcpy on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 03:40 in reply to "Open Solaris is not bad"
strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20

Interestingly: while hardware support is limited compared to Linux, the kernel that supports more devices -- with a big variance in the quality of device drivers -- than any other operating system kernel, OpenSolaris has shown that hardware support can be greatly improved in very short time when you got the talent, right people and some money. For any observer who has been involved in kernel development, the progress with OpenSolaris has been actually quite amazing in this area. All in all, this is a good example that the "superior" hardware support in Linux is not written in the wall and similar results can be achieved with proper engineering practices.

For the performance-related comment: I can not seriously think what you were after here. Our experiences at work have been exactly the opposite.

Edited 2009-06-03 03:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

jonathane Member since:
2009-05-31

I think his experience might be similar to mine. OpenSolaris is slower right now for some desktop, personal computing tasks but perhaps more robust for some enterprise level features.

You make a good point about hardware support. Every time I've interacted with OpenSolaris developers, they seem enthusiastic and responsive, unlike some linux communities with which I've interacted. I'm not sure which direction OpenSolaris will go aside from development around Oracle's assets, but I hope it continues as a desktop platform, if for no other reason than to offer variety and competition.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Interestingly: while hardware support is limited compared to Linux, the kernel that supports more devices -- with a big variance in the quality of device drivers -- than any other operating system kernel, OpenSolaris has shown that hardware support can be greatly improved in very short time when you got the talent, right people and some money. For any observer who has been involved in kernel development, the progress with OpenSolaris has been actually quite amazing in this area. All in all, this is a good example that the "superior" hardware support in Linux is not written in the wall and similar results can be achieved with proper engineering practices.

For the performance-related comment: I can not seriously think what you were after here. Our experiences at work have been exactly the opposite.


All my observations were made comparing the current version of Open Solaris to the current version of Ubuntu and the final beta (Since they keep pushing the date up) of Fedora Core 11.

I have all 3 installed on separate hard drives in my Dell 755 and I tested the same things on all three.

1. Boot times
2. Hardware drivers and ability to use the hardware
3. Included software
4. Ability to use the machine for day to day work
5. Machine speed after boot

The conclusions are what I saw from these simple tests.

I mean as you see my screen name is Windows sucks but I am man enough to say that even though I would trust my machines to Fedora or Ubuntu over Windows. Windows 7 runs better then Fedora 11, Ubuntu 9.04 and Open Solaris combined. That is just facts from running the current beta of Windows 7 on the same machine.

Reply Parent Score: 2